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.
People who couldnt afford to buy food, already received food stamps.. The fact that billionaires can afford to buy their own food is meaningless.. If its a stimulus, its a stimulus regardless who is spending it right? Its not like the economy has the ability to go, oooh this spending is good, its being done by the poor, and then oooh this spending is bad, very very bad, its being done by a billionaire...
Spending is spending, and if food stamps are such a stimulus, then it is, and you obviously would support everyone getting some!! But you dont.. just more class envy bs...
..
You might want to do the math on this one. I think the billionaires will buy food with or without food stamps, don't you?
Again, show me something that proves a cause/effect relationship between tax cuts and increasing capital gains revenue.
As soon as you show me the cause/effect of FOOD STAMPS..
Why the double standard jojajn? You want to ask people to support their claim while pretending you dont need to do so yourself?
But anyone who has studied the subject knows, decreasing tax rate increases the federal revenue..
You forget, I make my living from investing and avoiding these taxes. You can bet I wont be paying them in high tax years.. If you want to increase the tax rate, thereby decreasing the capital gains revenues, thats your choice, but dont expect us to sit here and not laugh at you for not understanding that people will hold onto their money until the rates drop again..
As soon as you show me the cause/effect of FOOD STAMPS..
Why the double standard jojajn? You want to ask people to support their claim while pretending you dont need to do so yourself?
But anyone who has studied the subject knows, decreasing tax rate increases the federal revenue..
You forget, I make my living from investing and avoiding these taxes. You can bet I wont be paying them in high tax years.. If you want to increase the tax rate, thereby decreasing the capital gains revenues, thats your choice, but dont expect us to sit here and not laugh at you for not understanding that people will hold onto their money until the rates drop again..
Why does your chart end at 2006? The tax cuts continued well beyond 2006, didn't they?
Heres the thing about capital gains. I feel that tax rates could have been raised, while keeping the capital gains tax at its current rate. Thus increasing the individuals income tax rate, while keeping them free to invest with capital gains money. It was already at 0% for those in the 10 to 15% income tax bracket.
There were other ways around this, other than just a blanket extension on everything.
Why does your chart end at 2006? The tax cuts continued well beyond 2006, didn't they?
Because the chart was made in 2006.. Are you telling me that because the chart doesnt show 2007-2010 that the revenues for 2003-2006 magically changed after the fact?
As for your foodstamp chart, again I've seen it before. You arent telling me anything new nor are you answering the questions asked. Simply rehashing the same old bs you were told the say..
if food stamps STIMULATE, and the goal is to stimulate, then it shouldnt matter who is using them right? Clearly someone poor, or someone rich would spend them and they would stimulate the same amount.. i.e. milk for the poor costs the same as milk for the rich.. ketchup costs the same regarless of ones income.. So if they are a stimulus, then why not give them to everyone. It would be patriotic again for rich people to use foodstamps right? The fact that they dont need them wouldnt matter, because clearly as you keep trying to tell me, they would stimulate regarldess of ones need..
And clearly if tax cuts are good, then they would be good for all right? The point being allowing people to keep their money to be spent would stimulate regarless of if someone earns $20K a year, or $200K a year.. Money spent = a stimulus right?
And clearly if you are so concerned about the national debt, then obviously you would want to attack the national debt in whole right by attacking the largest waste would you not agree? So why not concern over the $300B a year in tax cuts for the 98%, and only concern about the $70B for the other 2%? If debt is bad then its bad, regardless of what generates it...
Instead of playing class envy, and repeating the same old left wing bs.. think for yourself..
Try to stay focused and follow along.. The plan to pay for these extensions is the very money sitting in the federal governments books already. Its money from the stimulus package that has not bee spent..
Why would you want them to borrow to spend when they have already borrowed and its sitting there.. thats foolish, but thats what you Democrats want to happen
as the money is already there why is it that the republicans didn't want the extension?
Republican, Scott Brown [R-MA] singlehandedly shut them down with a refusal to consider the proposal unless the cost is paid for. 2.5 million unemployed Americans are left with out needed aid just in time for the holidays.
Yes, the GOP knows the money is sitting there, its Democrats who refuse to allow it to be spent on the unemployed and want to borrow AGAIN, adding costs to the debt, which essentially is borrowing the same money twice.
Link?
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.
