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.
Has it come to your notice that most of the country is in a financial deficit, including the federal government? Where do you think the revenues come from -- the good fairy?
either let them ALL stay
The current six rate brackets of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%
or let them ALL expire
rates of 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%.
notice the BOTTOM 60% got the biggest of the cuts
Its not discriminating against one group. They will still wind up with a $$$ amount cut that is equal and if not larger than the $$$ amount cut of the bottom 98% gets.
One proof that you are wrong.. It was the GOP that MADE and PASSED the tax cuts for ALL, not just the rich.. If what you said was true, then only the rich would have gotten them 10 years ago when the GOP had total control.
UTTER FAILURE
Right back at YOU. It was those tax cuts and the stupid wars that drove up the deficit to the point where the tax cuts now MUST be clawed back. The tax cuts shouldn't have been passed in the first place - the country might be in a completely different financial situation if they hadn't.
Seems like an easy solution. Take one for the team and ****. What do the Democrats have to gain by stalling? Make the tax cuts permanent and they could move on to their favorite issues like gays in the military and the dream act.
Because that is who they are ! Class Warfare, Greed and Envy is their stock and trade..it is their DNA!!
Its not discriminating against one group. They will still wind up with a $$$ amount cut that is equal and if not larger than the $$$ amount cut of the bottom 98% gets.
I doubt it.....again...
What about the 3 Trillion in tax extensions for the middle class? If you going to extend for all their income, why not all income for those who are wealthier? It is certainly discriminatory to say....simply becasue you make more money you are expected to pick up a greater part of the tab.
Why can't people understand we have plenty of money for the Gov....they are not good stewards, and we need to cut spending and prioritize what we spend on....
From your earlier post, I worked 15 yrs to get into the top bracket, with many yrs of roomates, mac and cheese, no marriage or children, 100K in school loans.....I expect others to be willing to work hard, sacrifice, and be willing to decrease some of the social services we now offer....
This graph is highly two-dimensional and doesn't take in all the other factors that matter; it is not a complete picture and is a shallow argument to convince people without experience in finance.
Wow, not a complete picture of how federal revenue stopped going down, and then started going up.. Lets review your complete reasons then shall we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maabus1999
Now I personally have never seen it done, but a proper Regression analysis done with tax revenue, GDP growth, forecasts, productivity, population growth, unemployment rates, etc... would answer the question better on what tax rates "really do" to the economy.
We werent discussing what it did to the economy, we were discussing how the negative trend of revenues to the federal government reversed. But things did improve, we had 52 consective months of economic growth and 10,200,000 new jobs (per the BLS), so how exactly are you disputing these things?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maabus1999
I personally think you will find that revenue was still going to go up, without the tax cut. All you did with the tax cut is reduce the possible revenue the government could have achieved.
um, the chart shows revenue was going down.. what "still going up" are you talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maabus1999
I also think the total tax rate, if graphed as a % versus revenue potential is a slight right tail graph, with the peak rate somewhere between 40 and 50% of total gross income.
That would be true if OTHER taxes went up during this period of time, but they didnt.. Tax cuts INCREASED revenues period.. Its a fact..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maabus1999
And I completely agree that government spending and entitlements need major roll backs(~20%). However, there are a "few" sectors of government I think government spending should increase as it would provide long term economic growth (e.g massive increases in R&D spenditures/tax credits). Innovation = Wealth Creation.
My 2 cents.
innovation by government creates no wealth, we are not a communist country. If government innovates it does so at the expense of the private sector.
you fail to mention that OTHER taxes have come and inceased in their place
you fail to mention that SPENDING has increase much, much, more than taxes have gone down
the fact is from federal income tax we take in about 1 trillion...then about 700 billion from wage fees (SS/medicare tax),, then about 800 billion from corporate tax......that's about 2.5 trillion.....yet we spend 3.5 trillion
you would have to double taxes. just to even break even...then what Dc will spend more...forgetaboutit
CUT SPENDING
We agree:
CUT SPENDING
What we don't agree on is cutting taxes to increases federal revenue.
The best way to increase federal tax revenue is ECONOMIC GROWTH!
The three major things that spur economic growth are:
A major increase in the population
A major increase in people joining the middle class or an increase in middle class income
Scientific and Technical innovation that creates new products and new markets.
Now look at those three things and tell me which one of them is going on right now in the United States?
Yes, they did. They got that cut as well. The portions of the tax cuts for the rich on the bottom $250,000 of their income will remain (and the 28% bracket will actually be pushed upward slightly) The portions on their income above $250,000 is what is going to increase. Hence my previous post. Married couple with two kids taking a standard deduction will keep more than 91% of the tax cuts, married couple with two kids making $300,000 itemizing $15,000 in property taxes and $15,000 in other deductions will keep their entire tax cut.
The rich got the smaller middle class tax cut but they did so at the expense of the higher income tax cut bracket. The tax cuts were regressive, the higher your income, the lower your percentage. Its not like you get a tax cut on your lower income the same if you are in the higher income brackets, thats not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
1,080,000 jobs were added during Bush's 8 years in office. The single worst record of any President since the stats were kept in 1939.
Wrong.. 10,200,000 jobs were added from 2003-2007. The fact that they ended up with only 1,080,000 jobs at the end was due to such poor management by Democrats in Congress who allowed the economy to collapse right under their noses..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
It took until 2006 for the revenues for the federal tax revenues to pass where they were in 2000. Tax revenues increased by 19.6% during Bush's 8 years in office. It increased 110% during Clinton. 16% during his father's time in office (in half the time) 61% when Reagan was in office.
You sound like the other poster here quoting federal tax revenues, and pretending tax revenues = a good economy. I'll tell you the same thing I told him, why dont you call for a 100% tax rate which obviously would boom federal revenue. You might not have money to eat with when your done, but hey, the economy will be fabulous right, federal revenues will be up ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
No. Mitch McConnell who has threatened that the GOP will filibuster the tax cut extensions for the bottom 98% if the top 2% aren't included.
taxburden.org
That is exactly what I am doing.
I dont care that he threatened a filibuster.. Good, thats why we elected them, to stop destroying the nation...
Those on the top will still get a higher $$$ amount cut than everyone else. Out of curiosity, what is your taxable income? Is it just over the $250,000 amount, or well over it?
Of course they got a higher $$$.. only someone who failed elementary math class could believe that wouldnt happen. If you earn $1,000,000 and get 5%, you obviously will get more $$$ than those who earn $10,000 even if you gave them 100%..
Try the math..
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.
