Republicans issue more tax cuts

Duty Honor Country

Duty Honor Country

Active member
Well, the republicans have spearheaded yet another tax cut when the budget is near $500 billion in the red. I have more right to call out the republicans on this one because I am an investor. The $70 billion tax cuts extends the long term capital gains tax rate of 15% and keeps more middle class citizens from paying the Alternative Minimum Tax.

I have completely had it with the fanticy world that the republicans and our government is living in. Isn't it convenient that the federal budget does not include the costs of Iraq? With the cost of Iraq, the budget deficit is flirting with $0.5 trillion. With such a deficit, the republicans are continuing to persue tax cuts. Have our government officials taken budget lessons from Visa, Mater Card or Capitol One?

I have had it. This election I just might vote democrat. At least they were able to balance a budget.
 
phoenix80 said:
I am all for tax cuts

;-)
Click to expand...
my point is I am pretty sure I benefit more than you from them and I am against them. For the 2004 tax year, i paid Uncle Sam over $3,000. Last year I would have owed money if it were not for an educational expense write off.

You have to be living in a fanticy world to pass tax cats with a $400 and something billion budget deficit. The ONLY solution is to raise taxes and cut spending. The republicans control the house, senate and the white house and they have spent more and cut taxes...

...insanity...total insanity
 
Doody said:
my point is I am pretty sure I benefit more than you from them and I am against them. For the 2004 tax year, i paid Uncle Sam over $3,000. Last year I would have owed money if it were not for an educational expense write off.

You have to be living in a fanticy world to pass tax cats with a $400 and something billion budget deficit. The ONLY solution is to raise taxes and cut spending. The republicans control the house, senate and the white house and they have spent more and cut taxes...

...insanity...total insanity
Click to expand...

May be they can afford it!
 
phoenix80 said:
May be they can afford it!
Click to expand...
yeah, and our national debt will pass $10 trillion before President Bush is out of power. As long as we have something called a treasury note will the republicans spend more and more. I believe Adam Smith said in the Wealth of Nations that any government will not save money as long as it knows it can borrow money.
 
An expensive war, which looks like it could last for most of our lifetimes, and tax cuts are just too much of an outlay at the same time. I'm for tax cuts and a balanced budget. Tax cuts put more cash where it's needed and gives more incentive to companies to expand, especially small companies, which means more taxpayers which adds to a bigger tax base to run Government.
 
Missileer said:
Tax cuts put more cash where it's needed and gives more incentive to companies to expand, especially small companies, which means more taxpayers which adds to a bigger tax base to run Government.
Click to expand...

But then you'd have to hope that the next administration will not promise tax cuts too. Otherwise you will rule out the use of a bigger tax base and become even more indebted. On the long run this will make any economy vulnerable!
 
Not to mention Bushs tax plan is working. April had the 2nd highest tax reveune in history.
 
Missileer said:
An expensive war, which looks like it could last for most of our lifetimes, and tax cuts are just too much of an outlay at the same time. I'm for tax cuts and a balanced budget. Tax cuts put more cash where it's needed and gives more incentive to companies to expand, especially small companies, which means more taxpayers which adds to a bigger tax base to run Government.
Click to expand...
What your describing is supply side economics a theory that has been debunked time and time again. President George H.W Bush Sr described it as "VOODOO ECONOMICS" thats not exactly a ringing endorsement (from a Republican no less). The trouble with Voodoo is that just doesnt work, because whenever you give huge tax to the rich they DONT use it to expand like they are suppose to. They simply stick it under their mattrass or put in Stocks or Bonds where it creates a temporary economic spurt such as causing the stock market to rise (like we are seeing right now).





Any Economics 101 professor will tell that is the Middle Class that stimulates the economy, not the rich. So If you want to stimulate the economy you need to give tax cuts to the middle class because unlike the rich they will SPEND it to buy cars, refrigerators and trips to Daytona Beach. Tax cuts for the wealthy are nothing more than a free handout, and because the money for this tax cut is borrowed, it means the MIDDLE CLASS are going to get stuck paying the bill.

For those who are wondering how much your going to get back the Washington Post published a breakdown yesterday, but like a dolt I forgot to post it and of course now I cannot find it. So this is only a partial list...

Your Income Your tax Rebate
$10000-$20000 $2 (slice of pizza with topping, no soda)
$20000-$40000 $20 (1 movie ticket with popcorn and soda)
$40000-$75000 $58 (nice dinner for 2)
$1,000,000-$5,000000 $40,000
$5,000,000+ $81,000 (a brand new BMW per year).

When Republicans pass bills like this, it makes the choice on Nov 2 so much easier.


PJ24
Tax cuts. Blech. Let's see some gas caps!

What??? and put a dent in the oil industries 2005 $1.1 Billion windfall. Perish the thought!
 
Last edited:
I have been saying for so long that tax cuts in a time of deep deficit is a horrible idea. I read an article by some economic historian, and his work said that this is somewhat like the time before the stock market crash of 1929, where the disparity of wealth is great, and keeps getting greater. Also, overspending was a big cause. Now couple this with the fact that countries overseas own thousands upon thousands of our bonds (china) you get a precarious situation for the USA.
 
I am going to have to disagree with overspending being a problem and a cause for the Great Depression. The federal budget had been cut from $6.4 billion in 1921 to $2.9 billion in 1928 under Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon.

As for taxes, during WWI, there was a 60% tax on "excess business profits" and a 65% tax on America's wealthiest people. Under Mellon, the tax on business profits fell to 20%. The income tax on the wealthiest fell first to 45% and then to a cool 20%.

I am glad the Great Depression has been brought up. Because of President Harding and Coolage, government spending was cut and there was virtually no national debt when the Great Depression occured. So the Government had the ability to use deficit spending to spur economic growth and help ailing citizens.

What if a new depression hit today. With our economy BOOMBING, we have produced record deficits under the leadership of the republicans. We have a national debt over $8 trillion (it was only $5 trillion when Clinton left office). How in :cen: would the government be able to do anything with a debt near $10 trillion? If the US gets enough debt, no one is going to accept the coveted treasury note. Then, as Adam Smith has stated, the government might actually start to save money.

Pheonix, this wonderful influx of tax revenue amounts to around $36 billion dollar increase over last year. Well that means the $440 billion deficit is now $400 billion. Much much more needs to be done, and I have zero confidence that the republicans are the solution.
 
Last edited:
Well said Doody.

I think part of the problem is people really have no idea how deep a hole we are digging ourselves into.

From 1789 to 2000 the US Presidents have asked to borrowed $1 trillion, COMBINED. Think about that for a sec, that includes expensive things like the Civil War, the Square deal, the New Deal, WWII, Vietnam etc.

Bush has borrowed $1.05 Trillion in the past 6 years. Its time to bring back pay-as-you-go, which was the only damn system they made bloody sense.

For you non Americans pay-as-you-go was a system (Im not sure if it was invented by Clinton or merely used by him) whereas whenever Congress wanted to do something, the money had to be allocated BEFORE the bill was passed. As opposed to the current system of merely charging it back to Uncle Sams Credit card.
 
mmarsh said:
What your describing is supply side economics a theory that has been debunked time and time again. President George H.W Bush Sr described it as "VOODOO ECONOMICS" thats not exactly a ringing endorsement (from a Republican no less). The trouble with Voodoo is that just doesnt work, because whenever you give huge tax to the rich they DONT use it to expand like they are suppose to. They simply stick it under their mattrass or put in Stocks or Bonds where it creates a temporary economic spurt such as causing the stock market to rise (like we are seeing right now).
Click to expand...

When you say rich, are you talking about robber barons or small business which employees more Americans that big business? If you remember President Kennedy was a dyed in the wool believer in tax cuts for employers. It's not just a Republican thing.
 
Missileer

You maybe right about Kennedy. But then again, that was 1963, over 40 years ago and things have changed a great deal since then. I might be wrong because I wasnt born back then, but the impressions I get from that time period was that people (employers) were far less greedy. You never heard about a CEO that fired his entire 2000 person staff and move operations to Indonisia just so the share price of the company would rise .5 of 1 percent. Thats not to say they wasnt scandals, but people seemed less obsessed with money those days. Perhaps thats why trickle down economics worked back then? One thing is for sure, it doesn't work anymore.

Speaking for the present, I think you'll agree that cutting taxes for the wealthy is mostly a Republican philosophy. The only exception to this was George HW Bush Sr, in a failed attempt to reduce the deficiets of the Reagan Administration, and the GOP rebelled against him because of it. Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy by 1 percent in 1993, and the Democrats have been very clear about their intention to repeal the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
 
Tax cuts really are a great idea. The really bad idea is that Bush hasn't met a spending bill he didn't like. How many times has he used his veto power? Heh. Exactly.
 
I oppoligize. I made a typo when i said overspending. I meant oversaving was the reason. Sorry again.
 
WNxRogue said:
I oppoligize. I made a typo when i said overspending. I meant oversaving was the reason. Sorry again.
Click to expand...
I was about to say.;)

RIght now I wish we had the problem of oversaving...in our government or society
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top