Obamanomics 101: Failure Explained

[CosmicCowboy]

How about back to what it was before the tax cuts? The man you voted for president opposed those tax cuts, and now it's suddenly socialism or communism to restore them?

You can sure tell the ones in here that don't pay taxes. It's never enough as long as someone else pays them.

[DMX7]

DMX7, you could tax everyone at 100% and it wouldn't be enough to pay for the programs now in place.

The point is, raising taxes isn't going to solve anything. Controlling spending and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse are the only solutions.

Tax policy and spending policy really need to be two separate conversations.

John Kerry gave us the latest example of what happens when you raise taxes beyond a certain level. Instead of docking his brand new yacht in Massachussets and paying the $500,000 sales tax, he docked elsewhere -- where, I presume, the taxes aren't so punitive.

This is an example of how higher taxes actually results in lower tax revenue. Simply raising taxes doesn't increase revenue and, at some point, it actually causes taxpayers to shelter assets and incomes where their tax obligation is actually lower.

Raising taxes isn't going to solve everything, but it will at least stop some of the irresponsible bleeding done by the Bush Administration.

And I'll get back to your other point when I've got more time, but I only partially agree, and I 100% disagree that the principle applies to the Bush tax cuts. That just a gross oversimplification and over application of the idea.

You can sure tell the ones in here that don't pay taxes. It's never enough as long as someone else pays them.

I pay taxes, dumbass. This is a typical republican talking point, that anyone who thinks we're under-taxed must be a non-tax paying welfare queen. I know Glenn Beck has got you conditioned real well.

Too bad warren buffett and bill gates also think the tax rates are too low and presumably should be restored to pre-Bush tax cut levels.

But when Democrats say "tax the rich", it's not because they want to bleed them dry, and they aren't going to because we're not talking about anything crazy like a 10% hike, it's because they can most afford to pay it.

[CosmicCowboy]

Raising taxes isn't going to solve everything, but it will at least stop some of the irresponsible bleeding done by the Bush Administration.

And I'll get back to your other point when I've got more time, but I only partially agree, and I 100% disagree that the principle applies to the Bush tax cuts. That just a gross oversimplification and over application of the idea.




I pay taxes, dumbass. This is a typical republican talking point, that anyone who thinks we're under-taxed must be a non-tax paying welfare queen. I know Glenn Beck has got you conditioned real well.

Too bad warren buffett and bill gates also think the tax rates are too low and presumably should be restored to pre-Bush tax cut levels.

But when Democrats say "tax the rich", it's not because they want to bleed them dry, and they aren't going to because we're not talking about anything crazy like a 10% hike, it's because they can most afford to pay it.

The Feds currently take 28.2% of GDP in taxes. How much more do you want them to take? How much is enough?

BTW I didn't say you were a welfare queen. I was thinking your posts sound more like a sop re in high school.

[ChumpDumper]

Federal deficits are the result of expenditures being greater than revenue.

Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty.

The political electoral process encourages ever increasing spending.

Continuing to increase spending and taxes endlessly is simply not feasible.

The real question is how much tax is enough for the Federal government to do the job it is tasked with in the cons ution.

I say they already take a big enough slice of the GDP.

You say they don't.

When did I say that?

Link please.

It's currently 28.2%. I say that should be enough for the Feds to do the job they are cons utionally obligated to do.

How much do you want Chump?

35%? 50%? 75%?

How much is enough?

If taxes are cut, spending needs to be cut too. Otherwise the deficit grows like it did after the Bush tax cuts.

Who has the plan to cut spending?

Palin?

[ChumpDumper]

Why don't they keep the tax cuts?

So you want the deficit to increase another $3 trillion.

Good job.

[boutons_deux]

Critics Still Wrong on What’s Driving Deficits in Coming Years




http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

=========

The deficit, which isn't so huge compared to GDP, given the Criminal Banksters' Great Depression.

None of Magic Negro's actions have increased the deficit anywhere near the Repug components of the deficit:

2 bogus/botched wars,

tax cuts for the rich,

tax breaks for the the corps,

unfunded Medicare Part D,

subsidy to Health Insurance companies to make them compe ive with Medicate,

Legislation blocking govt from acting as single buyer with BigPharma, etc.

mismanagement/deregulation of the economy 2001-2008.

[CosmicCowboy]

When did I say that?

Link please.

If taxes are cut, spending needs to be cut too. Otherwise the deficit grows like it did after the Bush tax cuts.

Who has the plan to cut spending?

Palin?

I'm OK with raising the Social Security retirement age for everyone younger than me...

Seriously, I'm for raising the age period. I'm not retiring at 65 anyway.

[angrydude]

what nobody seems to be mentioning is all the companies who right now are either

1. hoarding money in anticipation of the tax increases (whether justifiably or not...but they are doing it) so they'll have cash to pay them. This hurts us short term.

and/or

2. accelerating as much income as they can to this year (by issuing dividends and such). This hurts us long term probably more than it helps us short term (as right now doesn't feel too peachy)

[Wild Cobra]

what nobody seems to be mentioning is all the companies who right now are either

1. hoarding money in anticipation of the tax increases (whether justifiably or not...but they are doing it) so they'll have cash to pay them. This hurts us short term.

and/or

2. accelerating as much income as they can to this year (by issuing dividends and such). This hurts us long term probably more than it helps us short term (as right now doesn't feel too peachy)

Yep. The democrats scare the out of many rich people.

[ChumpDumper]

Yep. The democrats scare the out of many rich people.

Many rich people are pussies.

[DarrinS]

Yeah 1 year is not enough time to fix 8 years of ups...

But it is enough time to out-spend the predecessor in that entire 8 year time period.

[Yonivore]

Yep. The democrats scare the out of many rich people.

The democrats are the rich people...

Democrats scare the out of ordinary, hard-working, small business owners and hard-working, tax-paying laborers.

[boutons_deux]

"it is enough time to out-spend the predecessor in that entire 8 year time period."

You Lie

[DarrinS]

"it is enough time to out-spend the predecessor in that entire 8 year time period."

You Lie

You're en led to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

[DarrinS]

At least all that massive spending has created loads of new jobs.

[boutons_deux]

The vast majority of the deficit is on Repug wars, tax cuts, economic mismanagement and their relentless starving the beast.



aka, YOU LIE

[Wild Cobra]

The democrats are the rich people...

Democrats scare the out of ordinary, hard-working, small business owners and hard-working, tax-paying laborers.

I stand corrected, there really are too many wealthy people that either don't care if they pay more, or have had their friends in congress make good deals for them. Just a few really rich people that feel like they've been robbed.

[DarrinS]

aka, YOU LIE

It's a simple question. Has the Obama admin already outspent 8 years of Bush.

Yes or no?

[boutons_deux]

No

[DMX7]

No

And of course it's textbook SOP to spend when you're trying to get out of a recession.

[Winehole23]

It's a simple question. Has the Obama admin already outspent 8 years of Bush.

Yes or no?

Your mind as ever maintains its steely grip on the obvious. Kudos.

[admiralsnackbar]

logic