Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Senator Clinton's interview on CNBC
Old 08-07-2007, 11:13 AM   #1
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,898
Senator Clinton's interview on CNBC

Here's the link to part I & II. Really interesting! She talks about the need for economic independence and danger of our trillions in debt. FINALLY a candidate is talking about this important issue. She also talks about dropping the Bush tax cuts, which will be necessary if our country is going to take care of future expenses without resorting to the national credit card held by the Japanese and Chinese.

I think she's incredibly impressive! So did the talking heads who discussed it afterwards despite their disagreement with some of her positions.

MSNBC - Morning Call: Day Trading, Up to the Minute Market News and Coverage on TV Front Page
__________________

__________________
Zoocat is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 08-07-2007, 11:57 AM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
How impressive, She needs more money and is going to increase taxes.

That'll get the vote every time.
__________________

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 01:38 PM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,005
Sounds like she'll make a good candidate for the Dem's to line up against a Republican challenger (from a Republican point of view).

I don't know if any of you nice married middle class folks with a couple of kids have noticed it, but the "Bush tax cuts", set to expire after 2010, benefit you greatly. The elimination of the marriage penalty and huge increases in the child tax credit, among other things, were key components of the Bush tax cuts. Not making these cuts permanent (in other words, raising taxes) would very significantly increase the tax burden on married middle class folks with a couple of kids (like me).

Keep in mind which candidate you support and upon whom they propose placing the burden of funding our public treasury. Let's find out which candidates are in support of traditional families.

Being the cheapskate wannabe tax-cheat (er, tax planner!) that I am, I have proposed to DW that we get a divorce around 2010 on the grounds that it would save us thousands in taxes every year. Of course she rejected that idea. Guess that means she loves me?!
__________________
justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 01:50 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
FIRE'd@51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by justin View Post
I don't know if any of you nice married middle class folks with a couple of kids have noticed it, but the "Bush tax cuts", set to expire after 2010, benefit you greatly. The elimination of the marriage penalty and huge increases in the child tax credit, among other things, were key components of the Bush tax cuts. Not making these cuts permanent (in other words, raising taxes) would very significantly increase the tax burden on married middle class folks with a couple of kids (like me).
Plus, the elimination of the 10% bracket (currently on the first 15,650 of taxable income for joint filers). If this goes back to 15%, that's another $783 in taxes on middle income folks.

And, of course, many retirees of modest means will be hurt by the elimination of the 0% tax rate on dividends and capital gains on income which falls into the two lower brackets, which will apply from 2008-2010.
__________________
FIRE'd@51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 02:16 PM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
Plus, the elimination of the 10% bracket (currently on the first 15,650 of taxable income for joint filers). If this goes back to 15%, that's another $783 in taxes on middle income folks.

For those folks on the margins, this is going to hurt. The tax breaks by Bush really helped the middle class. When we revert to pre-Bush tax cut levels, the poor still won't pay any federal income tax, the rich will pay a slight bit more, but married w/ children's will see a very steep % increase in their federal income tax burden. Mine may close to double unfortunately.

I'll certainly keep this in my mind over the next year or so when considering candidates...
__________________
justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 02:25 PM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
Plus, the elimination of the 10% bracket (currently on the first 15,650 of taxable income for joint filers). If this goes back to 15%, that's another $783 in taxes on middle income folks.
n/m - double post software glitch
__________________
justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:01 PM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,898
In regard to taxes, I'd like to point out that we owe trillions to foreign governments because our own taxation system cannot fund the war, the entitlements, and everything else our government has to pay for. If we don't raise taxes, then please tell me where the money will come from to pay for these items as well as the interest on our government debt?

There are direct taxes, and then there are indirect taxes. If you don't want to pay it directly on your income tax statement then the indirect taxes will hit you, in the form of inflation (once interest rates have to be raised to attract more buyers for our treasury bills), and higher prices on imported goods, as well as a much higher governement debt burden which will leave even less $$$ to pay for government obligations.

If you have some magic remedy to find more money, then I'd like to hear about it. I'm sure that Senator Clinton would like to hear about it too.

There comes a time to step up and be grown-ups and stop whining about paying higher taxes.
__________________
Zoocat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:13 PM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,155
Paying higher taxes is always painful, but sometimes neccessary, for the sake of my children and grandchildren.

At the same time, there is nothing wrong with whining about paying it, especially when that tax money is being used for silly reasons like searching and destroying mass destructing weapons in Iraq, saving the owls, etc...

Some how I don't think Clinton, the female, is reading this board. So voice your political opinion here, if it makes you feel better, but that voice is going nowhere. Your vote, on the other hand, will go far.
__________________
Sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:19 PM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Isn't half of your income enough ? More taxes means more government.

Government expansion is unlimited. So until someone, somewhere, says that they already have too much and they must make due with what they have. Perhaps they should use the resources that they already have better.

Don't you feel that you have supported their poorly thought out, poorly executed mishmash enough already.

There is only one reasonable response...

Starve the beast !

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:35 PM   #10
Moderator Emeritus
laurence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 5,234
Hmmm....if somebody sent you a pre-approved credit card, would you say you were wealthier? That's my feeling on our current taxes. Sure, the rate has been cut, but the shortfall has been borrowed. Right now every one of you owes tens of thousands in national debt. I hear starve the beast a lot, but during Republicans control of congress, earmarks (pork) increased 1000%. So sure, point me to the people who are really small government, and I'll vote for them. None here that I can see. Niether side of the aisle has the guts to cut popular programs, and most of the budget is popular programs. So during the Dems, taxes go up, under repubs, the national debt goes up.

So far, Repubs look smarter since they've chosen the less tangible stupid way. Trillions in national debt is vaguely scary but abstract. Raise my taxes a few hundred bucks and I'm shooting civil servants.

So what do we do? Cut Social Security? Raise the cap so I'm not paying the same as Bill Gates? Cut defense spending? Cut Medicare? Medicaid? All those projects people like to fill the air waves complaining about amount to less than 10% of the total budget - you can take away all the welfare queens limos and still not make a scratch in it. The rest is sacred cows. I'm asking this question in all honesty, because I really don't have an answer.
__________________
laurence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:38 PM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Republicans, Democrats there is plenty of blame to go around cause they are all the same. Does it really matter who is to blame ?

It must be something in the water there in Washington cause they don't represent me. They just look at me (and everyone else) as their wage-slave to fund their nonsense.
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 05:52 PM   #12
Moderator Emeritus
laurence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 5,234
Human nature isn't going to change, they can call it what they want, but politicians accept money for access, vote in laws that benefit the people who donate to their campaigns etc. It seems like bribary to me. Change the Constitution to allow the line item veto? But again, nobody is line item veto-ing medicare part D (or whatever).

Back to the original post, Sen. Clinton certainly isn't dumb, and she's very experienced. I like the idea of having our first woman President and breaking the old white male club. But she is polarizing, and it's been a horribly divisive environment here for many years now. I had kind of been rooting for an Obama vs. Romney election, both have an opportunity to help heal the country.
__________________
laurence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:02 PM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,898
Here's a chart of receipts and expenditures for the federal government 2005. It's obviously out of date but it's interesting for a ball park look at where the money goes.
washingtonpost.com: '+title+'

Keep in mind that the debt is almost $9 trillion now (about 7.5 trillion in Jan 2005), so our interest payments are already much higher. Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

I really don't think it's going to be a feasible economic policy to say "starve the beast" anymore. The Bush administration has shown us what that means. Maybe conservatives are still willing to ride this beast down the toilet, but I am not.

I don't like paying so much in taxes, but what I object to even more is being economically enslaved to the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Arab countries who own our debt. We have to vote for a candidate who is willing to deal with this very difficult situation, and, yes, to raise taxes.
__________________
Zoocat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:06 PM   #14
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
That's just the feds, then we have the state, county, and local governments.

So you think that if you give extra money to the government that this time, finally, it will be used wisely ? Personally I am fed up ! Who works for who ?

Hey I have an idea, we should have an extra tax for liberals. They want to fund all this nonsense so we should let them...
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:13 PM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
By the way, it is not true that the "real" federal debt is at record levels. If we correct for the distortion of inflation then debt levels now are more manageable now than at many times over our history. It should also be pointed out that real federal debt is actually falling in the last couple of years - believe it or not !

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:14 PM   #16
Moderator Emeritus
laurence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 5,234
Good chart. By my quick count, 1.8 trillion of the 2.4 is things that will never get touched, large (Social Security 515 billion) and small (veteran's benefits ( 67.5 billion). That leaves $600 billion in play, over half of which is unemployment and welfare. So let's say we cut that $600 billion in half. That would send headlines screaming and be the most amazing act by Congress ever - really. So now we spend $300 billion less. Currently our debt increases $1.4 Billion per day according to the debt clock, that's $511 Billion a year. So this cut will me we still INCREASE our national debt by $200 billion a year. I just don't see how things can continue. Maybe some sacred cows are gonna become tasty hamburgers.
__________________
laurence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:18 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Laurencewill:

I think you need to pay more taxes
__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:30 PM   #18
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
wildcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lou-evil
Posts: 2,025
Oldbabe -

Talk is cheap, even cheaper when it comes from politicians.
__________________
"These walls are kind of funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them"
wildcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:34 PM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,898
That accounting chart does not include unfunded liabilities (social security and medicare).

I don't think that the current expenditures are sustainable. I am not a typical liberal who believes that the government can spend its way to nirvana. I believe in financial accountability and frankly, so do all the liberals I know. We know that there is a reckoning and it will be painful. And I wish more people, liberal or conservative, would get some courage and face the truth.

Conservative Republicans are the ones who have used the government credit card to get us into this predicament. Maybe liberals who believe in fiscal responsibility, like Senator Clinton, will be the ones who save us from certain catastrophe. I hope so.
__________________
Zoocat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2007, 06:34 PM   #20
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
wildcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lou-evil
Posts: 2,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster View Post
Laurencewill:

I think you need to pay more taxes
Or governments could always spend less.
__________________

__________________
"These walls are kind of funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them"
wildcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ohio waitress wins CNBC stock picking contest cute fuzzy bunny Stock Picking and Market Strategy 21 07-20-2007 11:22 PM
The Terhorst Interview Billy Life after FIRE 35 07-11-2007 11:54 PM
CNN vs CNBC or MSNBC KB Other topics 9 07-26-2005 12:24 PM
PETER Berstein Interview nwsteve FIRE and Money 12 10-21-2004 07:36 AM
Heard an Interesting Interview on SS today........ Cut-Throat FIRE and Money 36 09-09-2004 11:07 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:07 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.