bmacleod
Posts: 2533
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:32 pm

With the U.S. federal deficit around $500B, it seems Bush's successor will have no options but to substantially raise income taxes to reign in the deficit. Bush has said he'll refrain from tax increases as long as he's president.

The GOP says the deficit can be cut without tax increase, Dems say otherwise. Who's right?
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
LSPA
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:34 pm

no doubt in my mind. he HAS too if America wants to stay competitive. Americans live about 5 times over their heads!!!

It imports ALOT more than it exports so the balance of payment is WAAAY in the negative numbers.
~reach for the sky!
 
darrenthe747
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:40 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:45 pm

First of all the deficit is not $500B it's more like $6 trillion. I fail to see how the defecit can be dropped without raising taxes. It's $6 trillion for Christ sake. Obviously nobody will get elected (or re-elected) to office if they state publicly they will raise your taxes. It's sad though, our country can't sustain itself forever with this kind of radical spending. Politicians don't have the balls nowadays to do what needs to be done to make things right. If you are going to take the country to war you must raise the taxes to finance it. I used to like the Republican platform because they were all about small government and less spending. Now it has been hijacked by the Christian Coalition and they spend more than a communist dictator. Libertarian is the way to go now if you believe in small government and less spending.
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:46 pm

And the Republicans will have a ready made grievance that's a perennial favorite in the hustings. I can hear Limbaugh already: "Tax and spend liberal homos marrying each other while our boys are dying in Iraq!"

Devilishly clever, if you get my drift. You make someone else clean up your mess and then you get to blame them for what it takes to clean up the mess.

I feel sorry for the poor mother fuckers who win the next election-it's going to be awful.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:23 pm

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 2):
I fail to see how the defecit can be dropped without raising taxes.

I guess noone is concerned with the actual facts,

Since the Bush tax cuts went into effect, IRS revenue has INCREASED 13%.

Raising taxes would have the effect of lowering revenue, which is all that really matters.

Quoting LSPA (Reply 1):
It imports ALOT more than it exports so the balance of payment is WAAAY in the negative numbers.

With an 11 trillion + dollar economy how could we possibly export more than we import? Other than Japan, no country on Earth is even close to half our economies size.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:32 pm

The problem is not the lowering of taxes--that is good. The problem is the concommittant complete lack of spending restraint. Spending needs to be cut, not the tax cuts. If anything taxes should be lowered, particularly corporate taxation since we are second highest behind Japan apparently.

Quoting LSPA (Reply 1):
he HAS too if America wants to stay competitive.

Only if America wants to stay competitive with the EU, ie, not competitive. Silly
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:52 pm

One thing that has always made me mad about the Republicans, especially those opposed to raising taxes, is their "support" for the on going war.

Who are the biggest cheerleaders for the GWOT, OIF and OEF? - The Republicans.

What is the chief argument of the Republicans on why the deficit is as high as it is? - We are fighting a global war and it is costing a lot of money.

What is the Republicans favorite catch phrase? - Support the troops.

I find it ironic that they search out every opportunity to tell us how much they support the troops... but as soon as you ask them to PAY for the war out of their pockets... oh! Wait one minute! Now you're going to far! We don't want to support the war effort with our own money! We just want to support the war effort with catch phrases!

If they truly supported the war, they would be willing to make personal sacrifices. They would place the outcome of the war over the bottom line in their bank accounts.

Hypocrites.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:54 pm

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 2):
First of all the deficit is not $500B it's more like $6 trillion.

No, the deficit for this year is projected by the CBO be $337B.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...26/ap/business/mainD8FCF6SG0.shtml

Secondly the 6 trillion figure is the over all debt that this country owes. That will never go down as long as we have unrestrained entitlement spending.

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 2):
fail to see how the deficit can be dropped without raising taxes.

Try this visual.....



So raising taxes, as our former leader did, is not such a good thing after all.

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 2):
Obviously nobody will get elected (or re-elected) to office if they state publicly they will raise your taxes.

Thank God, and Walter Mondale, for that.

Quoting Darrenthe747 (Reply 2):
It's sad though, our country can't sustain itself forever with this kind of radical spending.

That is correct. People have to learn to take responsibility for themselves which is why the libertarian party will never take off in our life time.

Quoting LSPA (Reply 1):
It imports ALOT more than it exports so the balance of payment is WAAAY in the negative numbers.

Explain this to me. I spend money at the grocery store, locally owned, the doctors office, the dentist, and the barbers. I've just spent a lot of money. Now if all those people decide to fly another airline than I work for, how do I get my money back? Am I not in a trade deficit position with them all the time? And yet I seem to survive year to year.

And lets not forget, it is Congress which holds the purse strings. The President is limited to accepting or rejecting their budget and if he rejects it the Congress can still come back and override his veto. They also control the level of taxation as well.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:55 pm

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 4):
Since the Bush tax cuts went into effect, IRS revenue has INCREASED 13%.

That's less than inflation.


Congress is obviously going to have to cut spending. Period.
 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:04 am

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 7):

And your very impressive visual is nominal data,not real (ie after taking inflation into account)data.
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:15 am

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 8):
That's less than inflation.

WHAT? Are you serious? Even if that matched inflation - that figure would be extremely alarming! We havien't seen that level of inflation since the late 1970s.

No, current inflation levels, while edging higher, are still quite low. Check your numbers again.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 8):
Congress is obviously going to have to cut spending. Period.

   Agreed. And while it is more complicated than just simply cutting spending... it's a good start.

Quoting Donder10 (Reply 9):
And your very impressive visual is nominal data,not real (ie after taking inflation into account)data.

See above comment to MD90. The word "inflation" is misunderstood by most. Gilligan's chart spans a very short time period, and DOES show a dramatic increase. Inflation never came close to matching this rise. Charting inflation against another set of numbers usually does not work well with short time periods... but works better when you chart long periods of time.

Quoting LSPA (Reply 1):
no doubt in my mind. he HAS too if America wants to stay competitive. Americans live about 5 times over their heads!!!

It imports ALOT more than it exports so the balance of payment is WAAAY in the negative numbers.

Be careful here. The knee jerk reaction of "Trade deficits = bad" has been, for the most part, proven wrong by leading economists.

If you look back over the past 50yrs in the American economy, you find that periods of widening trade deficits accompany a boom in the national economy. During periods where the trade deficit shrank (or got "better") the national economy DECLINED.

Why? Well it's complicated, but basically without a trade deficit, Americans could not import the capital we need to finance the growth needed in the national economy.

A trade deficit, is not necessarily a bad thing. However, a SPENDING deficit is very much a bad thing. But the two should not be confused.

-UH60

[Edited 2006-07-06 17:16:26]
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:28 am

Quoting Donder10 (Reply 9):
And your very impressive visual is nominal data,not real (ie after taking inflation into account)data.

Ok, split the graph in two at May 2003. Prior to that date in which direction were tax reciepts headed? After May 2003? What happened to make the turnaround?

By the way, the growth is far out pacing inflation.


http://stats.bls.gov/eag/eag.us.htm
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 am

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 8):
That's less than inflation.

You are not serious are you? Inflation has not been double digit since about 1980. Inflation hovers around 3-4% max.

In the last 10 years it has been no higher than 4.69&
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:55 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 4):
I guess noone is concerned with the actual facts,

Since the Bush tax cuts went into effect, IRS revenue has INCREASED 13%.

Raising taxes would have the effect of lowering revenue, which is all that really matters.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 5):
The problem is not the lowering of taxes--that is good. The problem is the concommittant complete lack of spending restraint. Spending needs to be cut, not the tax cuts. If anything taxes should be lowered, particularly corporate taxation since we are second highest behind Japan apparently.

 checkmark  to both of the above.

Back in the 90's (I'm not sure of the exact date), during a fiscal crisis, the democratic governor and legislature in California raised taxes, especially on the higher income brackets. The result? A net decrease in income tax revenue.

You'd think people would learn.....
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:58 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 12):
You are not serious are you? Inflation has not been double digit since about 1980. Inflation hovers around 3-4% max.

In the last 10 years it has been no higher than 4.69&

4% inflation in one year means:
8.2% over 2 years
12.5% over 3 years
17.0% over 4 years...
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:00 am

How about we cut spending!!!
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:03 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 13):
You'd think people would learn.....

I think the basic problem is the same at the household level as it is at the federal level, you get a raise, you tend to think abut what more you can buy instead of paying off debt.

The bottom line is fiscal restraint, raising taxes is not the answer.

How bout a Presidential line item veto? Cutting pork takes more than a knife, it takes a chainsaw.

Also, why do millionaires collect social security? Is means testing really all that bad?
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:05 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 16):
Also, why do millionaires collect social security? Is means testing really all that bad?

ALL federal entitlement programs ought to be means tested. That would, of course, require a backbone in Congress, which is, apparently, an unknown item on Capitol Hill.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:06 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 14):
4% inflation in one year means:
8.2% over 2 years
12.5% over 3 years
17.0% over 4 years...

Well if you live with a finite pie I guess your world looks that way. In the real world inflation is not static. It may be higher one year or lower the next. 1.8 to 2.2 is a 13% increase in two years, still way ahead of your finite version of inflation.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 16):
How bout a Presidential line item veto?

Unfortunately it has already been ruled unconstitutional by the SC.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:15 am

Quoting Bmacleod (Thread starter):
With the U.S. federal deficit around $500B, it seems Bush's successor will have no options but to substantially raise income taxes to reign in the deficit. Bush has said he'll refrain from tax increases as long as he's president.

The GOP says the deficit can be cut without tax increase, Dems say otherwise. Who's right?

If it is a democrat, he will raise income taxes. If it is a Republican he will privatize army, navy and air-force.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:25 am

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 18):
Well if you live with a finite pie I guess your world looks that way. In the real world inflation is not static. It may be higher one year or lower the next. 1.8 to 2.2 is a 13% increase in two years, still way ahead of your finite version of inflation.

Percentages always requre proper identification of their basis value. I was merely reminding everyone that inflation accumulates by multiplication through multiple years.
 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:25 am

Ok, split the graph in two at May 2003. Prior to that date in which direction were tax reciepts headed? After May 2003? What happened to make the turnaround?


They increased largely because of a cyclical improvement in the economy's state.

Also,interestingly,currently (and possibly back then)profits are making up a much larger % of GDP than usual and this has led to an increase in revenue for the gvt from corporate profits.Don't get me wrong, the tax cuts implemented by Bush were needed at the time (around 2001 I think?)and helped to steady the ship but using that chart as proof of lowering taxes leading to increased government revenue is flawed.
 
slider
Posts: 6812
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:32 am

Quoting Bmacleod (Thread starter):
it seems Bush's successor will have no options but to substantially raise income taxes to reign in the deficit.

 redflag   redflag   redflag   redflag 

NO!!!

Read my lips: CUT FEDERAL SPENDING!!!!!!

Ole Jorge has spent like a drunken sailor...that can't continue. There's no difference between left and right in this regard. True conservative ideals have been betrayed by Bush 43. Just like his old man in raising taxes.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:26 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 17):
ALL federal entitlement programs ought to be means tested.

Have to disagree with you there. There should not be any federal entitlement programs. Why should anyone be entitled to any of my money. Let's get back to what our republic was meant to be - a limited federal government.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:56 am

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
No, current inflation levels, while edging higher, are still quite low. Check your numbers again.

And the official, government-reported inflation rate conveniently leaves out "volatile" energy and food prices. Nope, we surely don't need those to survive, or that "volatile" usuall doesn't mean up and up and up.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 14):
12.5% over 3 years

Indeed.

The American dollar has lost 95% of its value since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. That ought to tell people something right there.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12423
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:42 am

During President Clinton's administration: Raised some income taxes, mainly on the rich early in his 1st term. We had a sustained excellent economy, in part due to the tech boom, the deficit went down, inflation was low or moderate (except for housing in some markets) the annual budgets had a net SURPLUS of many billions of $'s, we actually REDUCED the long-term deficit and interest rates for home mortgages and all other borrowing dropped to historic lows. Employment levels were excellent. Early on, the minimum wage was raised.

Since Bush took office: Yes, the economy dipped in late 2000, as the tech boom collasped, the events of 9/11 and so on, so to some extent he had bad timing. Still, he made massive tax cuts, the Republicans have put us into a very expensive war without paying for it now, they spent tax revenues on their pet projects, trying to catch up from the many years of Democratic dominance, interest rates have gone up and states have had to raise their taxes due to Federal mandates yet without income from the Feds to support them; a sharp drop in the average middle class income, the ruin of major companies (Enron), pension plans destroyed with retirees lives ruined due to the losses of investments and income and so on.

To me his successor, especially a Democrat, will have to raise income taxes on the upper income people, but to sell it will cut middle-class taxes and raise the limits when the Alternative Minimum (income) Tax is required to be calculated. Road fuel (gasoline and diesel fuels) will have to have a major rise in tax per gallon to pay for the military the in large part exists due to the need to protect imported oil sources and transportation. Some return of the rates for Estate taxes will have to happen as well.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:59 am

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
We had a sustained excellent economy, in part due to the tech boom

The dust now having settled, it's well documented that the excellent economy was based on false accounting. Enron, Worldcom, HealthSouth, etc..... all were cooking their books.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
Yes, the economy dipped in late 2000, as the tech boom collasped

If I remember correctly, just two years ago the democrats were calling this the worst economy in 50 years...now it's just a dip?

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
interest rates have gone up

Interest rates today are still below where they were during most of the Clinton Presidency. Interest rates go up as the fed tries to cool an economy not because the economy is doing poorly.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
the ruin of major companies (Enron), pension plans destroyed with retirees lives ruined due to the losses of investments and income and so on.

Perhaps if the previous administration spent more time actually regulating what these major companies were doing, instead of selling time shares in White House bedrooms, many of these companies wouldn't have been ruined. If I remember correctly many of the companies now having trouble the airlines, the auto manufacturers all had very strong union components to their business operations that received tremendous backing from the previous administration.

This country will never fix its budget deficit by increasing taxes for that only supresses growth. We need to get spending under control. And the blame for allowing spending to get where it is rests SOLELY with the GOP Congress.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 7:33 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 16):
Also, why do millionaires collect social security?

Because they've been paying into it for as long as they've been paying an income tax, just like you and me.  Wink

(And no, they shouldn't be forced to pay into social security if they're just going to be "means tested" out of its benefits.)
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:51 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 23):
Have to disagree with you there. There should not be any federal entitlement programs. Why should anyone be entitled to any of my money. Let's get back to what our republic was meant to be - a limited federal government.

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

Quoting Donder10 (Reply 21):
but using that chart as proof of lowering taxes leading to increased government revenue is flawed.

Then what happened to tax reciepts was also flawed in the Reagan administration.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 25):
During President Clinton's administration: Raised some income taxes

??????? It was the largesttax raise ever, on everyone except the poorest of the poor. Who do you think you're trying to kid? From Wikipedia:

In August of 1993, Clinton had signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 which passed Congress without a single Republican vote. It significantly raised taxes on the top 2% of taxpayers, without providing middle class tax cuts as he promised during the campaign.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Fri Jul 07, 2006 11:32 pm

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 27):
Because they've been paying into it for as long as they've been paying an income tax, just like you and me.

(And no, they shouldn't be forced to pay into social security if they're just going to be "means tested" out of its benefits.)

Wrong, NOT like you and me because we pay SS for every single dollar we earn, there is a cutoff for high income earners and after that point they pay ZERO. My dad sometimes stops having to pay in MARCH!.

So, if they are exempt from paying after a certian point, they should be exempt from recieveing after a certian point too. My Dad agrees BTW.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 18):
Unfortunately it has already been ruled unconstitutional by the SC.

IIRC it is alive again in another form.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:00 am

They'll have no choice, if they want to be economically sound. Bush has spend us into oblivion, and unless we want to make the next 20 generations pay for his mess, taxes will have to be raised. Roll back the tax cuts for the uber-wealthy, who won't miss one damn dime of it anyways, and a small tax increase on everyone else.

Yes, I hear the conservatives say "you can't raise taxes". Why not? Most fiscal conservatives don't believe-or used to not believe-in deficit spending, and have, for years, called the Dems the "tax and spend liberals". Well, they can't cry now with their "taxcut and spend" President in the White House.

We haven't had a fiscally responsible Republican since Nixon. Reagan wasn't; Bush 41 wasn't, and this Bush isn't. The lie of the GOP being the fiscally sound party died over 20 years ago.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 28):
??????? It was the largesttax raise ever, on everyone except the poorest of the poor. Who do you think you're trying to kid? From Wikipedia:

Yes, my friend, and it was the most fiscally sound economy we've had in ages. We had a SURPLUS, and were not spending more than we could take in.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:57 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
We haven't had a fiscally responsible Republican since Nixon. Reagan wasn't; Bush 41 wasn't, and this Bush isn't. The lie of the GOP being the fiscally sound party died over 20 years ago.

While I sort of agree with your assessment, it is Congress that holds the purse strings. The President cant spend money, only Congress can. They have the power to approve or reject the Presidents budget, and they have the power to spend beyond that budget.

A President must be realistic, and his principals are often undermined by the realities of DC politics.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
Yes, my friend, and it was the most fiscally sound economy we've had in ages. We had a SURPLUS, and were not spending more than we could take in.

It was a fake surplus for about ten minutes. They slashed needed military and other spending to produce an artificial surplus for one fiscal year and the rest were simply unrealistic ESTIMATED surpluses that were never really possible.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:28 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 29):
NOT like you and me because we pay SS for every single dollar we earn, there is a cutoff for high income earners and after that point they pay ZERO

But nevertheless, they still contribute. Hence, they should be able to reap the benefits without being "means tested" out of it.

Should they only receive an equal share based on what they put in? Absolutely. But then again, Ida May Fuller, the first recipient of a Social Security check, received almost $21,000 by the time of her death in 1975 after only contributing $44 to Social Security before her retirement in 1939!!

It's simply a corrupt system all around, and this is a prime example.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:35 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
They'll have no choice, if they want to be economically sound. Bush has spend us into oblivion, and unless we want to make the next 20 generations pay for his mess, taxes will have to be raised.

Taken from the Tip O'Neil book of quotes, of course totally untrue.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
Reagan wasn't

Hmmmm...seem to remember old Tip and George Mitchell calling Reagan's budgets DOA because they cut too much.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
Bush 41 wasn't

He raised taxes at the democrats behest and then Clinton hammered him with it.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
and this Bush isn't

That I will agree with.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
Yes, my friend, and it was the most fiscally sound economy we've had in ages.

????? See the graph above my friend. Tax receipts were on their way down as the 1993 tax increase took real hold. It takes anywhere from 4 to 6 years for any change in the tax system to really show it's true impact. What Clinton was living off of was the Reagan tax cuts modified, by the small increase in the Bush 41 administration augmented by his "peace" dividend otherwise known as gutting the military. Helping was the '96 welfare reform bill which President Clinton was forced to sign to avoid giving Senator Dole a huge piece of ammo to use against him in the upcoming election. I remember him saying at the signing that they would "fix this" in his second term, fortunately he was unable to do so. That economy was a sham with all of the above along with all the phony books being presented by different corporations.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
We had a SURPLUS, and were not spending more than we could take in.

We never had a surplus and never will as long as there is a national debt and the U.S. government continues to raid social security taxes to put them in the general fund to be replaced by IOU's
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:58 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 31):
It was a fake surplus for about ten minutes. They slashed needed military and other spending to produce an artificial surplus for one fiscal year and the rest were simply unrealistic ESTIMATED surpluses that were never really possible.

How is it "artificial"? To get a surplus you make choices what to spend on. It wasn't artificial at all. It was real, just as real as Bush's spending like a 5-year old in a toy store.

What a load of crap that is.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 31):
it is Congress that holds the purse strings.

And the president CAN use the veto, can't he? If he's for fiscal responsibility, why hasn't he used the veto ONCE on spending bills? Tell me that?

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 33):
Taken from the Tip O'Neil book of quotes, of course totally untrue.

Which part is untrue? Bush has certainly spent us into oblivion. And he's in the hole to the tune of a half a 'tril a year. How do you balance that? You can be unrealistic, my firend, and say "cut all entitlements", but that will never happen. We all know that. So how else to you start to be fiscally responsible, by cutting down, then hopefully, eliminating the huge deficit spending?

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 33):
Hmmmm...seem to remember old Tip and George Mitchell calling Reagan's budgets DOA because they cut too much.

Scary isn't it? It cut too much, but was still bloated beyond belief. Which is why, besides changing presidents, we need to toss every incumbent out of Congress, and replace them with people who's sole dream isn't just re-election. Like cutting all entitlements, it may be a nice thought, but will never happen.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:23 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
Which part is untrue?



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
and unless we want to make the next 20 generations pay for his mess, taxes will have to be raised.

If, once again, you check the graph, since tax cuts have been in place tax receipts are on their way up. Prior to that we had two tax increases and as the graph shows, tax receipts were headed down. You decide which you would rather have. The problem is we spend too much. Which brings us to...

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
How do you balance that?

You cut spending.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
You can be unrealistic, my firend, and say "cut all entitlements", but that will never happen.

You can gut them today or watch them collapse under their own weight a few years from now. Unfortunately the true FDR legacy, although one he would not have chosen, is that the people realized, like Congress has realized, in a democracy you can legally raid the treasury any time you want. That, more than any foreign power, will be our downfall.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
So how else to you start to be fiscally responsible,

Certainly not by raising taxes. You can't raise them high enough. That has been proven time and time again since Congress takes a 1 dollar tax raise and then proceeds to go out and spend 2 dollars.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
It cut too much, but was still bloated beyond belief.

Not Reagans. It was the democratic Congress that said ok Mr. President, you can have your military spending to defend us against the Soviet Union, but in turn we are going to ramp up entitlement and discretionary (read PORK) spending. That is what truly drove us in the hole in the 80's.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 30):
Yes, my friend, and it was the most fiscally sound economy we've had in ages. We had a SURPLUS, and were not spending more than we could take in

while the government portion of the late 90's economy was sound, the private sector portion was a house of cards, largely due to the lack of government oversight.....

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
How is it "artificial"? To get a surplus you make choices what to spend on. It wasn't artificial at all. It was real, just as real as Bush's spending like a 5-year old in a toy store.

Yes, for a short period we took in more than we spent. But a large part of the "taking in" was due to the illusory dot com boom, not because Clinton was a fiscal conservative.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 35):
You cut spending.

 checkmark 

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 35):
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
You can be unrealistic, my firend, and say "cut all entitlements", but that will never happen.

You can gut them today or watch them collapse under their own weight a few years from now. Unfortunately the true FDR legacy, although one he would not have chosen, is that the people realized, like Congress has realized, in a democracy you can legally raid the treasury any time you want. That, more than any foreign power, will be our downfall.

Take a look at what social security was at its inception, and take a look at it now. It was designed to ensure that older Americans didn't live in poverty, not to provide disability assistance. yet in 2006, fully 16 percent of the amount expended from the OASDI trust fund was spent on disability payment.

I'm not saying we shouldn't provide disability assistance, but it shouldn't be linked to the original concept behind Social Security - "We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age."--
President Roosevelt upon signing Social Security Act
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:23 am

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 27):
Because they've been paying into it for as long as they've been paying an income tax, just like you and me.

The income tax dates to 1913, and SS only until...1933 or 1934? There might be some still alive who've been paying income taxes longer.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 29):
Wrong, NOT like you and me because we pay SS for every single dollar we earn, there is a cutoff for high income earners and after that point they pay ZERO. My dad sometimes stops having to pay in MARCH!.

Big deal. No one gets out of SS what they paid in, not on an inflation-adjusted basis.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:57 am

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
And the president CAN use the veto, can't he? If he's for fiscal responsibility, why hasn't he used the veto ONCE on spending bills? Tell me that?

No line item veto, they can attach as much prok as they want to bills that will certainly pass, or we would get nothing but vetos.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
How is it "artificial"?

If I come up short this month but dont pay my mortgage, I have an artificial surplus, but not next month I dont.

This is how the Clinton white house did it, by delaying spending that had to happen, allowing it to snowball for a later date. Clinton was not paying the bills, so OF COURSE he had a surplus. The military got the shaft, the interstate system got the shaft, a lot of needs did not get met, but we had a freaking surplus dammit! All those things had to be paid for eventually, just not on his watch. Problem was, delaying costs even more money.

Quoting MD-90 (Reply 37):
Big deal. No one gets out of SS what they paid in, not on an inflation-adjusted basis.

That is not the point, if you are going to say that Bushes tax cuts favored the rich because it was based on a percentage evenly applied to all brackets, then you have to say SS favors the rich even more because they pay less of a percentage of thier total income.

You cant have it both ways. If they payed the same percentage they should get the same benifit, since they pay less they should get less. Pretty simple.
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
sccutler
Posts: 5578
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:53 pm

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
And the president CAN use the veto, can't he? If he's for fiscal responsibility, why hasn't he used the veto ONCE on spending bills? Tell me that?

Far be it for me to agree with Falcon, but this is my great disappointment with el Presidente Arbusto; just say no... once!

To those who contend the veto cannot be used because there's no line item veto, I say that, just because you don't have the precise weapon with which to fight the battle, does not mean you concede the war. Veto a few pork-laden bills, force the standoff. Gut up.

We can never succeed by raising taxes, inevitably the economy is dragged down, Cut spending. Cut spending.

Cut.

Spending.

Cut.

Spending.

====

Oh yeah, Texas Longhorns, National Champions.

Just thought I'd throw that in.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:46 pm

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 39):
To those who contend the veto cannot be used because there's no line item veto, I say that, just because you don't have the precise weapon with which to fight the battle, does not mean you concede the war. Veto a few pork-laden bills, force the standoff. Gut up.

 checkmark 

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 39):
We can never succeed by raising taxes, inevitably the economy is dragged down, Cut spending. Cut spending.

Cut.

Spending.

Cut.

Spending.

 checkmark  checkmark  checkmark 

This is where the Republican party has disappointed so much in recent years. They have abandoned their ideals of fiscal conservatism.

Remember that during the 90s, Republicans took charge of Congress and gained control over the deficit for a while. But in the past 5 years, they have gone nuts on the spending.

Taxes actually need to go down further. U.S. citizens living overseas have gotten shafted for the past couple of years, for example. Some departments can be drastically cut or eliminated altogether, their responsibilities handed over to the states. And since the whole world seems to want to tell the U.S. that it needs to mind its own business, the foreign aid programs should be the first to go.
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:51 am

The following article ought to gore at least two often heard liberal "truths" - that we need to increase taxes, and the rich don't pay their fair share.

Quote:
July 9, 2006
Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit
By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
WASHINGTON, July 8 — An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed sharply because of the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief.

On Tuesday, White House officials are expected to announce that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year's levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, but the increased scale is surprising even seasoned budget analysts and making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year.

Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.

The main reason is a big spike in corporate tax receipts, which have nearly tripled since 2003, as well as what appears to be a big rise in individual taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses.

On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that corporate tax receipts for the nine months ending in June hit $250 billion — nearly 26 percent higher than the same time last year — and that overall revenues were $206 billion higher than at this point in 2005.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sun Jul 09, 2006 11:21 am

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 39):
We can never succeed by raising taxes, inevitably the economy is dragged down, Cut spending. Cut spending.

Cut.

Spending.

Cut.

Spending.



Quoting Cfalk (Reply 40):
Taxes actually need to go down further.

We all know that when it comes to financial spending... I'm one of the more conservative A.netters. But honestly... it's not so simple as "cut spending." And I am surprised no one has brought this up yet:

The system is broke and needs overhauling. We can cut spending all day long, but we're never gonna trim enough fat off to balance the budget, unless we overhaul the tax code system.

Eliminate the IRS!!! The current income tax system is harmful and an anchor on economic growth. Barely any Americans understand how the system works - proven by the fact that people say, "OH! The government gave me a tax refund!!" NO! The government took too much money and only returned a small portion of what they took!!

Without totally de-railing this thread, how many people have heard about the "fair tax"?? When it first came out, it was quickly dismissed as a "fringe, far right proposal" - but it's gained amazing popularity in the pass year. The American public and economy deserve a straight forward tax system. Anyone who thinks the IRS is a great agency needs to go back and take economics 101.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
cptkrell
Posts: 3186
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Sun Jul 09, 2006 11:54 am

UH60 is, of course, correct in his analyzation of the IRS system. If anything, the IRS is a drag on the economy. Now, however, there would be a truely bloody battle campaigned from lawyers, accountants and other groups that depend on the tax system for their very exsistance, not to mention the tens of thousands of people employed by the IRS if a truely fair and simple tax system ever got very close to being implimented.

I'd love to see common sense applied to the tax code...but, it ain't gonna happen.

As my grandpappy used to say about getting along in life..."You need a good doctor, a good bartender, a good bodyshop man and a good lawyer and tax man." Regards...Jack
all best; jack
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:57 am

Quoting Cptkrell (Reply 43):
UH60 is, of course, correct in his analyzation of the IRS system. If anything, the IRS is a drag on the economy. Now, however, there would be a truely bloody battle campaigned from lawyers, accountants and other groups that depend on the tax system for their very exsistance, not to mention the tens of thousands of people employed by the IRS if a truely fair and simple tax system ever got very close to being implimented.

I'd love to see common sense applied to the tax code...but, it ain't gonna happen.

Sad but true. Too many vested interests would lose if we really reformed the tax system.

It's a good thing most Americans are law abiding citizens. My tax professor in law school was fond of reminding us that if every person who was audited by the IRS refused to negotiate and demanded their day in tax court, the system would grind to a halt. The IRS counts on voluntary compliance.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:42 am

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
Why? Well it's complicated, but basically without a trade deficit, Americans could not import the capital we need to finance the growth needed in the national economy.

A trade deficit, is not necessarily a bad thing. However, a SPENDING deficit is very much a bad thing. But the two should not be confused.

There is, however, a degree of correlation in that the domestic deficit increases overall spending, a proportion of which finds its way into the external deficit. The problem is that if the bailiffs are called in, it will be by the overseas holders of debt. To avoid that process causing them losses, they will in effect demand higher interest rates, which will be much the same as a tax increase for anyone with debt. So there will be more than one way in which the cat may get skinned.
 
slider
Posts: 6812
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:33 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 31):
While I sort of agree with your assessment, it is Congress that holds the purse strings. The President cant spend money, only Congress can. They have the power to approve or reject the Presidents budget, and they have the power to spend beyond that budget.



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 34):
And the president CAN use the veto, can't he? If he's for fiscal responsibility, why hasn't he used the veto ONCE on spending bills? Tell me that?

Falcon- The line item veto was removed, do you remember? Probably one of the most gross miscarriages of jurisprudence I can recall.

Jorge Bush has no balls to veto anything.

But Delta's point about Congress is correct--without a line item veto, it is ultimately the omnibus spending bills that a president either blanket approves or declines.

The system blows, really.
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:49 am

Some taxes will likely be raised again eventually. But maybe if our "honorable" Congressmen and women would stop adding bullshit spending projects and riders to otherwise perfectly respectable bills, enough money would be saved to where the increases would be very minimal. One of the very few times I ever agreed with Reagan was when he said there were too many worthless pork barrel amendments and riders on vitally important spending bills (defence, transportation, etc). That was around 1984 and there were 60 some odd riders. There were more than 200 on last year's defense spending bill. It is a complete farce and our leaders should be completely ashamed. Of course they will say they are ashamed as they sit on a private jet shuttling them back home while sipping on champagne provided by a major corporation, union, or their lobbying groups. Try 'em all for treason and hang 'em high!

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
aaden
Posts: 775
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:49 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 3:16 am

doesn't matter! the majority of americans lie on the tax forms. so i suspect there will just be alot more of that!
 
CMHSRQ
Posts: 822
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Will Bush's Successor Raise Taxes To Cut Deficit?

Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:34 am

How about all the people who think the government should raise taxes should have their taxes raised. While all the people who feel that paying 50% of your income to taxes is already enough and shouldn't have to pay anymore.

I know a bunch of people are going to say you don't pay 50% of your income.

really? How many taxes can I list that I pay

Federal income 15%
state income 8%
city income 2%
social security ( I won't see a cent when I retire) 10%
Medicare tax 2%
property taxes 5% of my income
sales taxes 7% of purchases
gas taxes - 50 cents a gallon

taxes on phone, gas, water, electric, cable, car registration,

and the list goes on and on.


CUT SPENDING, maybe its time for a revolution
The voice of moderation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: afcjets, PacificBeach88 and 10 guests