|
Neil Cavuto pwns senator on Obama's "95%" tax plan (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
no an Obama campaign office |
Funny, you're probably gonna get a tax break under Obama. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Taxes won't go up for households making $250,000 - only those over $638,000. |
Get the out of here you factinista |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Funny, you're probably gonna get a tax break under Obama. |
He will for sure. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
which essentially is a tax increase, because for all practical purposes, you will have less disposable income once that takes effect.
He is going to raise plenty... 35% up to 39.6% equals an additional $9000 for a family making $250K. Wouldn't that family be better off deciding where that goes, say, to their kids college funds or something?
And doubling the capital gains tax is raising something too. |
allowing a law to expire isn't the same as enacting a law.
look at it this way, the federal budget deficit is going to be something in the order of 1 trillion dollars this year alone. there are 300,000,000 americans, 75% of whom are 18 years or older (of working age). That means every american of working age has an extra $4,444 of debt from just this past year. Since Bush has been in office the national debt has increased about 5 trillion; that's about $22,222 per working adult. How the is that going to get paid back?
People should think of national debt as their personal debt. The only significant way a government can finance it's activities other than borrowing is taxing, and you can't borrow forever.
some republican please tell me how we can reduce this debt burden by cutting taxes! I'm in agreement with Shakka that we need to reduce spending, but at the same time we need to increase revenues. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
allowing a law to expire isn't the same as enacting a law.
look at it this way, the federal budget deficit is going to be something in the order of 1 trillion dollars this year alone. there are 300,000,000 americans, 75% of whom are 18 years or older (of working age). That means every american of working age has an extra $4,444 of debt from just this past year. Since Bush has been in office the national debt has increased about 5 trillion; that's about $22,222 per working adult. How the is that going to get paid back?
People should think of national debt as their personal debt. The only significant way a government can finance it's activities other than borrowing is taxing, and you can't borrow forever.
some republican please tell me how we can reduce this debt burden by cutting taxes! I'm in agreement with Shakka that we need to reduce spending, but at the same time we need to increase revenues. |
you definitely make some solid points. One thing that nobody is mentioning is that in the past, when capital gains tax was lowered, revanues were significantly increased, as you can imagine more people/business will be investing and taking risks with that extra cash |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
you definitely make some solid points. One thing that nobody is mentioning is that in the past, when capital gains tax was lowered, revanues were significantly increased, as you can imagine more people/business will be investing and taking risks with that extra cash |
You should think of the tax rate like we all do with the Fed rate. Sometimes it should be higher than others, depending on economic circumstances. Now that we're dealing with the fallout of cheap money that contributed to the subprime boom, everyone's quick to blame Greenspan (and in some degree, rightly so). Why doesn't it work the same with taxes? In my personal life, that's how it works. When I'm making more money, I'm paying off more debt. I zeroed all of my credit cards earlier this year after working tons of overtime. That's the same thing that we, as a nation, should have been doing with the tax rates when economic times were good. We all know that economies work in cycles and if you're deficit spending in boom times, what do you think is going to happen when times get bad?
Secondly, while lower tax rates may inspire more risk and investment, lower tax rates for the middle and lower classes increases consumer spending potential, the lack of which is killing corporate earnings (definitely not a good thing for risk and investment, in case you haven't looked at the stock market lately). |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
some republican please tell me how we can reduce this debt burden by cutting taxes! I'm in agreement with Shakka that we need to reduce spending, but at the same time we need to increase revenues. |
thats just it, to reduce the debt you have to couple lower taxes with being under budget every year. over time the difference pays down the debt...but again the imperative is lower spending.
Federal revenue from end of fiscal 2001 to 2007 saw an increase of 25% to a record $2.6 trillion in 2007. >IRS PDF LINK<
either of those two things, increases in Federal revenue and reduced spending will not happen under a Democrat government. no one can convince me otherwise |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Funny, you're probably gonna get a tax break under Obama. |
i don't pay taxes. i don't want a welfare check.
my concern is the country as a whole and the impact of a liberal Democrat government. me personally, i'm fine. |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i don't pay taxes. i don't want a welfare check.
my concern is the country as a whole and the impact of a liberal Democrat government. me personally, i'm fine. |
I forgot not all of us have Uncle Sam holding our hand with safety net in tow telling us what to do with our lives. |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
thats just it, to reduce the debt you have to couple lower taxes with being under budget every year. over time the difference pays down the debt...but again the imperative is lower spending.
Federal revenue from end of fiscal 2001 to 2007 saw an increase of 25% to a record $2.6 trillion in 2007. >IRS PDF LINK<
either of those two things, increases in Federal revenue and reduced spending will not happen under a Democrat government. no one can convince me otherwise |
Reduced spending won't happen under any administration...But you should know revenues grew at record levels under Clinton, and he grew NON-DEFENSE spending at 1/3 the rate Bush/Cheney have grown it. The expansion in government under Bush has dwarfed anything we've seen since FDR. The republicans have completely abandoned smaller government, so if that's what you want you are wasting your vote on Mccain. Vote third party and send a message. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
Reduced spending won't happen under any administration... |
it can happen and if it were it would only happen under Republican leadership but these have been some momentous times this first part of the century. thats just my opinion though.
| quote: | | But you should know revenues grew at record levels under Clinton, and he grew NON-DEFENSE spending at 1/3 the rate Bush/Cheney have grown it. |
revenues did grow under Clinton even after his '93 tax increases coming out of a mild recesion in 1990-1992 but the remarkable growth came during the last three years of his term under Republican House leadership and the subsequent lowering of the capital gains tax. that, combined with the technology sector growth (which admittedly was historically fortuitous) saw a full percentage point more in GDP growth than it did following the 4 years after Clinton's '93 tax increase following the 90-92 recession.
| quote: | | The expansion in government under Bush has dwarfed anything we've seen since FDR. The republicans have completely abandoned smaller government |
agreed, Homeland Security, Medicare/Medicade, the bailout are directly attributable but there's no way i'm wasting my vote with a third party. what party?
i'd rather send a message to a party humble enough to lick it's wounds and learn from it's fiscal mistakes. if McCain says he's going to bring fiscal restraint back to Washington i'd take his word any day of the week based on his experience as opposed to the opposition. however, i'm concerned about more things than just the Federal Budget. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
I forgot not all of us have Uncle Sam holding our hand with safety net in tow telling us what to do with our lives. |
wtf? you have no idea what your talking about.
i never retired in the military and never got injured so keep my name out of your f**king mouth. women, i swear...:rolleyes: |
|
|
|
|
