The fiscal cliff

[The Voice]

What rate extra would you have smokers pay? Is it the $1.25 per pack in Ohio enough, or the $2.00 in Michigan or the $4.35 in New York? Do you also have a tax on pop, on ice cream, on products with high carbohydrate content, high fructose corn syrup?

How about higher rates for people who don't exercise? How about people who do extreme sports have waivers that their insurance doesn't have to pay or higher rates if they get injured, or even those who enjoy CrossFit classes or ToughMudder runs? Joggers should know that running on concrete is dangerous for joints.

How about a waiver for people who blast music in their earbuds so they don't get hearing services later in life?

There are limitless subsets for where people could get charged more.

Yes and insurance companies still charge more for people that smoke, therefore medicare should as well. As far as how much more, I'm not really sure, but I don't think a dollar or two more a pay would be that big of a deal. At my work right now people pay an extra 5 bucks for health insurance.

Does a person who drinks pop, eats ice cream, or any of that other stuff have that much higher risk of cancer? I know smokers do and it's proven they have a hell of a lot more health problems. If it wasn't insurance companies wouldn't charge more. I don't see people filing law suits to ice cream, soda, or any of that other stuff due to health complications.

[KI4MVP]

Yes and insurance companies still charge more for people that smoke, therefore medicare should as well. As far as how much more, I'm not really sure, but I don't think a dollar or two more a pay would be that big of a deal. At my work right now people pay an extra 5 bucks for health insurance.

Does a person who drinks pop, eats ice cream, or any of that other stuff have that much higher risk of cancer? I know smokers do and it's proven they have a hell of a lot more health problems. If it wasn't insurance companies wouldn't charge more. I don't see people filing law suits to ice cream, soda, or any of that other stuff due to health complications.

I think the cigarette taxes can cover that without specifically charging for it with increased medicare costs.

[southernflyer]

The question shouldn't be if the interest rates should go up, which they should; but why have they been artificially been kept at almost 0% for four years by the Federal Reserve, hurting those who actually save their money or older citizens who don't have 401k's and primarily have their money in CD's or savings accounts.


If the Fed rate went up to 3% (historically low at that), maybe more people would take a serious look at our spending and say the half trillion plus in interest on the debt per year isn't worth what we are spending it on. A corrupt institution with no real oversight minipulating it to be less than $200 billion and shown to be less that 5% of the budget is what we should fear. When inflation suddenly jumps, and it will, everyone will look around and ask where it came from. By then, the interest on the debt will be almost $1 trillion a year. Cheap debt never is in the long run.

[southernflyer]

Diabetes and the health risks of being overweight are far more destructive than smoking. If a smoker gets cancer and dies, there are no longer any costs associated with the smoking on the health system. An overweight person with diabetes can easily have heart issues, bad joints, blood pressure problens, sugar problems, and can have these costs over a long period of time. The average cost in a hospital due to a heart attack is in the tens of thousands. As is the cost of bariatric surgery.

I get a health credit each month from my employer from not smoking, but I think doing the same for being overweight and getting a credit for exercising would be much more beneficial to society as a whole.

[RappSoda]

Diabetes and the health risks of being overweight are far more destructive than smoking. If a smoker gets cancer and dies, there are no longer any costs associated with the smoking on the health system. An overweight person with diabetes can easily have heart issues, bad joints, blood pressure problens, sugar problems, and can have these costs over a long period of time. The average cost in a hospital due to a heart attack is in the tens of thousands. As is the cost of bariatric surgery.

I get a health credit each month from my employer from not smoking, but I think doing the same for being overweight and getting a credit for exercising would be much more beneficial to society as a whole.

Might be immaterial to your point, but cancer treatment is very expensive as is treamtment for emphysema. Blood pressure and heart issues are all caused by smoking as well. Also, mouth surgery to replace teeth/gums is incredibly expensive.

But you need food. It is natural to be hungry. Do people go overboard? Yes. Is that a costly problem? For sure.

You don't need tobacco, though.. One can go throughout life without ever smoking. You can't necessarily call food as a whole a "vice". Tobacco is completely unnecessary and it makes the lives of those who abstain more expensive.

I agree with your point in general, but smoking shouldn't be put in the same category as anything you've compared it to. I wish I could get health credit for being smoke-free.

[The Voice]

The question shouldn't be if the interest rates should go up, which they should; but why have they been artificially been kept at almost 0% for four years by the Federal Reserve, hurting those who actually save their money or older citizens who don't have 401k's and primarily have their money in CD's or savings accounts.

Lower interest rates make it more attractive for buyers. People are already having a hard time selling their homes at the rates they are now.

Banks with larger interest rates typically need deposits to cover their loans.

Diabetes and the health risks of being overweight are far more destructive than smoking. If a smoker gets cancer and dies, there are no longer any costs associated with the smoking on the health system.

And if an obese person has a heart complication and dies, there are no longer any costs associated with eating on the health care system.

An overweight person with diabetes can easily have heart issues, bad joints, blood pressure problens, sugar problems, and can have these costs over a long period of time. The average cost in a hospital due to a heart attack is in the tens of thousands. As is the cost of bariatric surgery.

And a smoker can easily have heart issues, lung issues, cancer, emphysema, teeth/gum treatment, strokes, lower bone density (in females), fertility problems, ect...

Smoking causes an estimated 90% of all lung cancer deaths in men and 80% of all lung cancer deaths in women.

Can I hurt another person by eating a whole chocolate pie in front of them daily? I certainly could by smoking a whole pack of cigarettes in front of them daily.

I get a health credit each month from my employer from not smoking, but I think doing the same for being overweight and getting a credit for exercising would be much more beneficial to society as a whole.

Problem with this is some people are overweight due to a disability or it's hereditary. Plus how do you prove one is working out? People with fast metabolisms could just say they are.

The biggest issue I have with the food thing is how do you tell someone is eating healthier? Someone with a fast metabolism is still going to have health complications if they eat like a pig. The only difference is you can't tell just by looking at them.

[Maximus]

Cut funding for agencies other than defense by 1%...savings $932 BILLION over 10 years
Reduce growth in defense spending by 1% annually...savings $862 BILLION over 10 years
Raise earliest age for Social Security Eligibility...savings $144 BILLION over 10 years

That's $2 TRILLION in savings from just those 3 moves.

There's a total of $4.6 TRILLION in savings from the CBO recommendations. These moves are only using a scalpel, not a chainsaw...they are not eliminating any programs at all....just small reductions or reduced growth. But, instead we have to ask the people for more money first? Absurd!



These don't even count the wasteful programs that should be elimated year after year from Coburn's Waste Report year after year ---

Examples of wasteful spending highlighted in “Wastebook 2012” include:


• Tax loopholes for the National Football League (NFL), National Hockey League (NHL) and Professional Golfers’ Association (PGA) – professional sports leagues that generate billions of dollars annually in profits ($91 million in taxes)

• Moroccan pottery classes (part of a $27 million grant from U.S. Agency for International Development)

• Efforts to promote caviar consumption and production ($300,000)

• Robotic squirrel named “RoboSquirrel” (part of a $325,000 grant from the National Science Foundation)

• Promotion of specialty shampoo and other beauty products for cats and dogs ($505,000)

• Corporate welfare for the world’s largest snack food producer, PepsiCo Inc. ($1.3 million)

• Government-funded study on how golfers might benefit from using their imagination, envisioning the hole is bigger than it actually is ($350,000)

• “Prom Week,” a video game that allows taxpayers to relive prom night ($516,000)

• Oklahoma’s layover boondoggle, a scarcely used airport in Oklahoma receiving nearly half-a-million in taxpayer dollars only to transfer funds elsewhere in the state ($450,000)

• The 2012 Alabama Watermelon Queen tour paid for in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “to promote the consumption of Alabama’s watermelon through appearances of the Alabama Watermelon Queen at various events and locations” ($25,000)



Does Obama or Congress even read the CBO Reports or Coburn's "Waste Reports"? Or are they too busy saying that the rich don't pay their fair share and that the people need to give the government "a little bit more"?

Imagine the public reaction if Obama and congress adopted all the CBO recommendations and eliminated all the projects in the Coburn Waste Reports.

[Lee]

• Robotic squirrel named “RoboSquirrel” (part of a $325,000 grant from the National Science Foundation)

Cut RoboSquirrel? Not on my watch.

[Tlyons]

• The 2012 Alabama Watermelon Queen tour paid for in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “to promote the consumption of Alabama’s watermelon through appearances of the Alabama Watermelon Queen at various events and locations” ($25,000)

L O fucking L

Really Alabama? Nick saban get your ass to Cleveland.

[Jack Brickman]

Cut RoboSquirrel? Not on my watch.

No kidding. Do they want a revolt or something?

[southernflyer]

• The 2012 Alabama Watermelon Queen tour paid for in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “to promote the consumption of Alabama’s watermelon through appearances of the Alabama Watermelon Queen at various events and locations” ($25,000)

Gus would do it for much less than $25k. I'm not sure that we can find better pictures of the Alabama Watermelon Queen to see if we getting our value out of this. Nothing like a good watermelon girl scandal.



How about a tax on beauty pageants. There are just way too many of those things. My ex did a couple of them, and those entry fees were a few hundred bucks each plus travel, dresses, hair, makeup, etc. If we can tax tanning booths, how about a 5% tax on pageants. And that damn Honey Boo Boo too while we are at it.

[bcort]

Tick tock.

Republicans want equal cuts for how much the debt ceiling is raised. Obama says he won't negotiate with the GOP.



When are those cuts coming, KI4MVP?

[gourimoko]

Cut funding for agencies other than defense by 1%...savings $932 BILLION over 10 years

Cut defense spending by 50% for no less than 10 years, saves $4 TRILLION. (then cut other agencies, get the 1-2Bn).

Reduce growth in defense spending by 1% annually...savings $862 BILLION over 10 years

Unfortunately it doesn't. The defense department's proportion of deficit spending, even if it remains flat, still has a negative impact on the deficit due to interest on the debt. Strengthening the dollar and paying down the debt would obviously help, but at present, if defense doesn't make cuts (not to growth, but actual cuts) then it's hard to imagine reducing the deficit substantially.

Raise earliest age for Social Security Eligibility...savings $144 BILLION over 10 years

Who do you raise it on? People who aren't born yet? Most proposals, like those proposed by Romney/Ryan, suggested anyone under 45. That means me. As an African-American, my life expectancy isn't as long as yours. In 2003, the average life expectancy for Black males was 68 years old. Raising the retirement age, even a little, puts Social Security (a mandatory tax towards a supposed gov't pension fund) out of reach for many African-Americans and Latinos, not to mention Whites with less than stellar health (obesity, congenital diseases, etc).

Many other people retire early because they simply no longer can work, due to physical conditions as a direct result of the aging process, especially due to arthritis, or diabetes. Many people cannot work until they're 65, and when they finally do reach that age they might have 3-5 years of life left.

We should be trying to reduce the retirement age, as well as the Medicare age (if not expand it to everyone) so that people can enjoy their golden years - not look to rip them off by taxing them unfairly and then reducing benefits.

That's $2 TRILLION in savings from just those 3 moves.

We really need to slash defense spending. Stop raiding Social Security and Medicare, and strengthen our dollar.

Our entitlement system is fine if we accept simple facts. If we embrace a universal health care system (a real one), and socialize a portion of our health industry, we could save hundreds of billions of dollars in both the public and private sector. This is undeniable. The health care system in the United States is completely broken, and is far more expensive than anywhere else in the Western World. But we choose to use this system because it allows corporations make profits off the sick while dumping them off to die when they are no longer profitable.

There's a total of $4.6 TRILLION in savings from the CBO recommendations. These moves are only using a scalpel, not a chainsaw...they are not eliminating any programs at all....just small reductions or reduced growth. But, instead we have to ask the people for more money first? Absurd!

These don't even count the wasteful programs that should be elimated year after year from Coburn's Waste Report year after year ---

Examples of wasteful spending highlighted in “Wastebook 2012” include:

• Tax loopholes for the National Football League (NFL), National Hockey League (NHL) and Professional Golfers’ Association (PGA) – professional sports leagues that generate billions of dollars annually in profits ($91 million in taxes)

• Moroccan pottery classes (part of a $27 million grant from U.S. Agency for International Development)

• Efforts to promote caviar consumption and production ($300,000)

• Robotic squirrel named “RoboSquirrel” (part of a $325,000 grant from the National Science Foundation)

• Promotion of specialty shampoo and other beauty products for cats and dogs ($505,000)

• Corporate welfare for the world’s largest snack food producer, PepsiCo Inc. ($1.3 million)

• Government-funded study on how golfers might benefit from using their imagination, envisioning the hole is bigger than it actually is ($350,000)

• “Prom Week,” a video game that allows taxpayers to relive prom night ($516,000)

• Oklahoma’s layover boondoggle, a scarcely used airport in Oklahoma receiving nearly half-a-million in taxpayer dollars only to transfer funds elsewhere in the state ($450,000)

• The 2012 Alabama Watermelon Queen tour paid for in part by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “to promote the consumption of Alabama’s watermelon through appearances of the Alabama Watermelon Queen at various events and locations” ($25,000)

I think Robo Squirrel is a good idea. If it can be done, it would advance our understanding of robotics. Just saying...

Does Obama or Congress even read the CBO Reports or Coburn's "Waste Reports"? Or are they too busy saying that the rich don't pay their fair share and that the people need to give the government "a little bit more"?

Imagine the public reaction if Obama and congress adopted all the CBO recommendations and eliminated all the projects in the Coburn Waste Reports.

I just think we need more drastic solutions than those being proposed. It's one of the reasons I always liked John McCain, because he understood the problem was the very nature of corruption in politics. People would always chastise him about the small amounts of money changing hands for pork barrel projects, but it was the principle - that politicians were likely getting kickbacks by way of campaign contributions and that was influencing (if not entirely controlling) the legislative agenda. It also dramatically slowed down the process, and made every bill about making money for someone.

But I don't think minor cuts will solve the problem. We need to not only balance the budget, but to generate a surplus, sufficient enough to start paying down the debt. Either that, or we need to scrap the Fed.