m*****i
发帖数: 4342 | 1 利润都没有了，低税率有个P用.
In 2001, Revenue was 19% of the GDP, spending was 18% of GDP.
Today, Revenue was 14% of the GDP, spending was 19% of GDP.
只要cut spending，不用raise revenue, 就可以Balance Budget是自欺欺人啊! |
P**H
发帖数: 2272 | |
w*******y
发帖数: 582 | 3 As regard fy2010, revenue is about 18% and expenditure is 25%
利润都没有了，低税率有个P用.In 2001, Revenue was 19% of the GDP, spending
was 18% of GDP.Today, Reven........
★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Mitbbs Lite 7.21
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: 利润都没有了，低税率有个P用.
: In 2001, Revenue was 19% of the GDP, spending was 18% of GDP.
: Today, Revenue was 14% of the GDP, spending was 19% of GDP.
: 只要cut spending，不用raise revenue, 就可以Balance Budget是自欺欺人啊!
|
m*****i
发帖数: 4342 | 4 About 14% right now.
【在 w*******y 的大作中提到】
: As regard fy2010, revenue is about 18% and expenditure is 25%
:
: 利润都没有了，低税率有个P用.In 2001, Revenue was 19% of the GDP, spending
: was 18% of GDP.Today, Reven........
: ★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Mitbbs Lite 7.21
|
b******u
发帖数: 3215 | |
y***r
发帖数: 16594 | 6 我觉得republic没错呀，天天借钱，难道真的将来不准备还了？ |
m*****i
发帖数: 4342 | 7 We are all for spending cut, but revenue increase must be part of solution.
You look at budget for 2011:
Security spending: 891 Billion
Non Security Spending: 496 Billion
Mandatory programs 2,177 Billion
net interest: 205 billion.
Total 3,771 Billion
Total revenue: 2,174 Billion
You can not cut mandatory programs right now, you can only slow down
Mandatory programs in the future, but lots of American don't have much
saving, so cutting Social security/Medicare/Medicaid is political suicide.
You tell me how to balance budget without revenue increase!
American people are brain washed, most of them think they can solve budget
problem just cut spending(of course, not their own wallet).
【在 y***r 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得republic没错呀，天天借钱，难道真的将来不准备还了？
|
y***r
发帖数: 16594 | 8 没有啥不能cut的，一切回到 2000年的时候的spend就行了。
国防开支cut个30%先。
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: We are all for spending cut, but revenue increase must be part of solution.
: You look at budget for 2011:
: Security spending: 891 Billion
: Non Security Spending: 496 Billion
: Mandatory programs 2,177 Billion
: net interest: 205 billion.
: Total 3,771 Billion
: Total revenue: 2,174 Billion
: You can not cut mandatory programs right now, you can only slow down
: Mandatory programs in the future, but lots of American don't have much
|
k********8
发帖数: 7948 | |
Z****g
发帖数: 13731 | 10 good point, US is spoiled, simple as that, still want to sit on debt and
enjoy the comfort it no longer deserve
【在 y***r 的大作中提到】
: 没有啥不能cut的，一切回到 2000年的时候的spend就行了。
: 国防开支cut个30%先。
|
|
|
m*****i
发帖数: 4342 | 11 国防开支cut个30%, I am all for.
但是, Republican 有几个人同意!能Cut个2%都不容易!
【在 y***r 的大作中提到】
: 没有啥不能cut的，一切回到 2000年的时候的spend就行了。
: 国防开支cut个30%先。
|
B****o
发帖数: 1393 | 12
If this is really what underlies, democracy has a big problem here...
【在 P**H 的大作中提到】
: 共和党就是要不惜一切代价让O8倒台
|
t****c
发帖数: 53 | 13 你这都是把民主党的宣传提刚拿过来说呵。先把事实搞清楚几点:
一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度。
加税也不是不可以，但是要与真正的开支减少对应才能说得过去。加一块钱的税，开支
也真的减少一块钱，大家在差距的一半有会合。这才合理。
二、加税不等于税款增加，减税也不等于税收减少。反过来往往是对的。在经济不振的
时候加税，抑制经济活力，只有奥巴马这样的极左才想得到。
三、你用百分比的做法很可疑。很多的开支与GDP没有关系，为什么要用百分比？例如
福利支出。应该与人口有关，与Ｇdp关系不大。甚至是负相关的。经济增长了，福利比
例会降低。还有吃福利的人也会减少。所以关键是经济的可持续增长。
四、国防支出的比例没有你说的那么大。印象是１０％多一些。
五，共和党也没有如你所说的不削减固防费用。相反，每次的方案都有国防经费的大量
削减。
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: 利润都没有了，低税率有个P用.
: In 2001, Revenue was 19% of the GDP, spending was 18% of GDP.
: Today, Revenue was 14% of the GDP, spending was 19% of GDP.
: 只要cut spending，不用raise revenue, 就可以Balance Budget是自欺欺人啊!
|
Z****g
发帖数: 13731 | 14 哇，有理有据，葱白!
【在 t****c 的大作中提到】
: 你这都是把民主党的宣传提刚拿过来说呵。先把事实搞清楚几点:
: 一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度。
: 加税也不是不可以，但是要与真正的开支减少对应才能说得过去。加一块钱的税，开支
: 也真的减少一块钱，大家在差距的一半有会合。这才合理。
: 二、加税不等于税款增加，减税也不等于税收减少。反过来往往是对的。在经济不振的
: 时候加税，抑制经济活力，只有奥巴马这样的极左才想得到。
: 三、你用百分比的做法很可疑。很多的开支与GDP没有关系，为什么要用百分比？例如
: 福利支出。应该与人口有关，与Ｇdp关系不大。甚至是负相关的。经济增长了，福利比
: 例会降低。还有吃福利的人也会减少。所以关键是经济的可持续增长。
: 四、国防支出的比例没有你说的那么大。印象是１０％多一些。
|
I******6
发帖数: 500 | 15 48% 的 美国人从来 或 根本 不 缴税。 TAX 对他们 没关系。 所以 民主党的 群众
基础好。
还好， 那些 人 很多 也 懒得 投票。 否则 共和党 怎么都 无 翻身的 机会。 |
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 16 budget deficit is 10%.
Tax is 14%.
how much is spending?
You IDxxT!
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: About 14% right now.
|
h*******a
发帖数: 573 | 17 totally agree with minncai. i can't understand why so many americans buy the
republican bullshit of spending cuts and no tax increase. on one hand,
history already showed spending cuts during an economic recession was a
recipe to the great depression. on the other hand, the tax increases
proposed by Obama totally makes sense: 1) no tax increases for the majority
of tax payers. so no hardship to the masses. 2) raising the tax brackets
only on the top 5% richest in the nation will encourage idle money to be
flowed into our economy, and the collected taxes can be used to fund
infrastructure, education and research. 3) closing corporate tax loopholes
for overseas profits will help bring corporate investments back to this
country.
what republicans are really trying to do is to make our economy worse, so
that Obama will not get re-elected. That motive - that total lack of concern
about the real suffering of people in this country - makes me angry and
sick! |
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 18 Government takes control more money and spread it to 95% ( the losers), the
economy will be better.
Good thinking!
That is call Communism! A lot of countries have tried that.
And it didn't work!
Insane.
the
majority
【在 h*******a 的大作中提到】
: totally agree with minncai. i can't understand why so many americans buy the
: republican bullshit of spending cuts and no tax increase. on one hand,
: history already showed spending cuts during an economic recession was a
: recipe to the great depression. on the other hand, the tax increases
: proposed by Obama totally makes sense: 1) no tax increases for the majority
: of tax payers. so no hardship to the masses. 2) raising the tax brackets
: only on the top 5% richest in the nation will encourage idle money to be
: flowed into our economy, and the collected taxes can be used to fund
: infrastructure, education and research. 3) closing corporate tax loopholes
: for overseas profits will help bring corporate investments back to this
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 19 Get a real job.
Try 自食其力。 then you will become a happy person.
既蠢又懒， 还想白白吃东西。丢人现眼， 小孩都会看不起你。
the
majority
【在 h*******a 的大作中提到】
: totally agree with minncai. i can't understand why so many americans buy the
: republican bullshit of spending cuts and no tax increase. on one hand,
: history already showed spending cuts during an economic recession was a
: recipe to the great depression. on the other hand, the tax increases
: proposed by Obama totally makes sense: 1) no tax increases for the majority
: of tax payers. so no hardship to the masses. 2) raising the tax brackets
: only on the top 5% richest in the nation will encourage idle money to be
: flowed into our economy, and the collected taxes can be used to fund
: infrastructure, education and research. 3) closing corporate tax loopholes
: for overseas profits will help bring corporate investments back to this
|
i****a
发帖数: 36252 | 20 Typical American people spending habit
【在 Z****g 的大作中提到】
: good point, US is spoiled, simple as that, still want to sit on debt and
: enjoy the comfort it no longer deserve
|
|
|
s********i
发帖数: 17328 | 21 为啥不能cut，公司不景气就裁人，政府为啥不行？ |
m*****i
发帖数: 4342 | 22 BTW, I always vote for republican other then BUSH, most of my American
Friends are republican.
In the past, I strong believed spending cut was the solution. After listened
and read lots of detail analysis, I have to agree that spending cut itself
is not enough to eliminate the budget deficit because our budget problems is
getting so big.
In the end, I don't believe either party would cut real deficit, so the end
results will be inflate our way out. This is why I invest heavy in real
asset(Like real estate, gold and silver).
一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度
。加税也不是不可以，但是要与真正的开支减少对应才能说得过去。加一块钱的税，开
支也真的减少一块钱，大家在差距的一半有会合。这才合理。
I totally agreed with you. This is the point, Republican refuse for any
revenue increase. So far, O8 proposed 3 trillion spending cut and 1 trillion
revenue increase. But republican resist any revenue increase(including
cutting the subsidy).
二、加税不等于税款增加，减税也不等于税收减少。反过来往往是对的。在经济不振的
时候加税，抑制经济活力，只有奥巴马这样的极左才想得到
No one wants to increase tax, Return the tax into 2001 level is not too much
to ask.
Bush cut tax in 2001 How many real new jobs did he create?
BTW, spending cut like tax increase will hurt the economic short term.
【在 t****c 的大作中提到】
: 你这都是把民主党的宣传提刚拿过来说呵。先把事实搞清楚几点:
: 一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度。
: 加税也不是不可以，但是要与真正的开支减少对应才能说得过去。加一块钱的税，开支
: 也真的减少一块钱，大家在差距的一半有会合。这才合理。
: 二、加税不等于税款增加，减税也不等于税收减少。反过来往往是对的。在经济不振的
: 时候加税，抑制经济活力，只有奥巴马这样的极左才想得到。
: 三、你用百分比的做法很可疑。很多的开支与GDP没有关系，为什么要用百分比？例如
: 福利支出。应该与人口有关，与Ｇdp关系不大。甚至是负相关的。经济增长了，福利比
: 例会降低。还有吃福利的人也会减少。所以关键是经济的可持续增长。
: 四、国防支出的比例没有你说的那么大。印象是１０％多一些。
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 23 行了， 别装了。
你就是 liberal 寄生虫一个。
自己不劳动， 还想白白吃东西。 没出息。
listened
itself
is
end
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: BTW, I always vote for republican other then BUSH, most of my American
: Friends are republican.
: In the past, I strong believed spending cut was the solution. After listened
: and read lots of detail analysis, I have to agree that spending cut itself
: is not enough to eliminate the budget deficit because our budget problems is
: getting so big.
: In the end, I don't believe either party would cut real deficit, so the end
: results will be inflate our way out. This is why I invest heavy in real
: asset(Like real estate, gold and silver).
: 一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度
|
O***C
发帖数: 1219 | 24 TMD大资产者利滚利就不算吃白食了？
更何况他们的原始资本积累就是建立在吃人的基础之上。
一味削弱中产，只能导致社会革命，这倒是我乐意见到的结果。
【在 T**********1 的大作中提到】
: 行了， 别装了。
: 你就是 liberal 寄生虫一个。
: 自己不劳动， 还想白白吃东西。 没出息。
:
: listened
: itself
: is
: end
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 25 You are brain-washed by Communist prop.
How many millinairs and billinairs do you know in the US?
Which ones you have heard of had their wealth build on EATING PEOPLE, or
from unlawful gains?
STUxxD!
if there are no millinairs and billinairs, there will be no middle class,
because middle class have to work on millinairs and billinairs' creativity
and insight.
if all you can do is to envy and to try to rob the creative people, then you
diserve nothing but poverty and misery!
what a loser!
【在 O***C 的大作中提到】
: TMD大资产者利滚利就不算吃白食了？
: 更何况他们的原始资本积累就是建立在吃人的基础之上。
: 一味削弱中产，只能导致社会革命，这倒是我乐意见到的结果。
|
s****l
发帖数: 10462 | |
O***C
发帖数: 1219 | 27 You forgot those fucking robs in US history?!
Rockefellow, Carnegie Mellon, Vanderbit,...
《史记·货殖列传》
总之，楚越之地，地广人希，饭稻羹鱼，或火耕而水耨，果隋蠃蛤，不待贾而足，地埶
饶食，无饥馑之患，以故眥窳偷生，无积聚而多贫。是故江淮以南，无冻饿之人，亦无
千金之家。
you
【在 T**********1 的大作中提到】
: You are brain-washed by Communist prop.
: How many millinairs and billinairs do you know in the US?
: Which ones you have heard of had their wealth build on EATING PEOPLE, or
: from unlawful gains?
: STUxxD!
: if there are no millinairs and billinairs, there will be no middle class,
: because middle class have to work on millinairs and billinairs' creativity
: and insight.
: if all you can do is to envy and to try to rob the creative people, then you
: diserve nothing but poverty and misery!
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 28 they are all Democrats.
you Idxxxt!
【在 O***C 的大作中提到】
: You forgot those fucking robs in US history?!
: Rockefellow, Carnegie Mellon, Vanderbit,...
: 《史记·货殖列传》
: 总之，楚越之地，地广人希，饭稻羹鱼，或火耕而水耨，果隋蠃蛤，不待贾而足，地埶
: 饶食，无饥馑之患，以故眥窳偷生，无积聚而多贫。是故江淮以南，无冻饿之人，亦无
: 千金之家。
:
: you
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 29 they are all Democrats.
you Idxxxt!
【在 O***C 的大作中提到】
: You forgot those fucking robs in US history?!
: Rockefellow, Carnegie Mellon, Vanderbit,...
: 《史记·货殖列传》
: 总之，楚越之地，地广人希，饭稻羹鱼，或火耕而水耨，果隋蠃蛤，不待贾而足，地埶
: 饶食，无饥馑之患，以故眥窳偷生，无积聚而多贫。是故江淮以南，无冻饿之人，亦无
: 千金之家。
:
: you
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 30 they are all Democrats.
you Idxxxt!
【在 O***C 的大作中提到】
: You forgot those fucking robs in US history?!
: Rockefellow, Carnegie Mellon, Vanderbit,...
: 《史记·货殖列传》
: 总之，楚越之地，地广人希，饭稻羹鱼，或火耕而水耨，果隋蠃蛤，不待贾而足，地埶
: 饶食，无饥馑之患，以故眥窳偷生，无积聚而多贫。是故江淮以南，无冻饿之人，亦无
: 千金之家。
:
: you
|
|
|
s**********0
发帖数: 266 | 31 我一直想问这48%的数字怎么计算的？ 是不是包括18岁以下的小孩和退休的老人？ （
现代老人越活越长，我觉得可以理解） 有没有数据统计 18 ～ 65 岁成年人中有多少
是不交税的？
【在 I******6 的大作中提到】
: 48% 的 美国人从来 或 根本 不 缴税。 TAX 对他们 没关系。 所以 民主党的 群众
: 基础好。
: 还好， 那些 人 很多 也 懒得 投票。 否则 共和党 怎么都 无 翻身的 机会。
|
O***C
发帖数: 1219 | 32 Robs are always robs!
BTW: you sold yourself so cheap.
【在 T**********1 的大作中提到】
: they are all Democrats.
: you Idxxxt!
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 33 you will always be angry at successful people and be miserable. Loser.
【在 O***C 的大作中提到】
: Robs are always robs!
: BTW: you sold yourself so cheap.
|
T**********1
发帖数: 2406 | 34 48% of tax filers/families.
do you have a brain?
【在 s**********0 的大作中提到】
: 我一直想问这48%的数字怎么计算的？ 是不是包括18岁以下的小孩和退休的老人？ （
: 现代老人越活越长，我觉得可以理解） 有没有数据统计 18 ～ 65 岁成年人中有多少
: 是不交税的？
|
t****c
发帖数: 53 | 35 LOL。你这个终身共和党员真是漏馅了。看来真的是某党宜传员。
奥根本没有什么方案。白宫的发言人被人不断追问，就是拿不出来任何的方案束。他有
的只是一个鼓吹阶级斗争的大嘴巴。
再强调一遍你所谓的削减，那只是支出少增长。这个在华盛顿叫做baseline cut。
listened
itself
is
end
【在 m*****i 的大作中提到】
: BTW, I always vote for republican other then BUSH, most of my American
: Friends are republican.
: In the past, I strong believed spending cut was the solution. After listened
: and read lots of detail analysis, I have to agree that spending cut itself
: is not enough to eliminate the budget deficit because our budget problems is
: getting so big.
: In the end, I don't believe either party would cut real deficit, so the end
: results will be inflate our way out. This is why I invest heavy in real
: asset(Like real estate, gold and silver).
: 一、根本没有什么削减开支。不管是共和还是民主，他们削减的只是开支的增长辐度
|
G*M
发帖数: 6042 | 36 No, most super rich support democrats, most poor people support republican.
【在 I******6 的大作中提到】
: 48% 的 美国人从来 或 根本 不 缴税。 TAX 对他们 没关系。 所以 民主党的 群众
: 基础好。
: 还好， 那些 人 很多 也 懒得 投票。 否则 共和党 怎么都 无 翻身的 机会。
|
