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.
If these people continue to ask for higher taxes, this rollover will continue and the rich will get richer, the tax revenue will continue to drop, the middle class will continue to shrink and need to be taxed more, and the national deficits will continue to climb as everyone needs to cover the tax revenues which should be coming in but arent.
Great post!
Should be easy enough for them to understand, but my prediction is that they'll still scream for higher taxes on the 'rich' despite the fact that the effect will be contrary to what they want.
The rich get most of those cuts as well, they get another $700 billion on top of that. That is what is being objected to.``
No they didnt.. The total of $700B is the TOTAL tax cut for the richest 1% of america. Spread this out over 10 years and divide by the number of americans, it comes out to about $25,000 cut per individual. Might sound like a lot for you but its not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
The revenue dropped the first few years, it then did increase slightly. However, it had the lowest increase in revenue in decades.
The 2003 tax cuts IMMEDIATELY resulted in increased revenues. As for your discussion about lowest increase in revenues, I want to know lowest increase in revenues for what? Other tax cuts? Other tax increases? We were in the mist of a recession, it put 10,200,000 individuals back to work. Why are liberals always so concerned about the amount of revenue the federal government receives? For one I'm more concerned about the 10,200,000 individuals which got jobs because of it, and even if the increase was lower then previous cuts, it was still an increase, it reversed a negative trend, it allowed people to go back to work. Give me one good reason to undo this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
Its the Republicans playing the class warfare game by holding the bottom 98% hostage to give the top 2% what they want. Technically the top 2% will still get the cuts extended, as the portions of the tax break under the $250,000 mark will continue. For example a married couple with two kids making $300,000 taking the standard deduction will actually get a little over 91% of their tax cut.
Ahh, you must listen to liberal media and have resorted the cuts to "hostage" like the rest of them. tell me, was that terminology transmitted to you in some Democratic talking point?
And your math is wrong because it doesnt take into account deductions, which high income earners get a lot of. Tell me, did the example come from the very same talking point memo as above?
Stop listening to the lies you are being told and start thinking for yourself.
increasing the taxes will add (might) about 70 billion a year (as the cbo put it at BEST 700 billion in a ten year span) mean while the state department just promased over 30 billion to GIVE to pakistan...and the liberals want the USA to give nearly 1 trillion to the IMF (to support europe)
CUT THE SPENDING
That very same CBO projected that the cuts will cost $70B and not result in doubling of the capital gains taxes as well.
The reason the CBO is often off is because they dont account for a change of action by taxpayers. They assume people will continue to act in the same manner and not change their investment/spending habits to reflect the tax changes.
Its not a lack of revenue to blame for deficits, its SPENDING.. Federal spending has DOUBLED in 10 years..
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
No they didnt.. The total of $700B is the TOTAL tax cut for the richest 1% of america. Spread this out over 10 years and divide by the number of americans, it comes out to about $25,000 cut per individual. Might sound like a lot for you but its not.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
The 2003 tax cuts IMMEDIATELY resulted in increased revenues. As for your discussion about lowest increase in revenues, I want to know lowest increase in revenues for what? Other tax cuts? Other tax increases? We were in the mist of a recession, it put 10,200,000 individuals back to work. Why are liberals always so concerned about the amount of revenue the federal government receives? For one I'm more concerned about the 10,200,000 individuals which got jobs because of it, and even if the increase was lower then previous cuts, it was still an increase, it reversed a negative trend, it allowed people to go back to work. Give me one good reason to undo this?
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. 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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Ahh, you must listen to liberal media and have resorted the cuts to "hostage" like the rest of them. tell me, was that terminology transmitted to you in some Democratic talking point?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
And your math is wrong because it doesnt take into account deductions, which high income earners get a lot of. Tell me, did the example come from the very same talking point memo as above?
taxburden.org
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Stop listening to the lies you are being told and start thinking for yourself.
The rich get most of those cuts as well, they get another $700 billion on top of that. That is what is being objected to.``
That is total BS.....so you want tax extensions on all your income and everyone else above 250K should loose their extension and pay more...again, why should I pay other peoples debts?
How is it fair to tax someone one way and another group another way?
Simple, they want a service...they pay for it. I am not going to pay for someone to have a handout in the name of charity..
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.
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. 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.
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.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could actually see a pole of those who would be stuck with paying others bills if they want their taxes going up? I find it ironic we live in a society where people actually give a damn about what others think when they are not the ones paying. Of course I would expect anyone to say, yes, lets take money from one group and give it to me....
That is total BS.....so you want tax extensions on all your income and everyone else above 250K should loose their extension and pay more...again, why should I pay other peoples debts?
How is it fair to tax someone one way and another group another way?
Simple, they want a service...they pay for it. I am not going to pay for someone to have a handout in the name of charity..
Those on the top will still get a higher $$$ amount cut than everyone else. Out of curiosity, what is your taxable income? Is it just over the $250,000 amount, or well over it?
Those on the top will still get a higher $$$ 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?
why do you want to discriminate against one group
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 50% got the biggest of the cuts....but that's not even the biggest issue..the credits..child credit, child care credit, reitrement credit(401k), health costs credit, education tuition costs credit, energy (homeowner upgrade (windowd, insulation, tankless HW) credit ONLY AVAILABLE for those households UNDER 175k
yet the liberals want to DISCRIMINATE one group against another
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.
