Sunday, December 16, 2012

Fiscal Cliff - Yup, gonna go right over

The stupidity of government is almost palpable. I'd say their actions are illogical, but that would imply they actually think about what they're doing and I say it's pretty obvious they don't.

We (the greater We) have a spending problem. Period. It's not a matter of revenue (I.E. taxes), but of spending. Governments, on all levels in the US, are spending money they do not have. From towns to counties to states to the federal level; they are borrowing money or "creating" it out of thin air and giving it away to their cause du jour.
And before some fool tries to make the claim that the Democrats want to spend it on the poor and middle-class (what ever that means) and the Republicans want to spend it on the rich and corporations: Show me the politicians at all levels who have NOT gotten wealthy while serving in government and I will show you the politicians who actually want to reduce spending. Both parties distribute money to corporations and "the rich", it's just a matter of what purpose they serve that party.

Obama's proposals are ludicrous at best, blatantly stupid, and lack any understanding of simple math. The sound bite is his proposal will raise $1.6 trillion dollars. What is left off that sound bite is "...over 10 years." Here's some simple math to show the ignorance:
The deficit (the "revenue" the federal government has raised  - the money the federal government has spend= deficit) for fiscal year 2011 was approx $1.4 trillion. That was in ONE YEAR. His proposal is to attempt to raise just over last years deficit, over a span of 10 years. So, annually, he proposes to raise the money to cover just over 1/10th of that years actual deficit. This means we will go deeper into debt by approx $1 trillion dollars per year! It's fighting a forest fire with a garden hose.
Now, deeper into this and with the help of history, we see that EVERY government that has attempted to raise more "revenue" by raising taxes and has projected how much they'll raise, has come pathetically short of that target by BILLIONS of dollars. You don't have to go that far back. If memory serves, England tried it last year and came up short by over half. It doesn't work!
And he's not serious about solving the problem. Why do I say that? Boner... sorry, Boehner, the slimy coward he is, proposed cutting deductions and "loopholes" for those making over $250k, which supposedly would have generated the same "revenue", along with spending cuts, and Obama rejected it. "Raises tax rates!" cried Barry. "Give me the power to raise the debt limit!" shouted Dear Leader. "And if I feel like it, I may chose to cut spending in the future. If I'm in the mood." Boehner, Mr. Dickbag himself, scurried back to his rathole, cried himself to sleep a few nights, then came back and said, "Fine... we'll raise rates on those making over $1 million. But we need those cuts, you know. Please. I'll be good." With a laugh, Chairman Maobama shooed him off and said, "Silly little clown, I said EVERYONE making over $250K. Not $1 million. Away with you and come back with what I want or I'll blame you like I did Bush." I will guarantee Boehner capitulates and proves he's as useless as a mesh condom.

"The rich need to pay their fair share!!!" Is the rallying cry of the Sheeple.
Define fair share? Pull any tax record you want; 10% of the population pays about 70% of federal income taxes. Obviously, being they make more money, they will naturally pay more. Isn't 70% of the income tax "revenue" fair enough?
But let's stop for a moment and open this up a little.
Yes, there are people who's salaries are in this $350K and above range (~$350k is that entry into the top 10% range). However, many of these "income earners" are small businesses, whose tax filings put them in the "individual bracket", as opposed to a business. AND, I would say a vast majority of this income when you get into $1 million range, is in the form of capital gains.
"What are capital gains?" In short, they're returns on investments. An interest payment. I loan  you $100 dollars so you can buy a new widget to increase your production capabilities. In return, I charge you 5% interest, so I expect to get back $105. The Sheeple will say this is greedy and I'm trying to make a buck off the "workin' man", but let's put stupidity aside for a moment. A) If you don't increase production and thus increase your profits, my $100 is toast. Gone. Bye-bye. B) Without my $100, you can't increase production for a long time, so you can't hire more people, make more goods for others, make more money for yourself and your employees, etc... So for letting you use my money in the short term, you're saying "Thank you."
AND... that investment money I gave you? That came from my income, which thanks to tax rates, was already taxed before I loaned it to you! So then I try to make that money work, loaning it to others, and when they pay me back with a little more, I then have to pay taxes on that little more! Fuck me in the goat ass! Tell me how that isn't theft!?

Our government is overspending. No amount of tax "revenue" is going to solve the problem. NONE. If your child is spending more money than you give them for allowance, you don't keep giving them more. You ground them and then give them EVEN less, to make up for their stupidity.
At the current rate, it needs to spend approx $1.6 trillion LESS per year. Let's call is $2 trillion. How?
Military - Gut it! Yes, gut it. We have a presence in 70 something countries around the world. This is asinine on a biblical scale. I will guarantee you could spend 1/10th  the amount and still be able to protect U.S. interests abroad. Other countries? Deal with your defense yourself. We have our own problems. And to the assmonkey who claims we'd be defenseless? Nuclear fucking weapons. We're the only country on the globe to use them and it made us the big cheese. Tell people that if they mess with us, they'll be lucky to get nuked. War sucks and if you're not ready to play for keeps, don't even get in the fight.
Foreign aid - Fuck you all! That goes for the UN, too. The US is by far the largest contributor to the UN, borrowing money to do so, and for this we get pissed on. Let China and Russia pay for it.
Social Security - If you're not on it or not going on in within say the next 5 years, too bad, so sad. Your government lied to you. They stole your money, spent it elsewhere and said, "Oh well." THE MONEY IS GONE! If you get on it now, you're not getting your money. You're getting your kids money. Or you grandkids. Cut out the middle man and go live with your kids if you didn't plan for "retirement". No kids? There are (or at least were before the Fed got involved) organizations who help those truly in need.
Medicaid/Medicare - Same as Social Security. The money is long since spent.
State "aid" - If a state can't pay for its own programs, that's its own fault. The people of North Carolina shouldn't have to pay for the retirement, welfare, healthcare, road issues, etc... of the people of New York or California or Oregon or Massachusetts or the dozens of other states that OVERSPENT! We have our own problems. Go eat a dick!

Long winded, but that's me.
I truly believe we have gone too far. There is no returning to fiscal normalcy, if you'll forgive the term. Like society as a whole, who buys everything on credit, our government is a reflection of Us and as such, it will collapse upon itself. Look at Europe and explain to me how we're different. We're going down the exact same path as the EU, following in lockstep.
2010 was the last year we could have turned back. Republicans promised they would return to fiscal sanity and hoping against hope, like those who voted for Obama in 2008, I thought they could do it. But like so many who through Barry was different, I too was let down and the leadership kept playing the same game. Sure, there were and are some in office who are trying, but it's like a gang rape; it stops every so often, but that's only until the next animal gets on.
The future is bleak. Sorry to be the downer, but it's not going to get better. Surely not any time soon. But like all collapses, there's opportunity to start again. To rebuild. The question is: Do we rebuild like where we came from? From the late 18th century; a land ravaged by war, but with hope and courage to build and prosper. Or do we rebuild like post WWI Germany? Or post WWII China? Totalitarian states where pain and suffering became a way of life for all but the privileged.

No comments:

Post a Comment

All comments will be moderated. I don't suffer temper tantrums.