I disagree with you entirely on this point. But I am interested to hear why you think that tax cuts aren't partly responsible for any loss of revenue. The popular consensus on both sides of the fence seem to be that Bush and Cheney greatly exaggerated when they said the "tax cuts would pay for themselves".
Republican Judgement
- Thread starter Minor Axis
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I disagree with you entirely on this point. But I am interested to hear why you think that tax cuts aren't partly responsible for any loss of revenue. The popular consensus on both sides of the fence seem to be that Bush and Cheney greatly exaggerated when they said the "tax cuts would pay for themselves".
-
2KReplies
-
29KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Accountable
Well-Known Member
:confused The statement you quoted doesn't indicate that tax cuts aren't partly responsible for any loss of revenue. However, here's something I did say regarding tax cuts & revenue ... well, job creation, but job creation increases revenue.
Interestingly, I've seen little evidence to support the notion that Bushes tax cuts created many jobs. To the contrary, he did create many jobs through increased state and defence spending.
Accountable
Well-Known Member
I'm of the mind that the gov't needs to get out of the job creation business altogether, but that ain't happenin' without a revolution.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Who said that? And you have the nerve to speak of blinders. Your hopeless.
Fantasy unless a variety of other factors fall into place. Under Bush this statement has been disproven. You are making too many assumptions in your idealized GOP-centric thinking.
IMO most people who look at this issue with an open mind see the falsity of the argument. It's glorified trickle-down. For businesses, if they are more successful, they may hire more, or they may just ask their current employees to do more. And for individuals there is no guarantee at all that they will go out and start a business with their new monetary gains. It's just as likely that they will take it and play the market, buy a yacht or an additional home, which no matter how someone argues, does not create jobs, at least not enough jobs to warrant treating the rich like Kings and Queens. Companies like GE make BILLIONS and pay a pittance in taxes all ready. This "we must lower taxes" is just for consumption by the suckers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Alien Allen
Froggy the Prick
lets face it we are doomed when both parties talk about reducing spending based on a ten year plan
when did that bullshit start anyway? I only noticed this the last few years.
how about also getting rid of friggin base line budget gimmickry. Have a 1% across the board reduction in spending each year over the next 5 years. Then tell the morons in office to just go home. There is nothing that passed in the last 10 years let alone 5 years that we could have done without.
oh and lets have a flat tax or a fair tax where everybody contributes something. This crap where more and more pay no federal taxes each year is absurd to the point where almost half don't. You can call that reverse socialism Minor if you like
when did that bullshit start anyway? I only noticed this the last few years.
how about also getting rid of friggin base line budget gimmickry. Have a 1% across the board reduction in spending each year over the next 5 years. Then tell the morons in office to just go home. There is nothing that passed in the last 10 years let alone 5 years that we could have done without.
oh and lets have a flat tax or a fair tax where everybody contributes something. This crap where more and more pay no federal taxes each year is absurd to the point where almost half don't. You can call that reverse socialism Minor if you like
Accountable
Well-Known Member
Taking my comment out of context is cheap. I'm not your enemy. I'm out of this for a bit.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
I have taken nothing out of context and I'm not trying to be your enemy. Adios.
lets face it we are doomed when both parties talk about reducing spending based on a ten year plan
when did that bullshit start anyway? I only noticed this the last few years.
how about also getting rid of friggin base line budget gimmickry. Have a 1% across the board reduction in spending each year over the next 5 years. Then tell the morons in office to just go home. There is nothing that passed in the last 10 years let alone 5 years that we could have done without.
oh and lets have a flat tax or a fair tax where everybody contributes something. This crap where more and more pay no federal taxes each year is absurd to the point where almost half don't. You can call that reverse socialism Minor if you like
God, Allen look at where the wealth is held in this country. You mean the almost half that don't have any money and are scrapping by under the poverty level? It's not that hard if your philosophy is fair- the concept is shared sacrifice. Cut spending here, raise taxes there, the rich CAN AFFORD IT. The depth to which the GOP is devoted to the wealthy is staggering. I can't believe that any average person could possibly trust these people.
Hmm, not to be argumentative, but look at these 2011 tax brackets: a married couple who makes $17000 is in the 10% tax bracket and pays $1200 in taxes unless they have deductions. May I ask where you come up with almost 50% don't pay taxes? I'm curious.
Last edited by a moderator:
oh and lets have a flat tax or a fair tax where everybody contributes something. This crap where more and more pay no federal taxes each year is absurd to the point where almost half don't. You can call that reverse socialism Minor if you like
So when you say that half don't pay federal income taxes, what type of people come to your mind?
Millionaires? or maybe poor people?
Do you know that there are over 500,000 people who make over $100,000/year that pay $0 in federal taxes?
That there are over 14,000 people that make over $500,000/year that pay $0 in federal income taxes?
There are even people making well over $1,000,000 that pay zero federal tax dollars...
Are these the people you are talking about, or is it just the bottom 50%?
What about the corporations that pay zero federal tax dollars? Should all of their deductions be removed as well so that they all must pay? Because over 1/3 of all corporations don't pay any federal taxes yet I never hear you screaming about that injustice.
Says the government employee.
I just can't understand you libertarians... It's all me, me me... I'm sorry but I just can't get onboard with that philosophy. It's WE THE PEOPLE, not me the people. The government is of the people, by the people and FOR the people. We are not a bunch of isolationists.
Hell, I don't want the government to give me a job, but I DO want the government to provide an environment that helps me get a good paying job with basic protections. I want the government to protect trade agreements that will guarantee that my job isn't outsourced on a whim. I want to be able to join a union if I want and they should be protected.
There are 1001 things the government should do to help protect the American worker.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Show me evidence of revenue going down because of the tax cuts.
Question: When someone does this, where does that money go and what is it used for?
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Well if you are trying to get me to say it goes to someone's business, it is trickle down, whatever discretionary income the rich decide to spend comes into the economy. This is not reliable, and it is not good tax policy, period.
NYTimes Opinion Article: Bonuses for Billionaires
Last edited by a moderator:
Stock market specifically.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Playing the stock market does not create jobs. Investing is mostly reactive, based on the fundamentals of a company, economic reports, and emotions. The market goes up and down based on these factors. If you put 100k into a stock and it goes up, you did not create a single job. If there is bad economic news it might go right back down and you might yank it out at a loss tomorrow. No real effect on jobs under normal circumstances.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Are you serious or messing with me? It is invested into the stock of a company in the form of shares. There are only so many shares. Someone has to want to sell, for you to be able to purchase. If there are more buyers than sellers the price of the shares go up. If reversed, the price goes down. What else do you need to know?
What you fail to acknowledge is that the money becomes the operating capital of the company who sells the shares. The billions (trillions?) that are invested are vital to keeping huge employers operating and millions of people working.
It seems like many people believe the stock market is just some form of high tech slot machine for rich people. The reality is that without people willing and able to put their money to work as capital for business on global scale, the whole economic system collapses.
It seems like many people believe the stock market is just some form of high tech slot machine for rich people. The reality is that without people willing and able to put their money to work as capital for business on global scale, the whole economic system collapses.
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members