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.
But, somehow, we do need to pay for unemployment insurance.
More 'fiscal responsibility' from the party of 'no.'
"But for all the talk about how desperate Republicans are to lower the deficit, when asked how the GOP would pay for $678 billion in tax cuts, Kyl said what he actually believed: he wouldn't pay for them at all.
...
It's quite a message to Americans: Republicans believe $30 billion for unemployment benefits don't even deserve a vote because the money would be added to the deficit, but Republicans also believe that adding the cost of $678 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy to the deficit is just fine."
there never was a tax cut for the wealthy...it was for EVERYONE
the DEMOCRATS passed PAYGO...why dont they want to follow their OWN RULES
That may have been the intention, however, that was not the result:
"The precise results would depend upon the specific measures adopted to offset the costs of the tax cuts. Nevertheless, the basic finding — that once the financing measures that ultimately will have to be adopted are taken into account, most households without high incomes will be net “losers” — is likely to hold under almost every financing scenario, unless a large portion of the tax cuts are repealed. "
But, somehow, we do need to pay for unemployment insurance.
More 'fiscal responsibility' from the party of 'no.'
"But for all the talk about how desperate Republicans are to lower the deficit, when asked how the GOP would pay for $678 billion in tax cuts, Kyl said what he actually believed: he wouldn't pay for them at all.
...
It's quite a message to Americans: Republicans believe $30 billion for unemployment benefits don't even deserve a vote because the money would be added to the deficit, but Republicans also believe that adding the cost of $678 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy to the deficit is just fine."
Tax-rate cuts don't need to be paid for because they pay for themselves by increasing economic activity that results in MORE revenue. Haven't you been paying since JFK was President. Well I have, and it works every time it is tried.
Tax-rate cuts don't need to be paid for because they pay for themselves by increasing economic activity that results in MORE revenue. Haven't you been paying since JFK was President. Well I have, and it works every time it is tried.
That is exactly correct.
Taxes are generated in most cases where money is exchanged - buying & selling, paying wages from employer to employee, receiving funds from investment earnings, etc.
The more the economic activity, the more received in taxes. So tax increases actually will decrease how much people spend - and will therefore decrease the amount received in taxes by the government.
With regards to who does and does not pay taxes...
Obama tax credits (which he calls tax cuts) gives money to people who do not pay taxes. Any tax rate increases will not affect those who do not pay taxes. So those who do not pay income tax get free money and will be unaffected as more money is taken from those who do pay taxes.
So instead of increasing the number of people who pay taxes by supporting policies that encourage people towards employment and earning enough to pay their own taxes - Obama is decreasing the tax roles and giving away tax free money. How do these policies reduce debt/deficits? They don't. It's a joke.
Tax-rate cuts don't need to be paid for because they pay for themselves by increasing economic activity that results in MORE revenue. Haven't you been paying since JFK was President. Well I have, and it works every time it is tried.
Increased economic activity and less revenue to battle deficits that we are facing now ARE NOT THE SAME THING. Tax cuts W/OUT spending cuts enhances with greater emphasis the profit revenue stream for those at the upper end of the economic spectrum.
IF you were paying attention since JFK...you would have noticed.
But, somehow, we do need to pay for unemployment insurance.
More 'fiscal responsibility' from the party of 'no.'
"But for all the talk about how desperate Republicans are to lower the deficit, when asked how the GOP would pay for $678 billion in tax cuts, Kyl said what he actually believed: he wouldn't pay for them at all.
...
It's quite a message to Americans: Republicans believe $30 billion for unemployment benefits don't even deserve a vote because the money would be added to the deficit, but Republicans also believe that adding the cost of $678 billion in tax cuts for the wealthy to the deficit is just fine."
Not just the wealthy received tax cuts under Bush.
It is just a liberal lie and myth to say so.
Re-read Kyl's comments and adjust your so it is not out of context and misleading.
The real party of NO, the dems are scared about the November elections are on the attack. At least get the information correct and put it into context.
* Who said NO to the majority of Americans who did NOT want the HC bill to pass? Of course, it was the party of Hell No, the demNOcrats.
Tax-rate cuts don't need to be paid for because they pay for themselves by increasing economic activity that results in MORE revenue. Haven't you been paying since JFK was President. Well I have, and it works every time it is tried.
That's only if the tax rates are high. Right now, tax rates in this country are pretty low and as evidenced by the Bush tax cuts, cutting them further isn't going to stimulate much of anything.
the tax cuts were for everyone......the 10% bracket didnt even exist..it was 15%
the tax CREDITS only help those under 180k
that's the child care credit
the child credit
the education credit
the energy credit
the retirment credit
the medical expense credit
you can post what ever garbage you want to, I have been doing taxes for 30 years
You will have a hard time finding a liberal who understands how money, taxes and the economy works. They cannot run a popcorn stand without going bankrupt in a month.
They only listen to their leaders and follow them like little sheep. We both know how lame the loons leaders are.
Lets watch the idiot in the WH end the Bush tax cuts and see the economy further tank under Obama because of it.
Liberals will be going nuts when the idiot in the WH lets these cuts go and adds his multi layered tax raises on top of them.
But, but, Obama promised tax cuts for everyone under 250,000, 200,000, 150,000, 100,000 and has not delivered them yet for some reason.
Hope and change is really working out real well I see.
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.
