Comments about ‘In our opinion: Pivot point’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 3 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

It is so sad that the rich, over 400,000, will have to pay a tiny bit more income tax. NOT.

The strategy to stop any more downward distribution of wealth is proceeding ahead at full bore. Having stopped any wage increase in the last 30 years, the emphasis now is to stop the government from taking any more money from the rich and giving it to the ordinary people.

Do they know something we don’t. Is America really dead and they’re not letting us know. Their attitude seems to point to a lack of confidence on their part that America will not be around much longer. Therefore don’t invest, don’t expand, just gather as much as you can and get ready to run.

If only we could have a new birth of freedom, a new emancipation proclamation, a new formula for distributing the wealth of human labor. Then we could say to those opportunistic quitters, God Speed. And be better for their leaving.

Nate
Pleasant Grove, UT

Spending is the real issue. Obama's only proposal -- taxing the rich -- falls far short of solving the problem.

Do the math. The CBO says that the tax increases just signed into law will raise $600 billion over the next ten years. On average, that's $60 billion per year. But our budget deficit is $1.2 trillion per year. This means that the new tax rates provide only 5% of what is needed to balance the budget.

Our problem is caused by over-spending, and it has been all along.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

If we're not willing to tackle military spending, we're not serious about spending cuts.

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

Yes DN the "deal is done" on taxes, no thanks to most of the Utah congressional delegation. But really the deal is not done on taxes until we get rid of the tax subsidies that allow corportation to pay little real tax, like GE who has a plethora of accountants whose only job is to see that they find enough deductions to eliminate federal income taxes entirely. We do need to revise the tax code. And I am not sure that churches should not be asked to pay a reasonable share on their contribution income offset by financial contribution to legitimate charitable causes.

Makid
Kearns, UT

Cut military spending back to what it was in 2000, that plus the recent tax increase cuts approximately 80% of the deficit.

Increasing the cap on Social Security would return the budget to the black.

Doing the above and cutting spending across the board by an additional 10% from the sequestration and we are easily running in the black and the current debt is able to be reduced by $500 Billion the first year, and increasing each year as debt payments decrease and increased revenue can be put towards debt payoff.

In approximately 10 years, the debt would be paid off and the budget would be showing a positive revenue of $1.5 Trillion per year if no growth in spending occurred in that 10 years.

Imagine what we could accomplish with positive revenue flow. Infrastructure improvements paid for up front and tax increases without breaking the budget all while allowing a balanced budget to go forward.

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

We spend 633 billion on the DOD alone. Canada spends 25 billion. So we can give the DOD 100 billion and save the rest.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@Nate
did you bother reading the editorial including the quote from Obama they night the budget passed?

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

If the editorial position of the Deseret News is that spending cuts are needed, it would be helpful if they'd offer some specific recommendation of cuts to be made and justify them.

Mark B
Eureka, CA

Blue's right. If they can't get past stiffing Big Bird to something a bit more substantial, then they're exactly where the last GOP campaign ended. Please give us something to consider.

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

Balderdash!! There will NEVER be a single dollar cut in spending. The ONLY thing the fed's do is monkey around with the RATE of spending increases and then think you are dumb enough to equate that to actual cuts. Now the military will be cut to the bone because any good liberal hates any form of national defense but the rest of the giant porker entitlement barrel will remain untouched and even continue to grow. Liberals stay in power by giving hand outs so asking a liberal to bite the hand that feeds him anin't gonna happen folks. America is a has been and the election of 2012 wrote that in stone for the ages.

Nate
Pleasant Grove, UT

@spring street "did you bother reading...?"

Of course. And despite Obama's lip service to fiscal responsibility, the spending keeps going up. Watch what he does, not what he says.

wrz
Ogden, UT

@Mike in Cedar City:
"But really the deal is not done on taxes until we get rid of the tax subsidies that allow corporation to pay little real tax..."

Corporations don't pay taxes. Only people pay taxes. If corporations pay a 'tax' they add the 'tax' to the cost of the produced goods and services thus passing the 'tax' to the consumer.

"And I am not sure that churches should not be asked to pay..."

That would be against the Constitution which says: 'Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'

Taxing religions would have the net effect of governmental involvement in religion.

@Mark B:
"If they can't get past stiffing Big Bird to something a bit more substantial..."

Big Bird was just an example of where tax dollars are wasted. Big Bird is wealthy enough to support him/herself. Dumb Democrats assumed Mitt was attacking a gangly yellow bird when in fact he was attacking frivolous tax expenditures.

"Please give us something to consider."

Cut bloated government expenditures.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments