Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-02-2011, 07:24 AM
 
6,484 posts, read 6,614,378 times
Reputation: 1275

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDirector View Post
No No No taxes are socialism! Why do you like Hitler and hate America?
We didn't get into this mess because we failed to impose enough taxes. Skippy's last budget proposal was to borrow 40% of the money needed. How is that reasonable?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-02-2011, 07:27 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,766,243 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
We didn't get into this mess because we failed to impose enough taxes. Skippy's last budget proposal was to borrow 40% of the money needed. How is that reasonable?
Taxes are the lowest they have been since the 1960's. The US taxes the least out of any developed nation. If we cut all discretionary spending, that still wouldn't eliminate the deficit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,894,702 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
The US taxes the least out of any developed nation.
Wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 08:08 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,766,243 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
Wrong.
Of course they are. Our rich citizens are taxed the least among developed nations and corporations are gaming the system to pay little to no taxes. The US has an outdated and inefficient tax code.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,806,382 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
We didn't get into this mess because we failed to impose enough taxes. Skippy's last budget proposal was to borrow 40% of the money needed. How is that reasonable?
Data first, 2010 dollars:
Federal Tax Receipts, 2000: $2.565 Trillion, GDP: $12.5 Trillion
Federal Tax Receipts, 2010: $2.163 Trillion, GDP: $14.5 Trillion

The economy grows by 16% but tax revenue drops by 16%. Would you mind explaining why tax receipts in 2010 was $400 Billion LESS than it was in 2000?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,941,962 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Data first, 2010 dollars:
Federal Tax Receipts, 2000: $2.565 Trillion, GDP: $12.5 Trillion
Federal Tax Receipts, 2010: $2.163 Trillion, GDP: $14.5 Trillion

The economy grows by 16% but tax revenue drops by 16%. Would you mind explaining why tax receipts in 2010 was $400 Billion LESS than it was in 2000?
Because in 2000, we were paying those Clinton tax-rates. It's also because the Republicans insisted that 40% of the stimulus package had to be tax-cuts -- then they complain about the deficit.

Bottom line: You can't keep cutting taxes and then whine that the government runs deficits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 09:19 AM
 
2,083 posts, read 1,620,018 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Data first, 2010 dollars:
Federal Tax Receipts, 2000: $2.565 Trillion, GDP: $12.5 Trillion
Federal Tax Receipts, 2010: $2.163 Trillion, GDP: $14.5 Trillion

The economy grows by 16% but tax revenue drops by 16%. Would you mind explaining why tax receipts in 2010 was $400 Billion LESS than it was in 2000?
It's mostly the tax cuts, but another big factor is unemployment which was 4.0 in 2000 and 9.6 in 2010.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,894,702 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
Of course they are. Our rich citizens are taxed the least among developed nations and corporations are gaming the system to pay little to no taxes. The US has an outdated and inefficient tax code.
That's not what you said. You said US taxes are the least of the developed nations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2011, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,941,962 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vejadu View Post
It's mostly the tax cuts, but another big factor is unemployment which was 4.0 in 2000 and 9.6 in 2010.
But GDP was still higher in 2010 than 2001 but the tax receipts were lower. In other words, if the same tax as p% was applied, tax receipts would be much higher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:22 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top