State of the Union 2014

[Ndaccountant]

I would love to find a site that could tell me how a decrease in national taxes impacted the state tax system as well as city taxes. I know that I live in a city that just started to collect local income tax to help off set the lack of state and federal dollars to the city. If someone finds one please post it .

The site I linked previously allows you to look at the data. I added on one additional link that has some helpful info as well.

Government Tax and Revenue Chart: United States 1920-2018 - Federal State Local Data


Federal, State, & Local Governments Main Page - Business & Industry - US Census Bureau

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

While the nation is going through the worst recession since the Great Depression, what did the Republican Party stand up for? Reduction of taxes to the nation's most wealth individuals, increased involvement in two ongoing wars, unnessisary medical procedures for women wanting to have abortions, reduction of social programs, removal of regulations that keep workers safe or from being victimized by corporations, and making it more difficult for people to vote. What are they against? Universal Health Care, immigration reform, Obama getting a second term, expansion of unemployment benefits, the Jobs Act, gay marriage, and everything else that is proposed by the Dems. If they were any further right, they'd fall off the edge.

The Dems, on the other hand, introduce a Republican idea to take a step toward what every president since Nixon tried to do -- universal health care. He has greatly compromised in every contrived budget negotiation since he took offiice (save the last one) to the point where John Boenner bragged that he got "99%" of everything he wanted. Obama made every attempt to reach across the isle and repair the political mistrust created by the previous administration, and was flatly rejected time and again by the GOP. During his attempts, he brought the Dems closer and closer to the center, even volunteering to cuts to social programs to get deals done. If you think that is as far left as the party has ever been, I suggest you do some reading about the Woodrow Wilson and FDR administrations.

And your comment about JFK is just silly. Sure, he was for personal responsibility ... so are the modern Dems. Obama spoke about it last night in his speech when he said that everything worth doing requires hard work and dedication. JFK was as much of a liberal as you would ever find in American history. Some of his legislative accomplishments include:

The Civil Rights Act (although it wasn't signed into law until a year after he died)
Inner-city housing and transportation
Water pollution control act
Increases in Social Security benefits
Increases in minimum wage
Food stamps for low-income Americans
Increased food distribution to the poor, including school lunch programs
Comprehensive farm legislation

Which of these would be supported by the Tea Party? Again, just a silly, silly uniiformed comment.

Wow, I need my shovel. Here goes...

Republican party stood for everything that got our country out of the recession of the early 80's: small government, lower taxes for EVERYONE, and fewer regulations. We've seen the exact opposite since 2009, and that's why we are where we are.

ongoing wars?! Obama increased troops in Afghanistan. Are you nuts?

immigration reform? They're for it, but against amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants who broke our laws.

social programs? more time and more money after 50 years and poverty has never been worse.

employees: who is being victimized by corporations? which employees and which corporations?

Universal health care: we KNOW now that it is the debacle we predicted.

gay marriage: feds have no power in this arena. state call.

unemployment benefits: we're rewarding people for not working.

Jobs Act: stimulus was a failure. If the economy were booming like the white house says it is, we wouldn't need to be talking about this.

In summary, Republicans have opposed Obama's "fundamental transformation" mostly due to the fact that everything has either been unconstitutional or an utter failure. Sorry, but that's not "far right." I can list for you at least dozens of "moderate" Republicans. Wisely, Democrats have given up on the term "moderate Democrats" and the party is run by radical, coastal Dems.

You thinking JFK, a staunch Catholic and by today's standards a Tea Party guy, would still be a D is laughable.

For everyone: Compare Reagan's 1986 SOTU address vs Obama's last night and you'll see who's gone off the deep end. It's simple: conserving the republic vs fundamental transformation.

 

[Goldedommer44]

Nd accountant I can't stop laughing at your Avatar lmao

 

[Goldedommer44]

Polish as much as I would love to sit here and write and entire article about how I disagree with your post I will not. The fact of the matter is I don't think receiving $400 a month for a family of 4 is a reward for not working. Both parties are responsible for where we are at!!!! When we decide to actually hold our elected official accountable for what they do then this will turn around but we continue to vote the same people back in every couple of years. I have attached a good article that talks about how company subsides are almost double what welfare is.

Think by Numbers » Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

 

[GoIrish41]

Wow, I need my shovel. Here goes...

Republican party stood for everything that got our country out of the recession of the early 80's: small government, lower taxes for EVERYONE, and fewer regulations. We've seen the exact opposite since 2009, and that's why we are where we are.

ongoing wars?! Obama increased troops in Afghanistan. Are you nuts?

There were two wars going on when Obama took office (one of them was us starting it, thanks GOP). Now there is one which will soon be ending despite GOP grumbling how the Dems are a bunch of pussys because it ain't a real war until it drags into the teens.

immigration reform? They're for it, but against amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants who broke our laws.

They are for it? Then pass it for christ sakes. They are interested in building a big wall around the country, not reforming a broken immigration policy. I guess losing one election for alienating minorities didn't do the trick. If they don't pass this soon, they will have 8 more years to think about how the minorities are taking over this country. Locking down the borders is all smoke and mirrors. Immigration into the US is at a net of zero right now.

social programs? more time and more money after 50 years and poverty has never been worse.

Yes these terrible policies like social security and medicare have been devestating for people in this country. Forget that they fundamentally improved the lives of millions of people over those 50 years.

employees: who is being victimized by corporations? which employees and which corporations?

Lets take a company like WalMart who refuses to pay their employees a living wage. Every time prices go up in their stores and salaries do not, those employees are getting chewed from both ends. But you would remove the safety net that supplements the incomes of people who ARE WORKING, and get rid of the minimum wage so the Waltons can pay their employees even less. How do you think that story ends?

Universal health care: we KNOW now that it is the debacle we predicted.

We don't have universal health care, and it is far too early to know if Obamacare will be successful or not. The open enrollment period hasn't yet ended and 10 million new people have signed up in one fashion or another.

gay marriage: feds have no power in this arena. state call.

There are republicans in the states too, and they have systematically attempted to get rid of gay couple's right to marry in red states across the country. This is the civil rights issue of the 21st century, and as with most issues, the GOP is on the wrong side of history.

unemployment benefits: we're rewarding people for not working.

Is it better to penalize people for not being able to find a job that does not exist?

Jobs Act: stimulus was a failure. If the economy were booming like the white house says it is, we wouldn't need to be talking about this.

The extent to which stimulus was a failure (which I don't think it was) had more to do with the fact that it didn't go far enough. It could have been so much more effective, but wasn't. Why? Because the GOP would not have it.

In summary, Republicans have opposed Obama's "fundamental transformation" mostly due to the fact that everything has either been unconstitutional or an utter failure. Sorry, but that's not "far right." I can list for you at least dozens of "moderate" Republicans. Wisely, Democrats have given up on the term "moderate Democrats" and the party is run by radical, coastal Dems.

You thinking JFK, a staunch Catholic and by today's standards a Tea Party guy, would still be a D is laughable.

Let's look at the rest of his family that shared his values. What party did and do they belong to. This may be the silliest thing I have ever heard argued on this board since I joined.

.

.

 

[Goldedommer44]

Very nice Job Go Irish. It's funny that Reps said how terrible the ACA was because I raised taxes but they just came out with a plan, yes I know the reps actually have a plan, that raises taxes even more to cover their healthcare plan . And although they have voted 40 times to repeal the ACA they now want to use most of it as a blue print.

 

[Woneone]

Polish as much as I would love to sit here and write and entire article about how I disagree with your post I will not. The fact of the matter is I don't think receiving $400 a month for a family of 4 is a reward for not working. Both parties are responsible for where we are at!!!! When we decide to actually hold our elected official accountable for what they do then this will turn around but we continue to vote the same people back in every couple of years. I have attached a good article that talks about how company subsides are almost double what welfare is.

Think by Numbers » Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

I agree with your basic premise, but introducing the topic of corporate subsidies to the discussion of social welfare programs is a red herring.

I don't think many would disagree that the topic of Corporate Welfare Subsidies needs to be addressed, but that doesn't bring about the conclusion that the current social welfare system is ok.

 

[Goldedommer44]

I would totally agree Woneone

 

[Goldedommer44]

I just don't think people should continue to to attack welfare when there are company's making millions if not billions of dollars that are receiving more money then the guy who can't feed his family

 

[ulukinatme]

I just don't think people should continue to to attack welfare when there are company's making millions if not billions of dollars that are receiving more money then the guy who can't feed his family

My problem with it is the program is abused by some people that can't be arsed to lift a finger. I'm speaking partly from experience here. One of my wife's sisters married a real dead beat. It all started with my wife's mother it seems. She home schooled most of her girls, never propped them up, gave them no self esteem or made them feel worth anything, kept them all on a short leash. As a result half of the 6 girls wound up with the first guy that came along, men nearly twice their age that were real winners (Multiple marriages, arrest records, drugs, no steady job or very poor pay, don't pay child support for previous kids, etc).

Anyway, long story short, one sister got knocked up 4 times in the span of 4 years by one of these Mr. Wonderfuls (Think Clevon in the movie "Idiocracy"). He spends most of his time smoking pot, works less than 20 hours a week, and he already has 3 kids from a previous relationship that he doesn't pay child support for. He refuses to watch their kids most of the time too, so the sister doesn't work full time either because she can't afford to have someone watch 4 kids. I wouldn't say she's a saint either, but she puts forth more effort than the deadbeat dad. In any case, she could actually give her kids a better life if she left the guy, got some more assistance in the form of free child care, schooling, housing, etc, and created a stable foundation for her and the kids. They could get off assistance in a few years if she did that. Instead, they're content continuing to suck up free food, health care, and getting pretty much all their tax money back. She can't leave the guy despite the fact he provides absolutely nothing for them and is a waste of space, he's actually a drain on what little money they have. They've been evicted from apartments numerous times the last 3 years for failure to pay. Needless to say, it's a poor situation for the kids and for her, and none of them are willing to change how they're living.

 

[T Town Tommy]

My problem with it is the program is abused by some people that can't be arsed to lift a finger. I'm speaking partly from experience here. One of my wife's sisters married a real dead beat. It all started with my wife's mother it seems. She home schooled most of her girls, never propped them up, gave them no self esteem or made them feel worth anything, kept them all on a short leash. As a result half of the 6 girls wound up with the first guy that came along, men nearly twice their age that were real winners (Multiple marriages, arrest records, drugs, no steady job or very poor pay, don't pay child support for previous kids, etc).

Anyway, long story short, one sister got knocked up 4 times in the span of 4 years by one of these Mr. Wonderfuls (Think Clevon in the movie "Idiocracy"). He spends most of his time smoking pot, works less than 20 hours a week, and he already has 3 kids from a previous relationship that he doesn't pay child support for. He refuses to watch their kids most of the time too, so the sister doesn't work full time either because she can't afford to have someone watch 4 kids. I wouldn't say she's a saint either, but she puts forth more effort than the deadbeat dad. In any case, she could actually give her kids a better life if she left the guy, got some more assistance in the form of free child care, schooling, housing, etc, and created a stable foundation for her and the kids. They could get off assistance in a few years if she did that. Instead, they're content continuing to suck up free food, health care, and getting pretty much all their tax money back. She can't leave the guy despite the fact he provides absolutely nothing for them and is a waste of space, he's actually a drain on what little money they have. They've been evicted from apartments numerous times the last 3 years for failure to pay. Needless to say, it's a poor situation for the kids and for her, and none of them are willing to change how they're living.

Here's my take on welfare. I am all for it to get people by until they can provide for themselves. But generational welfare is BS. And sadly, that is where we are at in this country right now. Girl that lived beside me in college was divorced - married a deadbeat - had a daughter by the punk. Loved that little girl - she made us cookies all the time. The mom was getting all kinds of assistance and was getting her college paid for. But this mom graduated college, went on to become a teacher, and has paid back more than she ever took from the government and the taxpayers. That's what welfare is for. Now, welfare has become the "job" of a lot of people. And to those - I don't have much time for. Their kids? We should all try to help them break that cycle as they are truly the innocent ones here... until they "grow up" and do what mom did. Then the cycle repeats itself.

 

[woolybug25]

Here's my take on welfare. I am all for it to get people by until they can provide for themselves. But generational welfare is BS. And sadly, that is where we are at in this country right now. Girl that lived beside me in college was divorced - married a deadbeat - had a daughter by the punk. Loved that little girl - she made us cookies all the time. The mom was getting all kinds of assistance and was getting her college paid for. But this mom graduated college, went on to become a teacher, and has paid back more than she ever took from the government and the taxpayers. That's what welfare is for. Now, welfare has become the "job" of a lot of people. And to those - I don't have much time for. Their kids? We should all try to help them break that cycle as they are truly the innocent ones here... until they "grow up" and do what mom did. Then the cycle repeats itself.

This is the difficult part. Taking away welfare doesn't just effect irresponsible adults, it would effect their children. That's the double edged sword.

 

[ulukinatme]

My friend told me he was going to watch the SOTU, but then he saw Rudy was on.

You don't even have to be a Notre Dame fan to see that's a better use of your time.

I read the transcript of the SOTU instead. I'm glad I didn't sit through all that clapping.

 

[T Town Tommy]

This is the difficult part. Taking away welfare doesn't just effect irresponsible adults, it would effect their children. That's the double edged sword.

Agree. And the answers to the dilemma aren't easy. But keepin' your britches up is a start...

 

[Cackalacky]

I propose a tax credit for every one who purchases a sleep sack and verifies they use it each night. This ought to shut down all this baby-making non-sense.

DISCLAIMER: I in no way am involved with or am entitled to benefits generated from the wholesale purchase of this product. I also deny any involvement with the concept or manufacturing of said product.

 

[ulukinatme]

Here's my take on welfare. I am all for it to get people by until they can provide for themselves. But generational welfare is BS. And sadly, that is where we are at in this country right now. Girl that lived beside me in college was divorced - married a deadbeat - had a daughter by the punk. Loved that little girl - she made us cookies all the time. The mom was getting all kinds of assistance and was getting her college paid for. But this mom graduated college, went on to become a teacher, and has paid back more than she ever took from the government and the taxpayers. That's what welfare is for. Now, welfare has become the "job" of a lot of people. And to those - I don't have much time for. Their kids? We should all try to help them break that cycle as they are truly the innocent ones here... until they "grow up" and do what mom did. Then the cycle repeats itself.

Well said. I'm totally fine with people that are forced to use welfare and then pick themselves up like this, thats the way the program is designed to be used...at least I think that's what it was originally intended to be, who can say today. I do feel for the kids, they are completely innocent. Part of me wishes my wife's sister got out of her situation and got extra assistance to get an education, but theres no end in sight for them, they're fine staying the course. In reality it would probably be better for the kids if they went into foster care, but the father just sees the kids as 4 big tax breaks. He would never give them up as long as he's under their roof.

This is the difficult part. Taking away welfare doesn't just effect irresponsible adults, it would effect their children. That's the double edged sword.

I agree. I wouldn't be against drug testing people on welfare. The testing would cost some cash, but it could also rule out people that abuse the system and as a result save some money. Maybe those with kids that fail a drug test are put into an addiction recovery program/house or risk getting separated from their kids by child services. Theres got to be a better solution to keep the kids protected and not provide a blueprint for them to do the same thing later in life.

 

[irishff1014]

Well said. I'm totally fine with people that are forced to use welfare and then pick themselves up like this, thats the way the program is designed to be used...at least I think that's what it was originally intended to be, who can say today. I do feel for the kids, they are completely innocent. Part of me wishes my wife's sister got out of her situation and got extra assistance to get an education, but theres no end in sight for them, they're fine staying the course. In reality it would probably be better for the kids if they went into foster care, but the father just sees the kids as 4 big tax breaks. He would never give them up as long as he's under their roof.



I agree. I wouldn't be against drug testing people on welfare. The testing would cost some cash, but it could also rule out people that abuse the system and as a result save some money. Maybe those with kids that fail a drug test are put into an addiction recovery program/house or risk getting separated from their kids by child services. Theres got to be a better solution to keep the kids protected and not provide a blueprint for them to do the same thing later in life.

It is a shame that anyone would look at children as a tax break. What does that say about where we are as a nation. It is really disheartening to hear. I love my daughter to death and will do the same with my son that will be here in roughly a month. My wife and I didn't have children to get something more from the government.

With that said our country has become "OK" with the teen pregnancy. It is sad to see the amount of young people putting themselves in these situations. As some know i work at a 911 center dispatching fire/ems and then a volunteer firefighter/Emt-b and i have dispatched calls for 12 year's having baby's. That is totally unacceptable. I also understand that parenting has a lot to do with this as well.

 

[Goldedommer44]

I cant disagree with anything that was just said. People do take advantage of the system and use there kids as leverage as to why they should get more then someone else. I don't think you should be able to sit on welfare your entire life but both parties need to actually come together and find common ground as to when it should stop and how to eliminate the fraud.

 

[T Town Tommy]

I cant disagree with anything that was just said. People do take advantage of the system and use there kids as leverage as to why they should get more then someone else. I don't think you should be able to sit on welfare your entire life but both parties need to actually come together and find common ground as to when it should stop and how to eliminate the fraud.

Maybe instead of what amounts to tax breaks for having kids, the government should give tax breaks to those families that choose to not have kids. Or at least multiple children. Radical approach maybe but at least one thought. And I haven't really thought the proposal out for all the positives or negatives... just a quick thought off the top of my head.

 

[Cackalacky]

Maybe instead of what amounts to tax breaks for having kids, the government should give tax breaks to those families that choose to not have kids. Or at least multiple children. Radical approach maybe but at least one thought. And I haven't really thought the proposal out for all the positives or negatives... just a quick thought off the top of my head.

That would be a step towards China's infanticide practices..... and possibly eugenics.... Also entering the realm of wide scale encentivized birth control which many people don't like out of principle at the scale it currently is. The new argument would be, "Why are my tax dollars going to pay for people to keep it in their pants? Can't they control themselves?"

 

[Irish YJ]

Bottom line, there should not be an incentive to have kids if you can not afford them. The fact that people have the ability to bear children does not give them the right to be a burden on society. Children are a gift, and a responsibility. So tired of the lack of personal accountability.

 

[Wild Bill]

It is a shame that anyone would look at children as a tax break. What does that say about where we are as a nation. It is really disheartening to hear. I love my daughter to death and will do the same with my son that will be here in roughly a month. My wife and I didn't have children to get something more from the government.

With that said our country has become "OK" with the teen pregnancy. It is sad to see the amount of young people putting themselves in these situations. As some know i work at a 911 center dispatching fire/ems and then a volunteer firefighter/Emt-b and i have dispatched calls for 12 year's having baby's. That is totally unacceptable. I also understand that parenting has a lot to do with this as well.

You made me reconsider the gift I just got my brother.

 

[Catholics_Rule]

Bottom line, there should not be an incentive to have kids if you can not afford them. The fact that people have the ability to bear children does not give them the right to be a burden on society. Children are a gift, and a responsibility. So tired of the lack of personal accountability.

Excellent point.

 

[GoIrish41]

Maybe instead of what amounts to tax breaks for having kids, the government should give tax breaks to those families that choose to not have kids. Or at least multiple children. Radical approach maybe but at least one thought. And I haven't really thought the proposal out for all the positives or negatives... just a quick thought off the top of my head.

There are a million productive things that people could do in communities across the nation by which they could "earn" their payments. Why not put people to work that don't have a job FDR style. Have them pick up trash or clean public transportation vehicles, or train them to repair roads and bridges. Teach them a trade that can lead to a real job down the road. Have them contribute to the society instead of just giving them money. There are certainly people who take advantage of the system, but I think there are far more who see it as an inescapable trap that they pray they will someday be able to make it out of. I'm all for helping them solve the puzzle. This country has needs that go undone while we pay people for not working. Seems like a pretty easy problem if one takes a step back and looks at the whole picture, but many are too eager to demonize people who have no choice but to continue on the road they've traveled.

 

[ACamp1900]

On the welfare state discussion:

To me it's the fraud... that aspect is completely and inexcusably out of control. If the gov. can’t implement a program without allowing wide spread fraud/theft of American tax dollars, then the program should clearly not be implemented in its current form. Example: working for a major grocery chain for five or so years I’d say nearly a quarter of our customers were openly defrauding the system (Swiping three, four, even five different EBT cards from multiple states for one bulk order would be a very obvious example) yet the stores demanded no one turn them in, because ‘it’s all our money now’, also quite typical, it’s those families that drive the nicest cars and have the nicest clothes. That stuff infuriates me… EBT, section 8, free lunch school programs… these programs are grossly taken advantage of by people who either don’t need it or massively abuse it. If it’s truly too difficult to audit/check, then sorry big brother can’t handle the system to begin with. It’s THAT stuff works me up about or social programs even more than the generational stuff.

 

[Catholics_Rule]

The overall problem is see in our country that I've been talking about for the last several years is the tax code.

I think both parties work better than what they want the American people to believe.

As a side note; I was involved with WMU college GOP group on campus. We brought in many BIG name speakers, helped campaigns, I had an internship at Michigan state capital, etc; I got a phone call during the last election from the RNC wanting money. I VERY politely said, "no, I'm no longer giving to the RNC and I'm still looking for work", she would NOT LET UP. I finally told her I was a Conservative Catholic Independent. This girl kept going on her pitch telling me how great the Republican Party was doing for the country,
Etc; and I cut her off. "Look, both the last election was a dividing line on which side each party stood for, if your rich there's a party for you & if your poor there's a party for you...if your in the middle get your A** to work because you've got to make up for the other two!

 

[ACamp1900]

To G141’s point… I’m all for having to earn your county checks somehow. My wife has a good friend who has one of her friends tag along sometimes. This friend of a friend is 35, three kids from three different guys and has never once held a job. Never once. She advertises it for crying out loud. One night my wife’s friends were over, I checked the mail and surprise, me fifth jury summons in as many years. I voiced my frustration and this chick stated that she has never once had jury duty and didn’t even know what it was. It hit me…. If you collect a check off of tax dollars you should be 1A on the selection list for things like this.

Anyway. End rant now before I really get going.

 

[palinurus]

There are a million productive things that people could do in communities across the nation by which they could "earn" their payments. Why not put people to work that don't have a job FDR style. Have them pick up trash or clean public transportation vehicles, or train them to repair roads and bridges. Teach them a trade that can lead to a real job down the road. Have them contribute to the society instead of just giving them money. There are certainly people who take advantage of the system, but I think there are far more who see it as an inescapable trap that they pray they will someday be able to make it out of. I'm all for helping them solve the puzzle. This country has needs that go undone while we pay people for not working. Seems like a pretty easy problem if one takes a step back and looks at the whole picture, but many are too eager to demonize people who have no choice but to continue on the road they've traveled.

I raised this suggestion to a more liberal friend (who was a relatively high manager in county government) once and he told me the problem was the the public employees unions didn't want "temporary help" coming in and taking what should be city/county union employee work. When I countered cordially with "But why don't they already do this work?", he said there aren't enough city/county workers to do it all. He supposed that we could hire them all as public employees, but that has union- and non-union-related issues -- pensions, employability, background checks, etc. -- that local govts can't afford or don't want to take on. Personally, I agree with you, but I just don't know the answer.

 

[Catholics_Rule]

Bottom line, there should not be an incentive to have kids if you can not afford them. The fact that people have the ability to bear children does not give them the right to be a burden on society. Children are a gift, and a responsibility. So tired of the lack of personal accountability.

My wife is a school teacher and one of the big issues she and public schools are dealing with are mothers having 3-6 children and the mother putting the children up in the foster care system. Well guess what? Those children are being raised by the grandmother and are getting cut a check $800-$1000 a kid a month.

 

[GoIrish41]

I raised this suggestion to a more liberal friend (who was a relatively high manager in county government) once and he told me the problem was the the public employees unions didn't want "temporary help" coming in and taking what should be city/county union employee work. When I countered cordially with "But why don't they already do this work?", he said there aren't enough city/county workers to do it all. He supposed that we could hire them all as public employees, but that has union- and non-union-related issues -- pensions, employability, background checks, etc. -- that local govts can't afford or don't want to take on. Personally, I agree with you, but I just don't know the answer.

I'm among the most liberal people that I know, and in this case I say screw the unions. We have to stop dancing around special interests and start doing what makes sense for this country. Otherwise, we might as well just accept that we're going to lose our way completely and for good.