Single Most Important Issue

[AZGrizFan]

This.

The governments #1 job is to protect it's citizens from foreign threats. The free market will sort out innovation and labor deficiencies.

Are you kidding? It's those very foreign "threats" that drive our free market/military industrial complex. Keeping those threats alive/plausible is what drives our economy.

Well, that and the sale of big screen TV's and cars.

[CAA Flagship]

Outside of a crisis (natural disaster, terrorist attack, etc.), the government should absolutely be held to a budget. And pork should be cut out of every bill. This is all a no brainer.

But what is your answer to the question of "single most important issue"? Is it keeping to a budget?

Oh, and I'm not sure that the paycheck that each member of Congress receives is driving their actions or non-actions. That would be interesting to discuss in another thread.

Yes...
The most important thing they should be focused on is MONEY because NONE of it it theirs
It is the ONE THING that they TAKE from the citizens of this country

My Federal Government takes money out of my paycheck
Frankly its a staggering amount of my personal funds

And the glib nonchalance with which they spend it is alarming...

They should ONLY DO what they have actual funds on hand to do - and NO MORE

While you won't get any disagreement with me, or with most people, I think this is another subset to the main "issue". While "most people" care about how much is taken out of their paychecks, I think they are more concerned with the paycheck itself, especially whether or not one exists. Agree?

[Chizzang]

Yes...
The most important thing they should be focused on is MONEY because NONE of it it theirs
It is the ONE THING that they TAKE from the citizens of this country

My Federal Government takes money out of my paycheck
Frankly its a staggering amount of my personal funds

And the glib nonchalance with which they spend it is alarming...

They should ONLY DO what they have actual funds on hand to do - and NO MORE

While you won't get any disagreement with me, or with most people, I think this is another subset to the main "issue". While "most people" care about how much is taken out of their paychecks, I think they are more concerned with the paycheck itself, especially whether or not one exists. Agree?

Nope - I don't

a) You can't have a "game" without rules...
b) define rules of game
c) Begin Game

You can't have a government without guidelines and structural boundaries
and THE BUDGET is a key matter in the instructions related to the game
with NO actual budget - there is not a sustainable proper "game"

There are not unlimited funds to operate our government

Back to square ONE

a) define the rules of the game - if there are no rules - the game is not sustainable

[kalm]

While you won't get any disagreement with me, or with most people, I think this is another subset to the main "issue". While "most people" care about how much is taken out of their paychecks, I think they are more concerned with the paycheck itself, especially whether or not one exists. Agree?

Nope - I don't

a) You can't have a "game" without rules...
b) define rules of game
c) Begin Game

You can't have a government without guidelines and structural boundaries
and THE BUDGET is a key matter in the instructions related to the game
with NO actual budget - there is not a sustainable proper "game"

There are not unlimited funds to operate our government

Back to square ONE

a) define the rules of the game - if there are no rules - the game is not sustainable

People like their roads, libraries, national parks, government contracting jobs, and safety nets. They may not want to pay for them personally, but they sure do like them.

[Pwns]

Our health care system is in deep trouble and anyone who criticizes Obama on the issue apparently just doesn't want people to have health insurance.

You were doing well until you mase this insanely stupid comment.

Yeah, as though Obama has the best plan and he can't be criticized.

There was an article in our local paper about a large chunk of illegal immigrants getting health care. Shall I send them your address so you can personally pay for their health care...or are you simply willing to let other people pay for your silly desires?

I must suck at sarcasm.

Here's what I'm saying....our health care system is like a train heading towards a cliff, and Obama has throttled up instead of hitting the brakes all the while telling any critics that they just don't want people to have health insurance.

[LeadBolt]

Given the amount of Federal Spending that has been funded by deficits over the last 50+ years, it would appear that virtually no one wants what it costs for those services that we enjoy.

[Chizzang]

Nope - I don't

a) You can't have a "game" without rules...
b) define rules of game
c) Begin Game

You can't have a government without guidelines and structural boundaries
and THE BUDGET is a key matter in the instructions related to the game
with NO actual budget - there is not a sustainable proper "game"

There are not unlimited funds to operate our government

Back to square ONE

a) define the rules of the game - if there are no rules - the game is not sustainable

People like their roads, libraries, national parks, government contracting jobs, and safety nets. They may not want to pay for them personally, but they sure do like them.

Well sure... I like a nice hand job while I put gas in my truck too

Um... but anyway: I digress - what you say above does not change the FACTS

[CAA Flagship]

While you won't get any disagreement with me, or with most people, I think this is another subset to the main "issue". While "most people" care about how much is taken out of their paychecks, I think they are more concerned with the paycheck itself, especially whether or not one exists. Agree?

Nope - I don't

a) You can't have a "game" without rules...
b) define rules of game
c) Begin Game

You can't have a government without guidelines and structural boundaries
and THE BUDGET is a key matter in the instructions related to the game
with NO actual budget - there is not a sustainable proper "game"

There are not unlimited funds to operate our government

Back to square ONE

a) define the rules of the game - if there are no rules - the game is not sustainable

OK, your vote has been cast. The passing of, and adherence to, a budget.

I'll assume that you consider "the budget" to be a number that factors in many important economic points such as pay down of debt, maintenance of a national defense, funding government assistance programs, etc., and is not just an arbitrary number. Having a goal can be one thing. Having a goal that will be beneficial to the country may be another.

[YoUDeeMan]

You were doing well until you mase this insanely stupid comment.

Yeah, as though Obama has the best plan and he can't be criticized.

There was an article in our local paper about a large chunk of illegal immigrants getting health care. Shall I send them your address so you can personally pay for their health care...or are you simply willing to let other people pay for your silly desires?

I must suck at sarcasm.

Here's what I'm saying....our health care system is like a train heading towards a cliff, and Obama has throttled up instead of hitting the brakes all the while telling any critics that they just don't want people to have health insurance.

OK, whew! I thought you were going off a cliff.

My bad, I should have had more faith (cue JoltinJoe) in you.

[Chizzang]

Nope - I don't

a) You can't have a "game" without rules...
b) define rules of game
c) Begin Game

You can't have a government without guidelines and structural boundaries
and THE BUDGET is a key matter in the instructions related to the game
with NO actual budget - there is not a sustainable proper "game"

There are not unlimited funds to operate our government

Back to square ONE

a) define the rules of the game - if there are no rules - the game is not sustainable

OK, your vote has been cast. The passing of, and adherence to, a budget.

I'll assume that you consider "the budget" to be a number that factors in many important economic points such as pay down of debt, maintenance of a national defense, funding government assistance programs, etc., and is not just an arbitrary number. Having a goal can be one thing. Having a goal that will be beneficial to the country may be another.

BINGO...
Part of their JOB would be to define the sustainable needs of each department of Government...
(Key word: Sustainable)

and then function within those parameters

[CID1990]

We have a pretty good model at the bureau of consular affairs at the state department. we are completely fee driven. even when the gov shuts down we keep on chugging along. most of these fees come from nonimmigrant visas. my salary is fee driven.

obviously this model doesn't work fir every facet of government, but i think that whenever gov is providing a service we should consider whether or not the taxpayers as a whole should pay for it, or if the consumer should pay.

[Chizzang]

We have a pretty good model at the bureau of consular affairs at the state department. we are completely fee driven. even when the gov shuts down we keep on chugging along. most of these fees come from nonimmigrant visas. my salary is fee driven.

obviously this model doesn't work fir every facet of government, but i think that whenever gov is providing a service we should consider whether or not the taxpayers as a whole should pay for it, or if the consumer should pay.

So nonchalance carte blanche spending of the tax payers money... See: TSA
is not how you cats operate..?

[kalm]

People like their roads, libraries, national parks, government contracting jobs, and safety nets. They may not want to pay for them personally, but they sure do like them.

Well sure... I like a nice hand job while I put gas in my truck too

Um... but anyway: I digress - what you say above does not change the FACTS

Yeah, whatever, America hater.

BTW, gas pump handy's should remain privatized.

[CID1990]

We have a pretty good model at the bureau of consular affairs at the state department. we are completely fee driven. even when the gov shuts down we keep on chugging along. most of these fees come from nonimmigrant visas. my salary is fee driven.

obviously this model doesn't work fir every facet of government, but i think that whenever gov is providing a service we should consider whether or not the taxpayers as a whole should pay for it, or if the consumer should pay.

So nonchalance carte blanche spending of the tax payers money... See: TSA
is not how you cats operate..?

what?

did you not read what I wrote?

we do not operate on taxpayer money- even consular salaries are fee funded

nonimmigrant visas are paid fir by the applicants, btw - in other words foreigners

[CAA Flagship]

OK, your vote has been cast. The passing of, and adherence to, a budget.

I'll assume that you consider "the budget" to be a number that factors in many important economic points such as pay down of debt, maintenance of a national defense, funding government assistance programs, etc., and is not just an arbitrary number. Having a goal can be one thing. Having a goal that will be beneficial to the country may be another.

BINGO...
Part of their JOB would be to define the sustainable needs of each department of Government...
(Key word: Sustainable)

and then function within those parameters

So how does this translate to your vote? If a candidate states that their number one priority is to pass a reasonable budget and stick to it, do they get your vote? Or would you require specifics on the revenue and/or expenses? I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you are focused on only one part of what we both likely see as the financial engine.

On the spending side, the line items can be set to whatever anyone wants. There is a lot of direct influence in these numbers. You either spend the money or you don't. But on the revenue side, raising taxes is one of the only direct influences that government has. But what effect do tax levels have on total revenue?

Taxes are paid when money is exchanged from one person/company to another. The more money that is exchanged, and the more exchanges that are made, the more revenue is generated by the government. One of the most important factors in achieving this is JOBS. When people are employed, they are getting paid (and taxed), and they are making purchases (also taxed). I think it is safe to say that employment also makes people happier as they have the ability to make spending decisions in their personal budgets.

The more revenue the government takes in, the easier it will be to meet budget goals. JOBS, IMO, is the root cause of revenue generation, and thus my most important issue.

[kalm]

BINGO...
Part of their JOB would be to define the sustainable needs of each department of Government...
(Key word: Sustainable)

and then function within those parameters

So how does this translate to your vote? If a candidate states that their number one priority is to pass a reasonable budget and stick to it, do they get your vote? Or would you require specifics on the revenue and/or expenses? I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you are focused on only one part of what we both likely see as the financial engine.

On the spending side, the line items can be set to whatever anyone wants. There is a lot of direct influence in these numbers. You either spend the money or you don't. But on the revenue side, raising taxes is one of the only direct influences that government has. But what effect do tax levels have on total revenue?

Taxes are paid when money is exchanged from one person/company to another. The more money that is exchanged, and the more exchanges that are made, the more revenue is generated by the government. One of the most important factors in achieving this is JOBS. When people are employed, they are getting paid (and taxed), and they are making purchases (also taxed). I think it is safe to say that employment also makes people happier as they have the ability to make spending decisions in their personal budgets.

The more revenue the government takes in, the easier it will be to meet budget goals. JOBS, IMO, is the root cause of revenue generation, and thus my most important issue.

Jobs are only as good as the wages.

[CAA Flagship]

So how does this translate to your vote? If a candidate states that their number one priority is to pass a reasonable budget and stick to it, do they get your vote? Or would you require specifics on the revenue and/or expenses? I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you are focused on only one part of what we both likely see as the financial engine.

On the spending side, the line items can be set to whatever anyone wants. There is a lot of direct influence in these numbers. You either spend the money or you don't. But on the revenue side, raising taxes is one of the only direct influences that government has. But what effect do tax levels have on total revenue?

Taxes are paid when money is exchanged from one person/company to another. The more money that is exchanged, and the more exchanges that are made, the more revenue is generated by the government. One of the most important factors in achieving this is JOBS. When people are employed, they are getting paid (and taxed), and they are making purchases (also taxed). I think it is safe to say that employment also makes people happier as they have the ability to make spending decisions in their personal budgets.

The more revenue the government takes in, the easier it will be to meet budget goals. JOBS, IMO, is the root cause of revenue generation, and thus my most important issue.

Jobs are only as good as the wages.

That would be a second level concern. A person making minimum wage, and paying a small amount of taxes, is a big leap over a person collecting unemployment as far as government finances are concerned. No?

[Chizzang]

BINGO...
Part of their JOB would be to define the sustainable needs of each department of Government...
(Key word: Sustainable)

and then function within those parameters

So how does this translate to your vote? If a candidate states that their number one priority is to pass a reasonable budget and stick to it, do they get your vote? Or would you require specifics on the revenue and/or expenses? I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you are focused on only one part of what we both likely see as the financial engine.

On the spending side, the line items can be set to whatever anyone wants. There is a lot of direct influence in these numbers. You either spend the money or you don't. But on the revenue side, raising taxes is one of the only direct influences that government has. But what effect do tax levels have on total revenue?

Taxes are paid when money is exchanged from one person/company to another. The more money that is exchanged, and the more exchanges that are made, the more revenue is generated by the government. One of the most important factors in achieving this is JOBS. When people are employed, they are getting paid (and taxed), and they are making purchases (also taxed). I think it is safe to say that employment also makes people happier as they have the ability to make spending decisions in their personal budgets.

The more revenue the government takes in, the easier it will be to meet budget goals. JOBS, IMO, is the root cause of revenue generation, and thus my most important issue.

Irrelevant ^
we Have a Federal Government that spends so far in excess of its generated revenue that any additional POINT you might be making is meaningless

Example: I'm saying, "There's a Bomb in the car!"
And you're response to that is: "Yeah, but I'm driving the speed limit.."

[JohnStOnge]

Well, my issue will never gain traction but to me the biggest problem we have is that we don't follow the Constitution. We have a Judiciary that doesn't stick to the Constitution at all. And of course the other branches don't stick to it either.

I'm totally serious too. I do think that's the biggest problem the United States has and think it is at the root of an awful lot of problems.

In my opinion we would not, for instance, have the chronic deficit/debt problems we had if we stuck to the Constitution because the Federal government would not being doing most of what it does now. It would not have a "War on Poverty." There would be no Medicare or Social Security. There would be no Medicaid. There would be no EPA. There would be no Department of Education. And there would be no a bunch of other stuff. We would have a minimal Federal government that wouldn't be doing a bunch of stuff and wouldn't be spending a bunch of money.

[LeadBolt]

The single most important issue is to protect those who attend government funded and run schools from having to see the flag of the country that pays for and runs them.

[CAA Flagship]

So how does this translate to your vote? If a candidate states that their number one priority is to pass a reasonable budget and stick to it, do they get your vote? Or would you require specifics on the revenue and/or expenses? I guess what I am getting at is that, in my opinion, you are focused on only one part of what we both likely see as the financial engine.

On the spending side, the line items can be set to whatever anyone wants. There is a lot of direct influence in these numbers. You either spend the money or you don't. But on the revenue side, raising taxes is one of the only direct influences that government has. But what effect do tax levels have on total revenue?

Taxes are paid when money is exchanged from one person/company to another. The more money that is exchanged, and the more exchanges that are made, the more revenue is generated by the government. One of the most important factors in achieving this is JOBS. When people are employed, they are getting paid (and taxed), and they are making purchases (also taxed). I think it is safe to say that employment also makes people happier as they have the ability to make spending decisions in their personal budgets.

The more revenue the government takes in, the easier it will be to meet budget goals. JOBS, IMO, is the root cause of revenue generation, and thus my most important issue.

Irrelevant ^
we Have a Federal Government that spends so far in excess of its generated revenue that any additional POINT you might be making is meaningless

Example: I'm saying, "There's a Bomb in the car!"
And you're response to that is: "Yeah, but I'm driving the speed limit.."

It's not irrelevant to my question. What matters to the most people TODAY is whether they have a job or not. Whether the government has a budget, or whether the US goes into deeper debt, is not likely the number one concern of the average voter in the current situation. Hell, we all lived through both scenarios recently haven't we? Most people haven't felt the impact. But those who are struggling to find work have felt the impact. And we are all feeling the impact of their unemployment benefits.

My question is to determine how we vote. A vote for anything other than the one thing that affects more citizens than anything else (Jobs) is just a wrong vote. Now if we had 4% unemployment and wages were up to where they were before the shitstorm, then I can understand looking at other issues. A vote for Obama in 08 and 12 was, at the very least, the wrong time. He did not have the experience, or the political platform, to pull a fast employment recovery. The timing of the ACA was complete negligence and with the number of premium payers dropping drastically, it will soon fail long before the Republicans have a chance to pull the plug on it. And the lack of immigration reform is further compounding the problem. And now with the corporate tax issue shining brightly in his eyes, he is....................doing nothing but calling inversion "unpatriotic".

[CAA Flagship]

The single most important issue is to protect those who attend government funded and run schools from having to see the flag of the country that pays for and runs them.

"......under Allah....."

[CAA Flagship]

Well, my issue will never gain traction but to me the biggest problem we have is that we don't follow the Constitution. We have a Judiciary that doesn't stick to the Constitution at all. And of course the other branches don't stick to it either.

I'm totally serious too. I do think that's the biggest problem the United States has and think it is at the root of an awful lot of problems.

In my opinion we would not, for instance, have the chronic deficit/debt problems we had if we stuck to the Constitution because the Federal government would not being doing most of what it does now. It would not have a "War on Poverty." There would be no Medicare or Social Security. There would be no Medicaid. There would be no EPA. There would be no Department of Education. And there would be no a bunch of other stuff. We would have a minimal Federal government that wouldn't be doing a bunch of stuff and wouldn't be spending a bunch of money.

This is not what is most important to you alone. It is what you think is important to the country. What issue affects the most people on a daily basis, that needs POTUS oversight and action?

People that are out of work or making half of what they once did do not have an immediate concern for any of that. They want a vibrant economy. They want a good job again.

[LeadBolt]

The single most important issue is to protect those who have f*#$@d up in punishing those perceived as being unfriendly toward the President, or generally just f*$@d their the performance of their government jobs from scrutiny by the public, with excuses such as the dog ate my emails or an obscure you tube video did it.

[Chizzang]

Irrelevant ^
we Have a Federal Government that spends so far in excess of its generated revenue that any additional POINT you might be making is meaningless

Example: I'm saying, "There's a Bomb in the car!"
And you're response to that is: "Yeah, but I'm driving the speed limit.."

It's not irrelevant to my question. What matters to the most people TODAY is whether they have a job or not. Whether the government has a budget, or whether the US goes into deeper debt, is not likely the number one concern of the average voter in the current situation. Hell, we all lived through both scenarios recently haven't we? Most people haven't felt the impact. But those who are struggling to find work have felt the impact. And we are all feeling the impact of their unemployment benefits.

My question is to determine how we vote. A vote for anything other than the one thing that affects more citizens than anything else (Jobs) is just a wrong vote. Now if we had 4% unemployment and wages were up to where they were before the shitstorm, then I can understand looking at other issues. A vote for Obama in 08 and 12 was, at the very least, the wrong time. He did not have the experience, or the political platform, to pull a fast employment recovery. The timing of the ACA was complete negligence and with the number of premium payers dropping drastically, it will soon fail long before the Republicans have a chance to pull the plug on it. And the lack of immigration reform is further compounding the problem. And now with the corporate tax issue shining brightly in his eyes, he is....................doing nothing but calling inversion "unpatriotic".

The Federal Government is NOT about "Making Jobs" -
Its not their job to make jobs - unless you want a Communist Government