Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Bush Should End This Tax Cut Myth


Fred Jones

Recommended Posts

In public opinion polls, the voters say they'll pick raising taxes.

But anybody who actually votes for it better have his retirement plan paid up.

Agree!!!!

Look I do not think there is anything wrong with the tax cuts and personally wish they were permanent. We were paying to much to begin with and hopefully people have taken advantage of this extra money and invested it. The taxcuts did not just help the rich, it helped the middle class a lot.

I agree I wish the government would stop spending but lets be honest here we have always had a debt and last I checked the US has not shut down, or would it. The other countries would not let it happen since it would create a global depression and no one could survive that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree I wish the government would stop spending but lets be honest here we have always had a debt and last I checked the US has not shut down, or would it. The other countries would not let it happen since it would create a global depression and no one could survive that.

Oh, it definitely could happen (see Argentina). However, I believe the political class will ultimately raise taxes.

Curious, Booma

What would you cut?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, it definitely could happen (see Argentina). However, I believe the political class will ultimately raise taxes.

Curious, Booma

What would you cut?

Lucky Argentina is not on the same level as the US, many countries depend on us and vise versa.

The first thing I would cut is all the pork projects. The major problem with the government is the inablity to forecast trends and areas of concern and acting on it. The key areas of concern right now are finding alternatives to fuel (the higher the gas prices the worse the econonmy can get), the key there is ethanal and cars that can handle both types of fuel. Many would be surprised how many are already on the market.

Put money into the war and defense and of course Katrina relief, ever other major program would need to take a large cut for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few points:

1. The most dishonest aspect of the Democrats argument, and the point that is hardest for Bush or anyone cutting top individual tax rates to get through to the public, is that many forms of small business (which provide the majority of new job creation) pay their taxes at the individual income tax rate.

Maybe all forms of business should be separated out in the tax code from personal income so that they could be taxed at a different rate (although that's very hard to do), but as it is now, if you want to cut taxes in a way that will stimualte economic growth and create jobs, you've GOT to cut the top marginal income tax rate.

2. The fact that Congress has failed to cut spending in the wake of tax cuts has nothing to do with economics. It is simply a failure of political will. Reagan's principle is not an economic "theory", it's a political argument. The fact that it hasn't been implemented is no proof that it's impossible.

3. In direct, total contradiction to what is stated in the article, the idea that cutting taxes actually leads in fairly short order to increased federal tax revenue is nearly a proven fact at this point. It happened in the 80s, and it has happened again in the wake of Bush's cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lucky Argentina is not on the same level as the US, many countries depend on us and vise versa.

The first thing I would cut is all the pork projects. The major problem with the government is the inablity to forecast trends and areas of concern and acting on it. The key areas of concern right now are finding alternatives to fuel (the higher the gas prices the worse the econonmy can get), the key there is ethanal and cars that can handle both types of fuel. Many would be surprised how many are already on the market.

Put money into the war and defense and of course Katrina relief, ever other major program would need to take a large cut for now.

To get this country back in financial shape, cutting pork isn't going to get it done. Entitlement spending has to be cut and/or military spending (o% chance in a post 9/11 world). Finding alternatives to oil is going to be a massive undertaking, funding galore. The War on terrorism isn't cheap. In the end you support more spending, not less.

It's depressing being a libertarian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get this country back in financial shape, cutting pork isn't going to get it done. Entitlement spending has to be cut and/or military spending (o% chance in a post 9/11 world). Finding alternatives to oil is going to be a massive undertaking, funding galore. The War on terrorism isn't cheap. In the end you support more spending, not less.

It's depressing being a libertarian.

Eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, and completely change SSI. You get close to 35 percent of our entitlement spending right there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. Why in hell would we actually want to follow the Constitution when it comes to Federal spending practices?

(Admiring the reasoning that says that Social Security is unconstitutional, (because the words "promote the general welfare" don't include "welfare"), but kidnapping and torturing people, making american citizens disapear, and searching of american citizens without warrants are all implied in the words "Commander in Chief".)

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Admiring the reasoning that says that Social Security is unconstitutional, (because the words "promote the general welfare" don't include "welfare").

No. The words "general welfare" don't include services to INDIVIDUALS that are not provided to EVERY American Citizen and/or that are not for the OVERALL GOOD of the country. If the government cut every individual in the country a monthly welfare check that would at least border on being Constitutional. As soon as there are provisions on who gets the checks, it becomes unConstuitutional. You're just putting the emphasis on the wrong word in the phrase "general welfare." Don't worry about it too much though, nearly every delusional Liberal (sorry for the redundancy) does the same thing, so you're in good company.

but kidnapping and torturing people, making american citizens disapear, and searching of american citizens without warrants are all implied in the words "Commander in Chief".

I'm not sure where you've come up with the idea that I agree with the CIC on those things. While I will agree that some of them can and should be done, the reasonings have nothing to do with the POTUS or the fact that he's the CIC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tough decisions have to be made. Local and state governments do it. At least here in Northern Virginia and the State have balanced budgets. I am just tired of the buck getting passed to future generations. The current administration is just as bad, if not worse, than the Democrats they spent years criticizing for their lack of spending controls. I would like to see taxes increased enough that people start to complain. Bring the issue out in front and make tough decisions on spending. Unfortunately, that will not happen any time soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The words "general welfare" don't include services to INDIVIDUALS that are not provided to EVERY American Citizen and/or that are not for the OVERALL GOOD of the country.

I get your drift, but have there been any laws enacted which were believed , by those who enacted them, to be to the overall detriment of the country?

Even when the services are not distributed evenly, the intent (if not the effect) is to achieve the greater good, I'd think - even the "evil liberals" should get credit for meaning well, and subversives are either a minority or well-camouflaged. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get your drift, but have there been any laws enacted which were believed, by those who enacted them, to be to the overall detriment of the country?

I do believe that there have been laws and policies enacted by legislators and chief executives over the years that they knew were contrary to the Constitution. Starting with Mr. Lincoln and moving forward over the last 140+ years.

Even when the services are not distributed evenly, the intent (if not the effect) is to achieve the greater good, I'd think - even the "evil liberals" should get credit for meaning well, and subversives are either a minority or well-camouflaged. :)

"The road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions."

Even the best intended law, if contrary to the Constitution, is unacceptable in my mind. I may have the best intent in mind, but if in carrying out my plan of action I violate the law, I can and should be arrested, charged, convicted and punished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...