so does your post.
why dont you include your president too... or is he your Messiah also>?

LOL Adrian, speaking of IDIOTS! Learn some facts baby. You ignorant libs crack me up.

Let me remind you that this was your President's idea to start. I say hold all salary, and especially his until they decide to run the country and not their mouths.

So why do you keep voting the "Republican Idiots" into office?

This whole sequestration bill was initiated by Big O.

"REPUBLICAN IDIOTS" - Way to start the discussion there Adrian. And you are how old?

There is more than enough blame to go around, and that is part of the problem. They keep blaming each other for the problem instead of fixing it. All congress had to do was to pass a bill that stated the sequestration was halted/deferred and they didn't do it. This is a game of chicken but the players aren't going to get hurt, only the rest of us! It does no good to single out one person or one side of the aisle, everyone has a share in this and the laughter that we're hearing around the world!

Don't blame the Republicans.... Our fearless leader is refusing to budge. It's his way or the highway.... The Republicans are tired of this guy thinking that we can spend, spend, spend what we don't have. And THAT seriously pisses me off.

Republican Idiots. The President suggested Sequestration. He then asked for additional taxes, and got them in exchange for a promise of spending cuts. None came. Republicans, for good or ill, have suggested and legislated spending cuts and tax loophole closures, with no response from Democrats. And, the Democrat Senate has refused to pass a budget, as required by law, for at least three years of which I am aware and, perhaps longer. While Republicans are not blameless, I think this "crisis" is part of Democratic strategy. Since when have the current slate of Democrats ever cared about the people?? It 's all about politics (on both sides).

We need to stop blaming one party or the other, and realize that none of these folks are working for us. Not one republican, not one democrat are actually working for our best interests. We need to realize this, and we'd be much better off, together, fixing our issues. Politician never used to be a lifelong career. Google where Harry Reid, a democrat, made his money. Google how Rick renzi, a republican made his money (and got caught) Google nancy pelosi and her shady deals with her husbands company. Google Rangel, and his numerous ethical violations. We need to, as a nation, realize that these people "representing" us are making money, hand over fist on the numerous laws they pass, and their only worry is to get re-elected to keep their gravy trains going. You know these people exempt thereselves from most of the laws they pass? They chastise each other in public, then play golf, and have beer summits in private. Remember Obamas election promise to post every bill online, so us the public can read and comment on it? Or how about giving us the same healthcare him and every senator and congressman got? Wouldn't that have been a 1 page bill consisting of "every American gets the same healthcare plan senators get" Not the 1000+ page bill that no one bothered to read, which, oh by the way, benefits a bunch of people who paid money to be able to write large sections of it? As far as im concerned, It's us and them, the elected and the "represented".

Davew is right. Vote the bums out!

I found it amazing how many people do not know that this is Obama's baby. He is the one that wanted this. Not the republicans. And if King Harry and his band of misfits would have done their job and past a budget we would not be here now. What is it now 4 years and running with no budget. This all belongs to the Demogods and their leader.

The blame rests on both parties but the responsibility belongs to Congress. The purse strings are their Constitutional duty.

Beyond that, most of these comments reflect tribal thinking instead of critical thinking. America's problems will never be solved while people identify more with the needs of a political party than the needs of the people.

Don't believe its the Republicans causing this problem its the idiots that voted for this President. He should take all you idiots back to his homeland where you belong.

No Congress should not be paid, Neither should the Communist in the White House or any of his staff.

facts are worrisome for Republicans who continually spout this canard. House majority forced the issues by holding the Senate Dems hostage with debit ceiling crisis by demanding deep and immediate spending cuts, Cantor claims he scuttled the deal forcing a 11th hour two part solution. If the super committee did not come up with a deal then auto spending cuts (sequestor) kick in. There is enough blame for everyone but T party rebubs get the lion's share.
Check out oped by Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein

Well said!

As Gerry Connolly said, President Obama "won" the tax increases he sought back in January - every working American is now paying higher taxes. Now it is time to address spending cuts. The gridlock is simple to fix: The President just needs to propose some spending cuts.that the Democrats in the Senate can agree to.

I agree, well said. Thank you.

Amen!

Good luck to you David. I wish you well at NIH.

We live in a country that has a state of mind, that They all deserve something They did not Earn. And, look to the government to provide it.
THAT IS THE WHOLE PROBLEM & THE DEMS WANT YOU TO BUY INTO THAT PHILOSOPHY.
THEY (DEM) WANT MORE POWER & MAKE BIG PROMISES THE GOV CANT DELIVER. or del. (SQUAT) IF THE GOPV WERE A BUSINESS THEY'ED BE BANKRUPT/BROKE.
NOWHERE IN LIVE, DOES IT SAY SOME ELSE HAS TO PAY FOR OTHERS
That my friend is called CHARTY not TAX and the Romeys show time and time again how thats done SHOW me a DEMs THAT GIVE THERE OWN MONEY and not
OUR TAXES-$$
YOU Have to Have A NATION THE MAKES THINGS TO HAVE TAX DOLLARS and not PIPE DREAMS. The gov is Driving Companies out of the country to make GOODs you Fix that by lower Tax not raising them. Remember dont bit the hand that feeds you. Open up your grade school books & read Econmices-101 the Law supply & demand. The Executive branch DID THIS THEY HAVE THE POWER WHERE TO CUT SPENDING (THIS IS SCARE TACTIS) They can CUT wastful spending and CAP increase and FEW will feel it. OTHER WISE WE KEEP ON & WE WILL ALL BE IN LINE LIKE GREECE. Stop drinking the Koolaid

Thanks, David.

Just how is the money going to Medicare and Social Security? Last I checked both are nothing to brag about. Social Security was to be used for just that - not to be borrowed against for other programs. And Medicare is laughable, since they keep cutting more and more out of that... And FYI, Al Gore has a net worth more than Romney, so let's include him on that. And while we're at it, how about the elite Hollywood stars and our beloved sports stars? Bo's salary should be the 1st to be held. (BTW, Romney didn't take his salary when he was Gov. of Mass. - Wouldn't it be nice if BO did the same thing?) It's not like HE can't afford it.....

David,

RE: "there was nothing partisan about this rant until you criticized the dems."

Did you even read the very first post? You owe Jessica an apology.

"Nothing partisan" when the first comment is about "republican idiots"?

i am sorry that you, David, are struggling with cancer especially because I lost a very dear friend to melanoma not too long ago. However, I'm also not sure that I can afford to pay for your treatments.

I agree that there needs to be serious reform, but from my view the Republicans have caved on everything. We haven't had any spending cuts, but we have had tax increases, salary freezes and inflation. Lets take some serious looks at Medicaid, at welfare, at social security. We are throwing money at huge social problems and just accepting that we can't change them? How charitable is that? Are we really concerned about individuals if we penalize them to try to get off of welfare?

And when people spout off that the rich need to pay more than 15% because its only fair that they pay more, you do realize that 15% of $5m is already a heck of a lot more than 15% of, say, $10,000? And if we confiscated all of the wealth in this country, we still couldn't pay off our debt. Sadly, these conversations always turn to sound bites and personalizing the situation. Which is why we never get anything done. So sad.

David I agree with most of what you say but believe a better answer for Social Security is to have higher income people continue to pay into the trust. I think you stop paying in after about $113,000 of earnings.

To "Working Class Man"... the Government is not a business. Businesses exist to make a profit. That is not the role of government. If it were, you would be even more frustrated.

I am looking at where the money is going. And it is not Medicare, Social Security, etc. WHY are YOU ok with military bases scattered throughout the world? You think that's done for FREE? WHY are YOU ok with sending US military to foreign countries to engage in war or occupation? You think that's not where the money is going? One week before sequestration kicked in we invaded Niger. You're ok with this? OK, deny Americans care with their own money which is partly taxes and mostly from China and give it all way in FOREIGN AID, that's $50 billion a year. And last Spring the US approved $60 million to fight child labor overseas. We have no business meddling overseas. Everyone wants a little spending money to buy themselves and their families nice things. But the do-gooders want the foreign kids out of work, unemployed, and engaging in habits and practices injurious to their health and welfare so that the do-gooders then have yet another cause to pour money in that we don't have and have no business getting involved in. When the USD crashes, it will be over for all of us. Is that what Congress wants? YOU keep voting them back in.

Agree with most of your rant except one very important point. SSI and Medicare are self funded. When it was set up it was with the stipulation that Congress could not touch the funds. Guess what, they did, YOUR elected officials are THE problem the WHOLE problem and nothing but THE PROBLEM.

I agree. Politicians should learn what its like to LOSE their cushy pensions and paychecks and live month to month like the people they (supposedly) serve.

The penalty for the politicians comes when the people effected vote the sitting politicians out of office. Everyone upset by the sequester should be calling, emailing, and writing their Representatives. Accept no excuses. Only accept an end to the sequester. If your Representative cannot fix the issue they are part of the problem.

That'd be fine too.

But when it comes to "Showing Off", don't forget the Expert-in-Chief, George W Bush... Especially his big flashy landing on an Aircraft Carrier with the big "Mission Accomplished" banner for TWO WARS he started that we're just now getting around to mopping up.

AGREE.. FULLY !!

Congresses do go into history as good or bad. The 112th was the worst. The 113th is trying to be worst. The Executive Branch has a different role than the Legislative Branch. Their jobs are different. Congress controls the purse strings. It is important to remember that the sequester came from the insistence of GOP leaders that the debt ceiling would not be raised unless the President agreed to wide spread spending cuts. That was the Summer of 2011. That is a historical fact.

How about we stop all those OIL Subsidies and no-bid contracts to Haliburton too while we're at it?

John Whitten - "How about we stop all those OIL Subsidies and no-bid contracts to Halliburton too while we're at it?"

Hey, John, I'm all for it, as long as we also stop subsidizing ethanol, so-called "green energy" businesses, teachers and labor unions, PBS, Planned Parenthood, ObamaCare, the Muslim Brotherhood, any and all allies who don't act like allies, the UN, and almost anything Team Obama thinks is a good idea at the moment, to include anything his major supporters and special interest groups are involved in.

Oh, and then there's Obama's DHS buying millions of hollow point bullets, allegedly for target practice when hollow points are not used for target practice, and about 7,000 fully automatic rifles, described as "personal defense weapons," in sole-source, no-bid contracts from Remington and then redacting portions of the contracts released to the public, when a government agency is only supposed to redact from classified documents, which these contracts weren't, or for national security reasons.

Heck, if we're gonna cut, then let's really CUT.

I agree 100% with cutting foreign aid. What do they give back to us? They hate us and would LOVE to see us fall. We keep sending money to Africa, Haiti, etc., while we have millions of our own people struggling to make ends meet or put food on the table, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of homeless people on our own soil. I'm all for sharing, but let's help ourselves first.

When, and more importantly IF, congress gives up any pay, that money is held for them. When the freeze is lifted, they receive ALL their back pay. The people who will be losing 20% of their income will not have this perk. If we demand congress stop receiving their huge paychecks, they should truly not get any money for however long it takes to straighten out this mess. While we're on the subject of not getting paid because you aren't doing your job, how about the senate doesn't get paid until they pass a budget. This is the fourth year in a row they have violated their Constitutional oath of office by not presenting a budget by October of each year.

The best way to insure Congress gives up their pay check is to vote them the heck out of office. It takes conviction to vote your standing Representatives out of office. But if you think this government is broken you got to get rid of the problem.

The only problem with this "Cut their Paycheck" stuff is that THEY (the people in Congress) are mostly wealthy in the first place and aren't really all that beholden to their monthly paychecks like the rest of us. You say "Cut it" and it really isn't that much of a threat. Kind of like telling you you'll have to do without one pizza this month. If they even notice, it will be such a trivial matter it won't faze them. It won't substantially impact their lives at all.

If you want them to notice, take away their cushy pensions and lobbying jobs when they "retire" from Congress. (Don't you have to DO something to GET tired before you can RE-tire??) Undo all the "Redistricting" gerrymandering and force them to run REAL, honest (cough) campaigns and fairly represent their constituents. That'll piss 'em off.

Question: How do you STARVE a Congressman?

Answer: Hide their PAYCHECKS under their WORK BOOTS

Finally someone says what we all are thinking.

Please check your facts. This story goes round and 'round, particularly among the military who works harder and longer than most for their pensions. But it's not true. Congressional members are federal employees for retirement purposes and pay into the federal retirement system. (Citation: http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/retirement_for_members.shtml)

Thank you for YOUR service, unlike that of your elected officials busy gorging themselves at the public trough.

Politics is truly the worlds oldest profession.

Fizban, first, thank you for your service. I'm also a disabled Vietnam vet who served 25 years, was promised "free" medical care for life, and now instead must pay premiums for TRICARE, dental care and Medicare.

What's needed is modifying the Constitution's 27th Amendment and/or establishing the following: (a) term limits of no more than a total of 12 years in either or both chambers of Congress, (b) put all members of Congress on Social Security, having to obtain their own private health insurance and being subject to each and every law they pass, the same as all the rest of us, and (c) either cutting off their retirement-for-life at a fixed time after they leave Congress or paying it according to a formula which multiplies their average Congressional compensation times the number of years they served, much the same as is done in many businesses, for our military, etc.

No matter how many years they've served in Congress, their "service" cannot even come close to the service of our military men and women, who do so in real harm's way, in some of the nastiest places on Earth, and not in air conditioned offices. cushy conference seats, or big, black limos. No wonder Congress thinks of itself as a bunch of entitled elites,rather than as servants of the people.

But their regular paychecks don't mean diddly to them. You'd have to cut their cushy retirement benefits, future speaking gigs, and lucrative lobbying jobs for them to feel it.

White House - "Sperling Admits Obama Misled in Debate: The President Did Propose the Sequester"

http://tiny.cc/3d8dtw

Patrick, it's also a violation of the Constitution not to live up to their oaths of office.

They're supposed to be protecting us against all enemies, foreign and domestic. How about they all go out now and check themselves into the D.C. JAIL.

Yes but you (we all) keep voting them right back into office. So who's the biggest chump? I think we need to revamp the voting system, get rid of this "TWO PARTY" mindset (BS), start listening to THIRD-PARTY voices and clean house-- OUR HOUSE. Our AMERICAN House. Toss 'em ALL OUT, ReBUBBAkins, DemoFLATS, and everything in between.

If they's in, kick their happy butts OUT.

I say fire them all, with NO retirement, NO cushy Healthcare protection, and be banned from ever running for a national office from that point forward.
Then ban PACs SIGs and any other interfering organization from donating. What ever happened to the Presidential Election Fund that we donated to when we filed our taxes? Reinstate that and when the two candidates are decided, those funds are all that are allowed. The same process should be followed for all members of the House and Senate. Then we should overhaul the long list of perks that they enjoy. Election to public office was never intended to instill royal treatment to those elected!

No, but "Congress" is.

You took the words out of my mouth. I learned a long time ago that when we have a problem you want to solve, we should all be bring "light" and not" heat" to the subject. Also the Whole Truth helps. First, to answer the question,I believe that congress should go without pay until we have a budget. In fact I understand that Del. Elanore Holmes Norton in DC is taking a 20% cut in her pay. They need to feel the pain.
Second, our president did in fact suggest the Sequestration but it was meant as a "poison pill", something that congress would not let happen. It was also approved by Republicans as well as Dems. Speaker John Boehner was quoted as saying that he got 97% of what he wanted, after the sequestration idea was approved.
Third,Congress should also listen to our military and civilain leaders in the DoD when they say they do not need a particular program.
Fourth, medical costs have to be addressed. They are too high. This is difficult to do since we have a "for profit" medical system.
Fifth, since 70 is the new 30. Why can't we gradually increase retirement age as we did under Pres. Clinton, un-cap the amount at which time we stop paying into Social Security (SS)and then make sure that what goes into SS stays there so that surpluses do not revert to general revenue?
Sixth, revise the tax code eliminate "loop holes"
Seventh, get money out of politics.
Eighth, adopt Simpson-Bowles or a variation of it.

Now there's an idea. After all, their own staffers are federal employees, aren't they? And almost all of them say the federal workforce is too large.

A CAPITAL suggestion. And while we're at it, let's institute a lifetime BAN on taking lucrative lobbying jobs and paid speaking gigs (aside from routine travel expenses) after they're out of office.

I agree.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!

That doesn't hit 'em where it hurts. It just hurts more hard-working Americans. What you need to do is BAN their LOBBYIST buddies. THAT would hurt 'em.

In order to cut their pay, Congress would have to vote to do so. Just like they will vote to limit their terms, benefits, retirement, etc.

And do you think when this country has no more money, any of those countries that recieve our money will come to our aid? Most don't support us when there is a vote in the UN.

We could always pray that someone would blow up the Capital while Congress was in session and wipe them all out.

Welcome to America.

Yes, but SOME are MORE equal than others, right?

Is he any crazier than those who want to spend billions on climate change? Al Gore has made a fortune about scaring the entire first world that we are somehow destroying a planet that will survive long after all of us.

And WHO would the person/people/committee/commission BE to do the firing?

Yup, the President is not supposed to be a dictator (George W Bush) and the Congress is not supposed to be the Poster Child for Public Welfare. We need to institute a Work Program... for CONGRESS.

Isn't that what they've BEEN doing? It sure as heck ain't been WORKING.

Another drop in the bucket to think about. Give people the option to collect extended unemployment benefits. The level drops to the states poverty level divided by 52 weeks and of course they will pay the money back after week 26 benefits.

Please, don't hold yourself back. Tell us how you really feel!

(LOL)

Right & that means all of them should have to be on the Obama Care Plan!

They have a fully manned Navy clinic in the Capital with an Admiral as the head doctor to take care of the members of congress. I am a former Navy Corpsman I have been in the clinic.

And what do you do when you login and your number has "already voted" ??

I don't think that will work.

Excellent point Beverly. How do we go about getting these changes made? Congress is not going to vote for term limits - they have it too good. What can we do?

Big changes like term limits require Constitutional Amendments. The only way to get that done is to march. Big demonstrations are the only way the media will focus on those issues. Once those issues become THE ISSUE Congress will have to pay attention.

so true!!

Love that idea - the problem you have is that these people become lifers and impose their beliefs on others to ensure that they give their votes, etc. to them. It's all a game of chess, who makes the next move and who's on my side and who isn't. Limiting terms will help stop the corruption in Washington.

Every time I have written a Congress member about term limits I get the same lie. They all say term limits already exist because of elections.

Yes, no pay for any of them (especially the President) until they come up with a workable solution that doesn't dismantle our national defense. I'd agree with Stan that fines for lack of progress would be very fitting, but don't forget to fine the President. The man seems to know how to use a pen when he wants to force Executive Orders hurtful to our country but somehow couldn't work his way out of a paper bag to help our national defense when Sequestration was imminent - and he's Commander-in-Chief of the military! What should cause people even more concern is the massive amount of ammo and rifles (RME KRNL stated above) that Obama's Department of Homeland Security just purchased. I heard the same thing about the massive purchase of ammo and weapons. Remember this is the Department of Homeland Security - do the math, wake up and smell the coffee!

The "cut" is actually only $45 billion, about 1.2% of spending this year, and it's not really a cut, only a reduction in the amount of spending increase. There are too many hyperventilating fools on this comment, buying without question the panic-grams of our innumerate President.

Why don't we start with Congressional pay... I think pretty much everybody here agrees THAT'S a WASTE.

Just signed!

Are there term limits on the Senate? I missed that.

A Conclave of Congress!! I love it!
Lock'em up with NO CONTACT to the outside world (as in Rome) and don't let them out until we finally have a budget for the remainder of this year and for next FY. They can sleep and eat in the capitol. Capitol Police could make sure the rules are followed.

Ummm... why exactly do we have to let them back out again...?? I forgot.

Davew, well said! I would love to post this on FB or Twitter, we need to get the word out and American's need to get involved. If we just keep complaining about it without doing something, nothing will change. This country of American's needs to come together as a whole and stand up and fight against what the politicians have created.

That is the way that the system is SUPPOSED to work but special Interests get in the way(AARP, NRA, Big Pharma---5 billion dollars spent on lobbying!) . So there are three things that have to happen:
1. Real campaign finance reform ala Mc cain/Feingold,
2. Eliminate Gerrymandering (so when we do re-districting we have an impartial commission draw the district lines), and
3. Informed voters who can cut through the name-calliing and half-truths to get to the real issues and where the candidates stand(League of Women Voters try to do this--inform the voter)

Anthony Fasolo,
RE: the NRA. -- What's so sad about the NRA is it should not even exist as a lobbying entity. The reason it was created was for the promotion of the shooting sports. It only became a lobbying organization when there was a clear and present danger to the 2nd amendment by our government. Think about it, there is an organization that lobbies the government to not abolish a constitutionly protected right; that's insane.

Imagine if the press spent millions and millions of dollars to stop the government from abolishing the 1st amendment. Sounds crazy right?

Respectfully T Ailshire term limits will not take power AWAY from the people. They will take power away from Special Interest Groups and lifetime politicians. Currently the game is rigged in favor of those holding office. Not only are the districts gerrymandered but the incumbents get many benefits, like "franking" (free postage) that politicians in office do not enjoy. Sitting politicians also get more press coverage and name recognition. In my opinion term limits are a necessary component of fixing our broken system.

Then there would only be rich people in the congress. Oh wait ....., there are only rich people in congress now.

@Tyler -

Great to see you on this thread! I read http://www.zerohedge.com/ every day.

That's what happens when the "We" is silent.

Where in the Constitution does it say that? I would like to read that. I have several copies available. Thanks, Don

Don C Donhoe, I think it's the 27th amendment.

FYI. I looked at the constitution and there are two parts dealing with pay that apply here:
1. Article I sec.6: "The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States...."and
2. XXVII amendment: "No law, varying the compensation for the services of Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." In other words they cannot raise THEIR own pay but can raise the compensation of the NEXT congress.

Just did. Thanks!

Just like his beautiful plan for all of us to get the same health coverage he and all the senators and congress people get, that turned into a boondoggle that was written by healthcare lobbyists, and ended up being 1000+ pages. Just like his plan to be the most transparent president we've ever had, and post all the bills he was going to sign online for 30 days for public comment. Just like his plan to close Guantanamo. Just like his plan to fix the economy with all his "shovel ready" projects. Just like his plan to "scalpel" stuff out of the budget. Gee, now that you've posted this "plan", I believe him. Again, it's not republicans and democrats... It's all politicians! They'll tell you whatever you want to hear, so long as it keeps them in office, with their fat pensions, security detail, free, private, military escorted airfare across the country, housing allowance, car allowance, $200,000+ salaries, and all the money on the side that lobbyists have (which is a lot). Really, it's not a republican vs democrat thing; it's us the electors and them the elected.

I just read the President's "plan". It is quite vague and reads like long term "goals".
"Reform" is used repeatedly. What does that mean? I don't find anything that gets into how it will be done. As they say, "the devil is in the details". The only thing in this plan that outlines exactly how it will be done is to raise taxes on the more "fortunate". That is the only thing that the President appears to understand.

I recommend that everyone go read the plan. It is less than one page.

hey oldtimer, anytime we the people can cut out the bs between us by cutting our bs so called representives, it's a great thing, serves a greater purpose,

Patch has already shown their bias. It is evident in every piece they do on the subject.

I disagree it is not irresponsible but rather a very good idea. This discussion serves several useful purposes:
1. It allows people to "vent"-as many of the comments show there is a lot of frustration of out there.
2. It shows that there is a lot of misinformation out there too which allows for others to clarify things.
3. The idea of stopping all or part of their pay until a budget is reached is actually one that many people agree with, including Congressman Frank Wolf. They could all do it voluntarilly also as has Del Elanor Holmes Norton of DC(she is taking a 20% pay cut so that her staff can work.)

The titles "Hit 'em Where it Hurts? How About CONGRESS Doesn't Get Paid Until Sequestration ENDS?" or "Thanks to Sequestration, You're About to Lose Your Job: Who's to Blame?". Or maybe the stories about how the Metro will fall apart, the airport is going to close, or special needs kids are going to get kicked to the curb?

I would like to see Patch do some stories about the National Debt or Deficit. Or maybe why the Federal government the other day decided to give Egypt $250 million dollars? What about the special needs kids here at home?

You lost me at Bush...not to mention you linked to a Maddow blog. That is sad. Very sad.

Lol, maddowblog? Not a good source of credible information if you are trying to convince someone with opposing views. That would be like me saying "hey, democrats won't like this but here is some damning evidence on our budget issues: rushlimbaughblog.com". Again, we need to stop blaming each other, and blame ALL politicians, and hold them all responsible. Not a one is there fighting for our best interests.

"Bush-era tax breaks continue to be the biggest chunk."

That is a false statement. While Bush did author 'tax cuts', it was the failure of Republicans and Democrats to fail to cut spending in lieu of the tax cuts. The tax cuts have not been driving the deficit. In fact, the tax cuts were the chief reason that the annual deficit shrank from $480 billion plus down to $160 billion before the Democrats took control of both Houses and started spending like drunken sailors.

I don't imagine Republicans want to hear this, but slashing investments in "Obamacare," education, aid to the poor, and foreign aid may advance a far-right vision, but these aren't the policies that are responsible for the existing budget shortfall."

ObamaCare is driving up the cost of insurance as a report was released recently that premiums for younger Americans are expected to rise by 150-200% thanks to the law. This law is going to be a disaster but, it's end goal is to drive America off the cliff and into socialized medicine as the president himself stated. Socialized medicine is bankrupting countries around the world.

You could check out the report from the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction called "Learning from Iraq".
http://www.sigir.mil/learningfromiraq/index.html
The problem I see with most Americans is that we think tribally, not critically. It seems the majority of the people align themselves with a Republican or Democrat tribe to the detriment of the Country as a whole.
Unless people stop defending their perceived alliances this country will never heal. Divide and concur is the mantra of corporate and political America. It is obviously working.

Liam, thanks for the link. I am libertarian. I dislike both Republican and Democrats. It is obvious that many people don't have the capacity to see outside the two-party dominated system. It isn't left or right for me, it is Liberty vs. Statism

Liam, you're exactly right. The politicians know we are locked into this two party system, and they exploit it. They divide us on the fringe issues, without ever addressing the real issues that will affect the most people. Their stances change depending on who they're pandering to, and then change even more while in office, then change again when their approval ratings come out; it's a joke, and we all know it.

@Liam, Mises, Davew - What if both parties were two birds of the same cloth?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DrfMor5CCA

Lee, if you read all my other posts, (which I know may be difficult, in a post with so many comments, honestly no sarcasm, with over 500 comments) I totally agree with you that all politicians are cut from the same cloth. They are all playing us, dividing us, making us fight with each other, so we don't realize the glaring problem, that the people "representing" us are screwing us. All while they get big salaries, pensions, housing allowances, car allowances, free health benefits ( that we were supposedly going to get) and then the side benefits from lobbyists.

"It doesn't matter who the people voted for; they always vote for us" -Joseph Stalin

If social security or medicare were contrived in the private sector, the people responsible would be going to prison for the rest of their lives. They are exponentially worse than Ponzi schemes.

Yes, you have paid into it and thus deserve it, but again, the people "representing" us, both democrat and republican, have taken out of that pot to pay for other things, and along with you, some people eligible, who never, or only paid into a shorter amount of time, are drawing from it. Again, these politicians only needed to sock away this money, not touch it, maybe invest it it t-bills/bonds, give the fair rated amounts to everyone, and everything would have worked out. But again they somehow screwed that up. And you think they're worried? Nope. They, no matter what, have free healthcare, a pension, and all the money they've made on questionable deals with lobbyists, and the in the stock market, for the rest of their lives. Good deal, huh?

Mr. Fasalo,
I do not know the rules, but I do know that the Social Security Disability applications have risen tremendously in the last few years. The number receiving it is impressive.

To receive retirement SS, you must have 40 quarters of employment paying SS. I am not sure what the rules are on disability, but I imagine it is minimal. I THINK that some young people are also entitled to SS benefits if they are disabled. I do have a relative with severe mental issues that went on SS disability after just a couple of years of working. She has been on disability for many,many years. (She truly is unable to work.) However, there are some people who do abuse this.

ANthony - As the GAO has reported, the federal government wastes $125 billion on things just like sending SS payments to people who don't pay into the system or to dead people. The Pentagon wastes $70 billion a year as well.

http://thealexandrianva.com/2013/01/11/the-u-s-government-wastes-125-billion-a-year/

We'd save more money if the cheaters went after the government instead.

@Keith -

Social Security & Medicare are facing between $86 trillion and $132 trillion in unfunded liabilities (meaning there is no money to pay for this). That is between 550% & 900% of GDP. I would say that is way more than 'some sort of problem with Social Security.'

Just sayin...

"accepted indicators from professional sources"...you obviously did not read my reply about your supposed professional source...who I guess gave "indicators" that are accepted by....who again?

I do have a problem with Social Security...as does most of the country. If you read something other than a blog from a far left website, maybe you would be able to educate yourself on the issues facing that system. Or maybe you are old enough to believe that you will benefit from it. But screw your children, and their children, the ones who will be working to pay off the debt that is currently skyrocketing with absolutely no indication of slowing down. I bet you even believe that sequestration means that our debt...hell...the deficit will even go down. Wake up and stop drinking the koolaid.

My favorite part you providing a statement of mine, with the date and time, like I had filed it under “TOP SECRET” and you were the genius who discovered it and has just released to the world. I don’t think Wikileaks will be interested. Not only that, but you don’t offer any evidence whatsoever to disprove my claims.

How about this: Keith Conway, 11:19 pm on Saturday, January 26, 2013 (in a separate article)
“Well, since 31,000 people were murdered by guns in the US in 2011…”

Where in the hell do you get your information from? There were about 12,650 murders in the US in 2011. Of those, about 8,580 were caused by firearms. So, how do you get 31,000 just from guns? Maybe you misspoke and you meant that there were 31,000 DEATHS from firearms in 2011, which includes suicides, accidents, etc. Whether you did it on purpose or not, you are still part of the problem. You are proof that most of this country is in an intellectual coma thanks in part to the public education system (another subject we can debate).

Nothing is keeping the rich from paying more in taxes; if they intentionally write bigger checks to the govt and don't file a return asking for it back, you think the IRS would voluntarily go through their returns for them and pay them back? Why doesn't warren Buffett do this if he believes in it so dearly? You don't think his CPAs get him every possible deduction and credit? Charities do a lot more with every dollar they receive than the govt. look at the work Bill and Melinda Gates do through charities, that would otherwise be squandered by our govt if they paid the equivalent in taxes. I don't know anything about you and your returns, but I am guessing you get money back (again, I could be wrong since I don't know you) but if you didn't file a return with all itemized deductions and credits, you wouldn't get all your money back. If people like warren Buffett want higher taxes on themselves, then they should put their money where their mouths are.

And oh by the way, mises was correct, look at Bernie madoff who took money from newer investors, and paid the older investors with that money. He's doing life in prison, for doing exactly what the govt is doing with ss; taking money from new investors and paying the older ones. Is that not a Ponzi scheme? The govt, both republicans and democrats did this.

@Davew reston. And one huge difference between SS and Madoff is that his scheme was voluntary. Social security is not. If I decide that I do not wish to participate in Social Security, I will be arrested, fined, and thrown in prison. If I resist, I will be shot and possibly killed.

Hey Davew you are missing the point with Warren Buffett. He is promoting a system where he does not pay a lower percentage of his income than his secretary, or other working class Americans pay. He thinks that if working class Americans kept more of their money, made possible by the rich and corporations paying the same percentage as middle class Americans, than the country as a whole would be better off.

Mr. Buffett has donated more than half of his total economic worth to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. His Berkshire Hathaway companies create hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs. I call that giving back.

Working for one of his companies was one of the most fulfilling and educational times of my life.

Liam...so what your saying is, working middle class people who KEEP their money will have tremendous benefits, but wealthy people keeping their money will not produce the same said benefits....such as donating a huge chunk of their wealth to charity...like Buffett just demonstrated.

I have one sincere question for you, and an honest and succinct answer will suffice. Lets say we are holding all the money Buffett gave to that charity, and we are faced with the decision to either still give it to that charity OR give it to the government in hopes that they will use that money for the same reasons Buffett wanted...who would you hand the money to?

What I'm saying is that rich people pay a smaller percentage of their income to the government. For example, Mitt Romney, Warren Buffett both payed smaller percentages on the money they earned than you and I pay on the money you and I earned.

Why do you think the rich, and lets be very clear here, corporations - many global who receive HUGE subsidies from the government, should pay less than a middle class working American?

Regarding your one question I don't see the point of the question. Are you asking is the government full or waste fraud and corruption? Are you saying that the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation has the same mission as the government? Either way that does not go to my point or change my original comment.

Liam wrote:

"Hey Davew you are missing the point with Warren Buffett. He is promoting a system where he does not pay a lower percentage of his income than his secretary, or other working class Americans pay. "

This is a false statement. While Warren Buffet currently pays a 'lower rate' than his secretary (his company also owes the IRS billions in back taxes btw/), this is because the rate stems from capital gains tax and is a completely different tax than the ordinary income tax rate. In most cases, an individual like Warren Buffet or the company he works for has already paid the top rate (currently 39%+) on the income before it is invested.

Liam, so you trust that government will fix the problem that the government caused…as if the problems of corporations being so wealthy, and wealth inequality in this country, is not a DIRECT result of government policies. I’m sure you’ve heard this before, but the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

The point of my question is that most people would rather give their money to charity rather than government. This is because we know that government is full of waste, fraud and corruption. HOWEVER, you are advocating that we entrust our government to enact more laws that will somehow solve the same problems that we have always had. Reality is, it will make it worse.

And you original argument is just another fallacy. Of course your argument sounds good when you use percentages to describe (and just TWO examples). But once again you run to the government who caused the problem in the first place and ask them to fix it. Why not just eliminate taxes on the lower and middle classes and have the rich/corporations pay it all? Since income inequality is a reality in this country (we agree there), what would be the harm?

Lee I respectfully disagree. Many people who pay only capital gains tax are trust babies and have never had to earn the money they are investing. But look, you have the right to think Billionaires should pay less taxes than you. If that's how you feel you should feel great about the state our country currently enjoys.

Mises I didn't say the government will fix anything. I believe our government is broken. I think our two party system is designed to divide and control the people. I think the deep hatred exemplified by the posts on this thread clearly shows a divided America that thinks liberals and conservatives, democrats and republicans, are two separate and extreme groups that have nothing in common. I know my neighbors, my friends cannot be so easily categorized. Unfortunately the us versus them mentality perpetrated by political parties and solidified by the corporate media prevails insuring the people blame each other instead of banding together and demanding real change.

You said, "you are advocating that we entrust our government to enact more laws that will somehow solve the same problems that we have always had."

In the past corporations and the rich paid much higher percentages of their incomes in taxes. Those higher taxes funded wars and rebuilt our country. They allowed for an infrastructure that made the United States the greatest manufacturing country in the world. That infrastructure allowed a standard of living that had never been experience. Never in the history of the world. It wasn't only taxes it was also regulation. It was the breaking up of monopolies and labor laws that allowed a middle class to grow and prosper.

You also said, "Of course your argument sounds good when you use percentages to describe." My point is based on fairness and is a good argument.

I don't want to waste my time or yours, but I really hope you get your 70%-90% tax rate on the rich and corporations. One thing I know is that shrinking government is impossible (hello sequestration) so maybe the only way to get real change that doesn't involve socialism (or any other -ism) is to let it collapse the country. When that happens, I am sure you will still look to the government for help. If we get through this mess that people love to ignore, then so be it. But I won't pretend its not happening.

Liam - Considering 1) I am not a billionaire and 2) I pay the top rate (39%+), I understand how the tax system works a lot better than you do.

You are talking about two completely different taxes and in most cases (hopefully I will be able to do this in the future), those that live off of their capital gains taxes have paid the top rate on the money that they get from capital gains for years. Are there some 'billionaires' that try and cheat the system as Warren Buffet has? Certainly.

Until the tax code is scrapped, the rates are lowered, and the loopholes and closed, some of the 'billionaires' yes will continue to pay a lower effective tax rate than their secretary. And yes, I am fine with that because the tax code allows them too.

If you are as upset about the tax rates as I am and I think you are then you should lobby your Congressman (sadly we're stuck w/ Moron) and Senators to get the code changed.

Mises we already have an -ism in capitalism. However the money generated by capitalism has perverted the system. Multinational corporations have cornered many markets. Utilities have cornered infrastructure. Our political system has been purchased. Only term limits and caps on election spending can even begin to reel in the graft and corruption.

As far as looking to the government for help? The government has to be forced to help. The current Congress needs to be fired. The government should be working for the people. They should regulate big business, the utilities, big oil, etc... for the safety and good of the people.

Lee, I'm not a billionaire and I pay the top tax rate as well as you. I don't see why you think you know more about taxes than I. You stated, " In most cases, an individual like Warren Buffet or the company he works for has already paid the top rate (currently 39%+) on the income before it is invested."
I countered, "Many people who pay only capital gains tax are trust babies and have never had to earn the money they are investing."

The fact that generational wealth is taxed at a lower rate than money earned from a job, in my opinion, is unfair.

Regarding Warren Buffett, I've met him and worked for one of his companies. I am an investor in Berkshire Hathaway and read his annual reports. He doesn't strike me as a cheat. That's my considered opinion you are welcome to yours.

If you want a tax cheat I present Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He is a great example of one place America is wasting entitlement.

@mises Maybe we are arguing the same poinr; I'm not sure, based on your posts. The bottom line is that SS is a Ponzi scheme, by definition. People paying into it now are paying to the people who have been paying into it for 40 years. The money the 40+ years people are paying has been gone a long time. Explain to me how that is not a Ponzi scheme?! I think we agree, but are missing each other points.

@liam, but if warren buffet is so for higher taxes for the rich, why does he not voluntarily pay more? Argue my point that if he really, truly, believed in more taxes, why would he not seek every possible deduction and credit? You can pay more in taxes if you so choose not to seek them in your returns. He was against more taxes when he wasn't as wealthy; and iI never said he didn't contribute to charities, my point was that charities, in general, we're far more effective at spending more of each dollar on the people they are intended to benefit than the govt is.

And Liam, one of the reasons Romney and a lot of rich people "appear" to be paying less taxes is because they donate a lot to charity(which gets deducted) like buffett, and a lot of their income is from investments, which require income to put into investments, which they already paid income taxes on a while ago. If you make income, you pay taxes on it; when you take the remainder of that money, left after taxes, and invest it, and then make more money on that, should you get taxed again at the same rate? They've already paid taxes on that money once (or more likely 2 or 3 times) And how are we paying less? Percentage wise? Sure, because we have less disposable income than millionaires; but millionaires are paying HUGE tax bills.

@ Davew, I think we are on the same wavelength. It is difficult at times to follow on here.

@Laim...I agree with every statement you made except that money hasn't perverted the system. People have...mainly politicians by lobbyist for special interests. Inanimate objects like money can't do that. Also, I don't believe that government regulation solves much of anything. Government needs to empower the people to regulate society on their own. Would government step in at some point? Maybe, but they never step back. Once you let them in, they aren't going anywhere whether the problem is solved or not. Otherwise we agree on a lot, just different avenues of getting there.

@mises, I think we are arguing the same point, apologies.

Liam, fine then, are you paying 40% in income taxes? Nothing is keeping you from doing so. You really want the govt to take 40% of what you make? You really believe it takes 40% of your income to keep this country running, then another % for local taxes, then another % for investments you make any money on, then another % for any property you own, then 50% of the value of any assets you own when you pass away, that you intended on leaving to your kids? If you're a socialist/communist/whatever, then we can agree to disagree. I think that's outrageous.

You are the one who said the money had already been taxed. Your premise is untrue. The money they are earning off income should be taxed at the same rates all earned income is taxed at Tyler. I don't begrudge them their trust fund. I simply say those new earnings should be taxed at the same rate as a teacher's, bus driver's, cop's, fireman's, ditch digger's earnings. Why are the rich entitled to pay a lower percentage than the poor?

Liam -

MOST of the 'rich' pay the top rate (now 39%) on income they earn from a job which is the federal income tax. This doesn't include property taxes, state or local taxes or a host of other taxes.

What some of the 'rich' are able to do is live off of their capital gains taxes, money that more than likely has already been taxed prior to investment. increasing this tax has proven over time to be harmful to the economy which is why it has been lowered over the years down to 15%. The recent fiscal cliff deal raised this tax back to 20%.

And btw/ for Warren Buffet to pay a lower rate than his secretary, she likely makes between $200,000 & $500,000 a year.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/01/25/warren-buffetts-secretary-likely-makes-between-200000-and-500000year/

He isn't the only one saying it has already been taxed. The government would tax the air you breathe if they thought that they could get away with it. The government's goal is to tax each and every transaction possible...personal or business..whether or not the same item has been taxed before. And people wonder why something costs 10 times what it should by the time it gets to you? Did you know that there is an entire tax code section on making sure they get taxes from BARTERING...you know, if you trade a lawnmower for a neighbor's weedwacker, you are required (nobody does) to claim it on your tax return with the fair market value of the item or services received.

Liam, come on; people who are making money off of investments, already paid income taxes on the money that was needed to make those investments. Yes; you can argue allllllllllll day that the money that certain rich people have, wasn't taxed at the same rates that people earning income today pay, but so what? Are you arguing that people today just "suck it up" and pay up because our represented officials have screwed us royally? Sounds "fair". What do you think drives our economy? It's people who are ambitious, and start companies, and hire people. And once they get hit with outrageous taxes, you think they all of a sudden feel more ambivalent, and give more to the ineffective government?! No, they fire people. Companies have razor thin profit margins and when it comes down to it they get rid of their most expensive asset: salaries (people). This isn't rocket science, you can hope all day that people and corporations and rich people will pick to give people extensive benefits, and pay exorbitant salaries, and companies will pay all the government wants in taxes, but it just doesn't work that way. Sorry. Life isn't fair, unicorns and mermaids don't exist either. Companies don't exist for free to give people jobs. Eliminate the incentive for people to create companies, and jobs, we're screwed.

Mises - "The government would tax the air you breathe if they thought that they could get away with it."

Ummmmmm.... ever hear of 'carbon-tax'. Yup, the real agenda behind the 'Climate Change' boondoggle is to create a 'market' to tax what we exhale, carbon dioxide. So, they are going to tax the air we breathe, or at least the air we exhale.

@davew..."Companies have razor thin profit margins". That will be argued with claims that companies are now earning record profits (as if that is something to be ashamed of). The big joke here is that large corporations, the ones who have bought off the politicians, are the ones with the record profits. Small businesses...ones run by family or are actually limited to a community...are the ones with razor thin profit margins. These are the businesses that really matter and the ones that employ more people, but they don't have that extra cash on hand to bribe politicians for special favors and influence like the large companies.

Davew your assertions are wrong. Corporations are currently enjoying the highest profits in the history of the world. Let me say that again, Corporations are currently enjoying the highest profits in the history of the world. So that razor thin ideas don't cut it. Furthermore if I buy a house and flip it making 100K and pay 12% taxes I'm happy. If I buy a house and flip it and pay 40% taxes I'm still making $60K and I'm still way happy. If the houses I'm flipping are on an island and the bridge collapses rendering it impossible for my crew to not be able to rehab the house I'm not so happy. Taxes are needed to make society function.

Are you seriously telling me a 60% profit is too little for you to make an investment?

We had the chance back in Nov. How'd that work out?

I suggest educating the populace...oh wait, nevermind, the government already has a monopoly on that. Why would they give us the freedom to educate our children the way we want to? Because, as with everything else, they think they know better.

And people get offended when you call them a communist....

Mises, I'm familar with Hayek and Von Mises and all of the writers who have shaped your ideology. I agree with some of their points, but not all.

What I do not agree with is an anti-competitive, predatory system that seeks to insulate itself from the realities of poverty, disease, and war that so many lives are touched by. Anti-competitive, predatory business practices are ruining our capitalist system and the criminals behind them need to be called out, not bowed down to.

And I disagree with the assertion that somehow giving the government more power by increasing taxes is going to solve the problem. The people you want to solve the problem are complicit in causing it. Do you really think that government promotes competitiveness? (think about bailouts) You speak of poverty and WAR and fail to look at the root causes of each, or at least what makes them worse. Income inequality and poverty gets worse as government regulation and taxation goes up.

I don't remember wading into the scope of government debate. I do maintain that many of the advocates of Austrian economics want to pretend that their ability and desire to profit doesn't adversely affect the lives of the unfortunate. They, ironically, are those with the deepest pockets who are capable of walling themselves away from mankind's miseries and protecting their interests with obscene amounts of lobbying expenditures (which completely unmasks their hypocrisy).

Why would the scope of government be relevant? I think you point that out very well in your last sentence when you talk about lobbying. If possible, you should try looking at the government as a business. They too have the "ability and desire to profit" in the form of tax money and power through legislation. However, their most lucrative profit is violence. So, why wouldn't their profits be just as harmful to the "unfortunate"? Because we elected them? Because that money is being put to good use?

You know what the best thing about these large and profitable companies is? At the end of the day, I can simply refuse to buy their products, work for them, or support them in any way. They won't lock me up or kill me for it.

RE: "Taxed too much -- The Democrats are destroying America"

So you are still under the illusion that one party is somehow different from the other? The government is run by two mafia families; the Gambino, a.k.a. Democrats, and the Genovese, a.k.a. Republicans.

If the Republicans were supposed to be our saviors from the Democrats they could have put a stop to Obamacare on multiple occasions.

Keith, have you ever actually researched the effects of increasing the minimum wage? Or do you just assume that every business is evil and that they should just absorb the increased cost by lowering profits?

Those were my words...in the form of a question....which you didn't answer. I don't see how that was an absurd question. What's more telling are your words..."deceit wage"....I understand it was a typo, but one can wonder if it was a Freudian slip. Either way, I've come to the conclusion that you act based on emotion rather than any logical, rational, or intellectual evidence. And when you say that you "could care less", what you meant is that you COULDN'T CARE LESS...unless you really do want to give me credit.

Good point. I'm going into hiding :-)

I totally agree with you DF, thank you for your comments. That would be a great name for a web-site to notify ALL Americans that could join the social media group of "American's United".

Huh! I guess you think the world of George Soros, though...