or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › President Obama calls Apple CEO Tim Cook to discuss 'fiscal cliff'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

President Obama calls Apple CEO Tim Cook to discuss 'fiscal cliff'

post #1 of 169
Thread Starter 
U.S. President Barack Obama reached out to a number of business leaders last week about the so-called "fiscal cliff," and Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook was among those on the president's short list.

Cook was one of a handful of CEOs who received a phone call from Obama about the government's budget woes set to go into effect at the end of 2012. A White House official told CNN that the conversations were part of the president's "outreach on the need to find a balanced deficit-reduction solution that protects the middle class and continues to move our economy forward."

Cook


In addition to Cook, Obama also contacted Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway, Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, Jim McNerney of Boeing, and Craig Jelinek of Costco, the White House confirmed.

Last week, Obama also met with a dozen other CEOs from major American companies for "fiscal cliff" talks. Those discussions included General Electric CEO Jeffery Immelt and American Express CEO Kenneth Chenault.

Tension is growing in Washington as officials face a number of law changes on Dec. 31, 2012 that have become known as the "fiscal cliff." When the calendar year rolls over to 2013, it will mark the end of some temporary payroll cuts, certain tax breaks for businesses and other tax cuts, and it will mark the beginning of new taxes related to Obama's healthcare law.

Cook has been a go-to choice for leaders in Washington looking to discuss financial issues with the private sector. Earlier this year, Apple's chief executive met with John Boehner, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
post #2 of 169

Bailouts don't work.

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #3 of 169

I wonder if they discussed Jimmy Cliff while they were at it...
 

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #4 of 169

Hopefully Obama is interested in a reduced repatriation tax, but I am not holding my breath.

post #5 of 169

I've said this before - I really like Tim Cook, he was quite a find...

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #6 of 169
Obama: "Tim, I'd like to discuss the pending financial meltdown"

Tim: "Dude, we know, our stock has slipped some lately. Chill."

Obama: "No, Tim. I'm talking about the fiscal cliff."

Tim: "Oh..."


I'm joking, just joking. I like Tim and actually, I like Obama too. I'm your typical liberal hipster doofus. :-)
post #7 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Bailouts don't work.

Not in Ireland, no.
post #8 of 169
At the end of the day, a corporation is focused on it's own self-interest, which by definition means it's not the best place to go for advice about what is best for the public interest.
post #9 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Bailouts don't work.
But it's the only way to save the Twinkie ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

  You should probably meet with Mr. Romney and find out how he helped all those companies come back from their own fiscal cliffs.
Oh that's easy ... Just outsource all the jobs to India or China. All Obama had to do is look at his website for detailed answers to the nations problems. It's all there (In case he missed them during the debates that is).

Obama only needed to make one call to Paul Ryan -- he has all of the answers.
Edited by Mac_128 - 11/19/12 at 7:12am
post #10 of 169

Welcome to Political Outsider.

post #11 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

Just tax the wealthy.  It will bring in $10 billion a year in new taxes.  That should take care of the $1Trillion++ Deficit and $17Trillion Debt.   Meanwhile, don't worry that those business will hire less and you lose less workforce (aka tax payers) and grow unemployment.    None of that will happen.  History has no place in helping us understand consequences.  

 

Since you exploited the 51% of our country that are blithering idiots and got yourself re-elected, you could at least do something to help your welfare society.   You should probably meet with Mr. Romney and find out how he helped all those companies come back from their own fiscal cliffs.    He is the right man for the job, regardless of whether he believes Sandra Fluck should receive free birth control.

 

Just saying...

 

If we are talking about taxing the individuals who are wealthy, why would that affect their companies' decision to hire? It's not like the hiring budget will come out of the owners' salary.

 

Spending cuts along cannot and will not reduce the deficit until the economy recovers. Since you are so big on history, you would know that tax cuts have been proven useless in stimulating economic recovery. The government (like most governments) has a spending problem as well as a revenue problem. You can pretend all you want that is not the case. It is.

 

It's easy to label those with opposing political views as idiots. But ask yourself how often you have proven yourself smarter than any 51% of any population. If the 51% is made up of idiots, you are also an idiot. A tip - a sweeping insult like that earns you very few supporters.

 

As for Mitt Romney's track record, please list all the companies that he brought back from fiscal cliffs without major layoffs. Please. As a student of history, I am sure you know that's a very short list. Right?

 

Lest we forget history, there was Romneycare before Obamacare.

post #12 of 169

It's be hilarious if the goons in DC don't reach a deal and we fall off the fiscal cliff. lol.gif

 

I have very little faith in the leadership of this county and I am prepared.

post #13 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

Just tax the wealthy.  It will bring in $10 billion a year in new taxes.  That should take care of the $1Trillion++ Deficit and $17Trillion Debt.   Meanwhile, don't worry that those business will hire less and you lose less workforce (aka tax payers) and grow unemployment.    None of that will happen.  History has no place in helping us understand consequences.  

 

Since you exploited the 51% of our country that are blithering idiots and got yourself re-elected, you could at least do something to help your welfare society.   You should probably meet with Mr. Romney and find out how he helped all those companies come back from their own fiscal cliffs.    He is the right man for the job, regardless of whether he believes Sandra Fluck should receive free birth control.

 

Just saying...

 

Taxing the wealthy will actually bring in far more than $10B, you just have to be flexible on the definition of "rich". I suspect it will soon mean you made more than the personal deduction.

post #14 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

Just tax the wealthy.  It will bring in $10 billion a year in new taxes.  That should take care of the $1Trillion++ Deficit and $17Trillion Debt.   Meanwhile, don't worry that those business will hire less and you lose less workforce (aka tax payers) and grow unemployment.    None of that will happen.  History has no place in helping us understand consequences.  

 

 

Yes, it does seem to be the case that those who espouse your particular viewpoint do believe that history has no place in helping us understand consequences. But, just in case there is any confusion, right wing tax policies have, according to all historical evidence, done absolutely nothing to promote job growth, real income growth or reduce deficits. All these right wing policies do is blow out our deficits, destabilize the economy and transfer wealth from the middle class to the rich.

 

And, the idea that Romney, who made his fortune by leveraging his father's wealth and connections, and by outsourcing jobs, has anything useful to add to the discussion is ludicrous, as 51% of the electorate, to their credit, realized. 

post #15 of 169

Obama, "Need a few bucks to tide us over the fiscal cliff."

 

Cook, "I can spot you 50Bs. But that's it."

post #16 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

It's be hilarious if the goons in DC don't reach a deal and we fall off the fiscal cliff. lol.gif

 

I have very little faith in the leadership of this county and I am prepared.


Your county is also at the edge of the fiscal cliff?

 

;)

post #17 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

Yes, it does seem to be the case that those who espouse your particular viewpoint do believe that history has no place in helping us understand consequences. But, just in case there is any confusion, right wing tax policies have, according to all historical evidence, done absolutely nothing to promote job growth, real income growth or reduce deficits. All these right wing policies do is blow out our deficits, destabilize the economy and transfer wealth from the middle class to the rich.

 

And, the idea that Romney, who made his fortune by leveraging his fathers wealth and connections, and by outsourcing jobs, has anything useful to add to the discussion is ludicrous, as 51% of the electorate, to their credit, realized. 

This smear on Romney's career in private equity is both absurd and wrong. Why don't you go read something about his career and stop trolling message boards?

post #18 of 169

The president and the president of the most valuable company on earth. Very smart move.

Think about it, the rich are hoarding over 40 trillion overseas. The country is pathetically rich.

A little taxes ain't sh** to the wealthy.

I remember watching a documentary where Dominique Strauss Khan said he was at a party attend by plutocrats and he overhead some hedge fund mangers say the government should tax them more. Why?

Because they are making too much damn money.

post #19 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


Your county is also at the edge of the fiscal cliff?

 

;)

1biggrin.gif

post #20 of 169
Yes, "give us what we want or no one gets a job!" All those "job creators" who haven't created much for so long are going to start working for us as soon as we guarantee that they keep their steep tax discounts.

We "blithering idiots" know full-well how Mr. Romney "helped" all those companies. That's a large part of why he lost.
post #21 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Bailouts don't work

Yes bailouts do work..

 

It is a slow day in a little town in America.

The rain is beating down and the streets are deserted.
Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody lives on credit.
On this particular day a rich tourist is driving through the town, stops at the local hotel and lays a $100 note on the desk,
telling the hotel owner he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to pick one to spend the night.
The owner gives him some keys and, as soon as the visitor has walked upstairs, the hotelier grabs the $100 note and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.
The butcher takes the $100 note and runs down the street to repay his debt to the pig farmer.
The pig farmer takes the $100 note and heads off to pay his bill at the supplier of feed and fuel.
The guy at the Farmers' Co-op takes the $100 note and runs to pay his drinks bill at the Taverna.
The publican slips the money along to the local prostitute drinking at the bar, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer him "services" on credit.
The hooker then rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill to the hotel owner with the $100 note.
The hotel proprietor then places the $100 note back on the counter so the rich traveller will not suspect anything.
At that moment the traveller comes down the stairs, picks up the $100 note, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, pockets the money, and leaves town.
No one produced anything.
No one earned anything.
However, the whole village is now out of debt and looking to the future with a lot more optimism.

And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how the bailout package works

post #22 of 169
Of course Obama would call Tim Cook. Cook has donated to Obama's campaign in the past. Lets see Obama reach out to executive and companies not in the back pocket of his own party.
post #23 of 169
I'm an "idiot" that voted for Obama.  Because I can do math, see? 
 
You can't give tax cuts to the wealthy and then borrow money for two wars.  Clinton had a surplus.  It took Bush just a few years to wipe that off by giving back to the "people" meaning, the richest.  Tax cuts do NOT mean more job growth.  Why do people not understand this?  If you give, let's say, Tim Cook a tax cut, is he going to hire more Apple employees?  No, of course not.  He's going to spend or save the money, it's not rocket science.
 
 
Taxes are at their lowest rates in something like 50 years.  Let the rates go back up to Clinton's levels on the wealthiest of Americans.  
post #24 of 169

Obama talks with Tim Cook and Warren Buffett, but does he ever talk to small business people?  You know the mom bakery or the pop hardware store that may not have the millions, let alone billions, in cash reserves the likes these guys and their companies have?  We've already seen what Obamacare has started to do with certain businesses with over 50 employees that work 30 hours or more per week.  Fewer employees and less hours in order to comply with the Obamacare outs.  Unless you were union and got a waiver early on.  Should be an interesting year!...

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #25 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Of course Obama would call Tim Cook. Cook has donated to Obama's campaign in the past. Lets see Obama reach out to executive and companies not in the back pocket of his own party.

 

He's met with Jack Welch, who isn't a fan of Obama. That's just one example for ya.

post #26 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifij775 View Post

This smear on Romney's career in private equity is both absurd and wrong. Why don't you go read something about his career and stop trolling message boards?

You're right, everybody should read this deep background piece on Mitt Romney's career in private equity, by Matt Taibbi:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829
post #27 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Of course Obama would call Tim Cook. Cook has donated to Obama's campaign in the past. Lets see Obama reach out to executive and companies not in the back pocket of his own party.


Obama has met the CEOs of GE, Ford, Xerox, Walmart, Pepsi, IBM and Chevron, plus more. Are they all in Obama's back pocket?

 

He won the election. He is not up for re-election. He simply needs advice and support for policies and can now reach into any pocket to get them.

post #28 of 169

This is in PO now. Seemed like the only good course of action, given the direction it was going. Now you can go ahead and have at it, but not at each other.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #29 of 169
(avoiding politics)

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #30 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Obama talks with Tim Cook and Warren Buffett, but does he ever talk to small business people?  You know the mom bakery or the pop hardware store that may not have the millions, let alone billions, in cash reserves the likes these guys and their companies have?  We've already seen what Obamacare has started to do with certain businesses with over 50 employees that work 30 hours or more per week.  Fewer employees and less hours in order to comply with the Obamacare outs.  Unless you were union and got a waiver early on.  Should be an interesting year!...

I don't doubt there are companies, big and small, that have been adversely affected by ObamaCare.

 

But there are also many great stories and good benefits emerging from the program. Are you willing to cite those too or are you simply filtering data to fit your political predisposition?

post #31 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

(avoiding politics)


Good idea.

post #32 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rot'nApple View Post

Obama talks with Tim Cook and Warren Buffett, but does he ever talk to small business people?  You know the mom bakery or the pop hardware store that may not have the millions, let alone billions, in cash reserves the likes these guys and their companies have?  We've already seen what Obamacare has started to do with certain businesses with over 50 employees that work 30 hours or more per week.  Fewer employees and less hours in order to comply with the Obamacare outs.  Unless you were union and got a waiver early on.  Should be an interesting year!...

What good would some Mom n' Pop store with one location in one town offer Tim Cook? That data set is too small to be useful so he'd have to talk with hundreds to get a picture of the nation's consumer habits. With Apple he can talk to one company and see how things are going; not just in the US but in comparison to the world. Apple has this data and it's updated constantly because they need to be able to project sales on any given day.

That isn't to say that talking with Apple paints a complete picture (or even an accurate one) on its own but it's immensely more comprehensive than talking to one Mom n' Pop shop in one town.


PS: This is statistical analysis not politics. 1smoking.gif

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #33 of 169
The Republican party likes to think of itself as the party of "personal responsibility."  But here's the thing, not everyone has the same opportunity. Not everyone has the same shot at being successful.  It's just fact.  And what the Democratic party tries to do (sometimes too far to the left, yes) is to even the playing field as much as possible.
 
Just like Romney's comments about college education - his idea was "borrow the money from your parents."  My parents didn't have the money when I came of college age.  My folks were conservative, hard working, blue collar workers who did their best, but they lived paycheck to paycheck.   And I'm grateful to have been considered "middle class" then.  There are plenty of others who had much less.
 
Remember Obama's comments about "you didn't build that."   The conservatives ran with it, saying he's against business.  The rest of that quote was omitted, but he was talking about the roads...bridges...infrastructure.  See, the simple fact is that NOBODY, NOBODY has done it or "made it" on their own.  Either they were passed down some money, or they've benefitted from society and community to a degree. And yes, the government, too.
 
No man/woman is an island.  To a degree, each of us have made it to this point as a result of receiving some benefit from someone, somewhere.
post #34 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf View Post

The Republican party likes to think of itself as the party of "personal responsibility."  But here's the thing, not everyone has the same opportunity. Not everyone has the same shot at being successful.  It's just fact.  And what the Democratic party tries to do (sometimes too far to the left, yes) is to even the playing field as much as possible.
 
Just like Romney's comments about college education - his idea was "borrow the money from your parents."  My parents didn't have the money when I came of college age.  My folks were conservative, hard working, blue collar workers who did their best, but they lived paycheck to paycheck.   And I'm grateful to have been considered "middle class" then.  There are plenty of others who had much less.
 
Remember Obama's comments about "you didn't build that."   The conservatives ran with it, saying he's against business.  The rest of that quote was omitted, but he was talking about the roads...bridges...infrastructure.  See, the simple fact is that NOBODY, NOBODY has done it or "made it" on their own.  Either they were passed down some money, or they've benefitted from society and community to a degree. And yes, the government, too.
 
No man/woman is an island.  To a degree, each of us have made it to this point as a result of receiving some benefit from someone, somewhere.

Ignoring the politics of it, it's interesting how much our being is chance/luck. You take any person in the world and change something they had no control over and you change the entire course of their success and failures. We like to think we succeed on our own (and within a very confined definition we do) but for the most part we are governed by forces beyond our control.

Take anyone who has graduated college. Yes, they worked hard, they put in the time and effort to pass the classes to get their degree, to become an expert in a certain field. That's commendable but it's only commendable on a level playing field. What about the child with Down's Syndrome that can't achieve the goal of becoming a neuroscientist no matter how he tries. Does that make their efforts to achieve a less social status in education any less difficult for them?

What about Stephen Hawking? Imagine if he didn't amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Imagine if his mind was not only in a perfectly healthy body but also in a body and face that attracted the opposite sex more readily or allowed him to be an All Star in sports. Because of the way society works those would have likely taken up more of his time because it was something he was good at and may have not made the discovered he has in his career or worse, even pursued his doctorate.

We simply don't what would have been different but we do know that most things are far out of our control in the world that shapes us. Here is an example of an early success in vitrified ceramics bringing about a long term disadvantage for China over the West.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #35 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macboy Pro View Post

Just tax the wealthy.  It will bring in $10 billion a year in new taxes.  That should take care of the $1Trillion++ Deficit and $17Trillion Debt.   Meanwhile, don't worry that those business will hire less and you lose less workforce (aka tax payers) and grow unemployment.    None of that will happen.  History has no place in helping us understand consequences.  

Since you exploited the 51% of our country that are blithering idiots and got yourself re-elected, you could at least do something to help your welfare society.   You should probably meet with Mr. Romney and find out how he helped all those companies come back from their own fiscal cliffs.    He is the right man for the job, regardless of whether he believes Sandra Fluck should receive free birth control.

Just saying...


and I'm saying, that the rich don't have enough money too be taxed like you suggest...

look the Debt alone right now, is approximately the Equivalent of 16 million $1 million mortgages...
so their are 150 Million people working... so 10% of the workforce is going to have , in addition to the everyday expenses they have , assume a 1 million Dollar mortgage... which means 4700 dollars a month for 25 years at 4 % (the numbers not exact, but in the ballpark)

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States

so approx 10 % of the work force make 80K(or more) a year, and 6.61% make more that 100K... (and it is before taxes)

ok a million dollar Mortgage is 56400 dollars a year, and you really should be making 250000 a year to. even Consider taking on addition mortgage of million a year...
meaning
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/measuring-the-top-1-by-wealth-not-income/

that the top 1% make approx. 380000 a year, so these people could pay that addition mortgage... (meaning debt) but that is only 1.5 trillion dollars(in 25 years) ...but NO WHERE NEAR ENOUGH FOR THE DEBT.

TL;DR... There are NOT enough rich people to pay off the debt...

but,(assuming that the Deficit just disappears) if the whole work force (150M) makes 3.6 Trillion a year,
and you tax an addition 10% on EVERYBODY... that will get you 9 Trillion after 25 years which will pay off the Debt (the other 6-7 trillion could be written off because that debt is owned by American citizens)...

IN other words their is NO way that this Debt is Going to be paid off!. (of course, I have not considered taxing businesses more... that might be a way out of this mess...)
Edited by haar - 11/19/12 at 8:29am
post #36 of 169

The entire economy twists itself around for the benefit of the corporations, and the corporations and their practices are primarily responsible for the problem so ... 

 

... of course, the thing to do is ask the four biggest fat-cats in the country what to do about the problem.  

They aren't biased at all right?  :-/

post #37 of 169
Of course Obama would call the CEO of one of the world's largest corporations. That's hardly an earthshaking news headline. Too bad we didn't get actual news, like what the substance of their conversation was. But I suppose that Appleinsider has to fill up their site with something, even if it's only stating the obvious.
post #38 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...
In addition to Cook, Obama also contacted Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway, Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, Jim McNerney of Boeing, and Craig Jelinek of Costco, the White House confirmed.
Last week, Obama also met with a dozen other CEOs from major American companies for "fiscal cliff" talks. Those discussions included General Electric CEO Jeffery Immelt and American Express CEO Kenneth Chenault.
...

so the only person that "creates" profit, ("The Hard Way", manufacturing) is Tim Cook... (and perhaps Jim McNerney) ... and the rest sit on their a**es and shuffle paper...
post #39 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by haar View Post


and I'm saying, that the rich don't have enough money too be taxed like you suggest...
look the Debt alone right now, is approximately the Equivalent of 16 million $1 million mortgages...
so their are 150 Million people working... so 10% of the workforce is going to have , in addition to the everyday expenses they have , assume a 1 million Dollar mortgage... which means 4700 dollars a month for 25 years at 4 % (the numbers not exact, but in the ballpark)
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States
so approx 10 % of the work force make 80K(or more) a year, and 6.61% make more that 100K... (and it is before taxes)

ok a million dollar Mortgage is 56400 dollars a year, and you really should be making 250000 a year to. even Consider taking on addition mortgage of million a year...
meaning
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/measuring-the-top-1-by-wealth-not-income/
that the top 1% make approx. 380000 a year, so these people could pay that addition mortgage... (meaning debt) but that is only 1.5 trillion dollars(in 25 years) ...but NO WHERE NEAR ENOUGH FOR THE DEBT.
TL;DR... Their are NOT enough rich people to pay off the debt...
but,(assuming that the Deficit just disappears) if the whole work force (150M) makes 3.6 Trillion a year,
ad you tax an addition 10% on EVERYBODY... that will get you 9 Trillion after 25 years which will pay off the Debt (the other 6-7 trillion could be written off because that debt is owned by American citizens)...
IN other words their is NO way that this Debt is Going to be paid off!.

 

Most of what you say here seems like total BS to me.  It's easy to cobble a few stats together and think that they prove your point even when your point is ridiculous.  

 

While we are throwing out wild and crazy idea however, how about this? 

 

Half of the deficit could be eliminated in a single year if Obama simply passed a law removing the tax exempt status from "churches" in the United States.  If churches and religious organisations paid taxes, the figure is roughly 72 billion dollars a year.  One single law (and a very fair and reasonable law at that), and the entire deficit disappears in two years.  

 

It will never happen because Americans are crazier for religion overall than many Muslim states, but it's as reasonable as any other fix I've heard IMO.  1smile.gif

post #40 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Most of what you say here seems like total BS to me.  It's easy to cobble a few stats together and think that they prove your point even when your point is ridiculous.  

While we are throwing out wild and crazy idea however, how about this? 

Half of the deficit could be eliminated in a single year if Obama simply passed a law removing the tax exempt status from "churches" in the United States.  If churches and religious organisations paid taxes, the figure is roughly 72 billion dollars a year.  One single law (and a very fair and reasonable law at that), and the entire deficit disappears in two years.  

It will never happen because Americans are crazier for religion overall than many Muslim states, but it's as reasonable as any other fix I've heard IMO.  1smile.gif

sorry for being Repetitive and jumping all over your numbers that are wrong but...

your numbers require a zero meaning (720 billion) for your solution to be anything but a "cup of water" instead of a "bucket of water"...

btw the Deficit is 1.5 trillion.. or 1500 thousand million... so it would take 1500 divided by 72 which is actually 10 times longer than your calculations, and the deficit is yearly, so um, (With all due respect ) YOUR MATH IS WRONG...

72 billion is 72 thousand million, the deficit is about 1500 thousand million... and the debt is 15000 thousand million...


GOOD point, tax the churchs (or the Charities masking as faux-churchs such as the tv ones).../sarcasm upon realizing that your numbers are out by 10... useless...


BTW, it isn't "wild-and-crazy" ideas... just math... (or do the math yourself... go to the internet, find a site that calculates mortgage costs, and see for yourself.

and for crazy numbers ... http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/ ... a Mind-blowing site if there ever was one... i have tried to see if he has an axe to grind with the site, but because it is numbers, he can't...
but reading
http://www.usstuckonstupid.com/
might get you thinking...wheres the bias?


editted because I Just Realized "Gazbobee" numbers are out by TEN to be a useful solution. (humble i am not LOL)
Edited by haar - 11/19/12 at 9:03am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › President Obama calls Apple CEO Tim Cook to discuss 'fiscal cliff'