Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its like I need to educate you on every single posting. Are you sure you're old enough to be here?
Your insecurity has ALWAYS amused me. Anyway...
Quote:
Profits on corporations were higher, but clearly we dont only tax corporations, we also profits from labor, and we have far fewer people working. Do you really need people to explain this to you?
How we tax did not change. Tax rates did. Then, why did federal tax revenues decline?
Quote:
I agree, it has nothing to do with it, but then I must ask why YOU brought it up..
I brought up GDP but YOU brought up gross sales versus profits... and how taxes are calculated. As much as you hate me repeat my posts, I hate it a bit more but the least I could do to help you read things you need to learn to... although, I can't really help you comprehend. Hence:
But GDP grew. Why didn't federal revenue? Average Growth in federal revenue by decade (constant 2005 dollars):
1981-1990: +2.21%
1991-2000: +4.41%
2001-2010: -1.47%
I think that smacking has taken its toll. We tax profits for corporations, which represents only a small part of federal revenue. We tax income fully, after deductions. The fact that tax revenue as a p% of GDP, which is lower than it should be, tells a great deal, regardless of your attempt to marginalize the measure. It's not because corporate profits are lower. In fact... Corporate profits come in unexpectedly strong
I think that smacking has taken its toll. We tax profits for corporations, which represents only a small part of federal revenue. We tax income fully, after deductions.
Can you say dah?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Profits on corporations were higher, but clearly we dont only tax corporations, we also profits from labor, and we have far fewer people working.
Profits on corporations were higher, but clearly we dont only tax corporations, we also profits from labor, and we have far fewer people working.
It seems you are unwittingly confirming our position.
1. We have a revenue problem, not a spending problem.
2. Improve the economy and employment will improve and revenues will rise.
3. But even if revenues rise to Bush era levels, we'll still run deficits and therefore need tax increases.
Nope.. as displayed to you before, but like a typical 5 year old, it needs repeating, tax revenues to the federal government remains rather consistant regardless of the tax rates. What changed is THE ECONOMY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Then, why did federal tax revenues decline?
Because there is less people working and a bad economy. What planet do you live on that you need to be educated with every posting?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
I brought up GDP but YOU brought up gross sales versus profits...
As usual, I brought up gross vs profits AFTER you brought up the GDP.. Try to follow along with the thread. This is what I posted where you went into lala land about the GDP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Bull ****.. federal revenues are low because of the ECONOMY, not the tax rates, while spending has climbed by 25% over the last THREE YEARS ALONE...
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
As much as you hate me repeat my posts, I hate it a bit more but the least I could do to help you read things you need to learn to... although, I can't really help you comprehend. Hence:
I hate you repeating them because you dont respond at all to what was said, and always go into kookland. And when its pointed out that your reply has nothing to do what what you're responding to, you requote it, as if it sounds more intelligent the second time around.
Trust me, it doesnt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
But GDP grew. Why didn't federal revenue? Average Growth in federal revenue by decade (constant 2005 dollars):
WE DONT TAX GDP DOLLARS.. Where on gods earth did you get your education from?
It seems you are unwittingly confirming our position.
1. We have a revenue problem, not a spending problem.
If the federal government returned to spending levels from JUST A COUPLE YEARS AGO, the deficit would be about 25% of current levels, and when the economy improved that 25% would easily be recovered by them SPENDING less on things like social programs. The lack of income is MINOR compared to the TRILLION DOLLARS they are spending in excess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
2. Improve the economy and employment will improve and revenues will rise.
Absolutely true, but you cant improve the economy nor employment by taking money out of the economy to stimulate. ITS NEVER WORKED. Ok, it might have worked in nations that can run surpluses, but WE NEVER DO.. Not even during Clinton did we, despite your claim that we did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
3. But even if revenues rise to Bush era levels, we'll still run deficits and therefore need tax increases.
WE DONT TAX GDP DOLLARS.. Where on gods earth did you get your education from?
Where in the world did you read that someone was discussing about taxing GDP dollars? Wait... you don't learn. You can't! You do, however, seek shelter by pulling things out of thin air. But, I'm heartless when it comes to such people.
So... we don't tax GDP dollars. Nobody has said we did or should. Now, what we do, however, is measure revenue AND spending as a percentage of GDP. We expect tax revenue to rise as economy does, the GDP does. But, occasionally it doesn't. And frequently (since 2001) it didn't. THAT is what people are trying to get thru to you.
Where in the world did you read that someone was discussing about taxing GDP dollars? Wait... you don't learn. You can't! You do, however, seek shelter by pulling things out of thin air. But, I'm heartless when it comes to such people.
So... we don't tax GDP dollars. Nobody has said we did or should. Now, what we do, however, is measure revenue AND spending as a percentage of GDP. We expect tax revenue to rise as economy does, the GDP does. But, occasionally it doesn't. And frequently (since 2001) it didn't. THAT is what people are trying to get thru to you.
YOU asked why revenues to the federal government went down, despite GDP growing.. If you are now saying again that one thing has nothing to do with the other, (thereby confirming what I said is correct) then why are you spending so much time babbling useless information?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
