http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/business/economy/11tax.html?_r=1&src=busln
After analyzing tax policies they conclude, tax cutting won't fix economy or reduce unemployment.
They gave high marks to an Obama proposal.. to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of invest costs
But they went further and said that reducing payroll taxes and payments to Social Security and unemployed will stimulate the economy more than anything.
The article also says that politicians are reluctant advocate further stimulus, so neither party has guts. They are both going to stick to old, misguided rhetoric, than really try to fix something.
At least the politicians will have jobs I guess..
TurtleDude said:jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster
TurtleDude I agree that "jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster". But who actually drives the economy? Is it that top 1%er in income, or is it the other 99% of us who actually build stuff and design stuff and directly start businesses and directly manage businesses? Is it possible that the top 1% contribute more than the other 99%?jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster
the only way to fix the economy is to make those who continue to vote for more and more socialist spending to take a beating in their income by doing that
as long as the majority of voters who want more government expect the top 2% to continue to fund their entitlement wet dreams these voters will never stop voting for socialist politicians
raising taxes on the wealthy won't end the deficits because that scheme will do nothing to cut government spending and actually encourages more government spending
The office gave higher marks to the proposal, now embraced by President Obama, to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of their investment costs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/business/economy/11tax.html?_r=1&src=busln
After analyzing tax policies they conclude, tax cutting won't fix economy or reduce unemployment.
They gave high marks to an Obama proposal.. to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of invest costs
But they went further and said that reducing payroll taxes and payments to Social Security and unemployed will stimulate the economy more than anything.
The article also says that politicians are reluctant advocate further stimulus, so neither party has guts. They are both going to stick to old, misguided rhetoric, than really try to fix something.
At least the politicians will have jobs I guess..
Maybe the CBO has ideas different than what you think they have.The office gave higher marks to the proposal, now embraced by President Obama, to allow small businesses to write off 100 percent of their investment costs.
Neither of those options, though, would do as much to stimulate the economy as offering direct payments to the unemployed and Social Security recipients or reducing the payroll taxes of workers, the study found.
One curious omission in the Obama plan is the tax cut proposal that many, including the Congressional Budget Office, believe would do the most to spur hiring: a payroll tax holiday.
jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster
the only way to fix the economy is to make those who continue to vote for more and more socialist spending to take a beating in their income by doing that
as long as the majority of voters who want more government expect the top 2% to continue to fund their entitlement wet dreams these voters will never stop voting for socialist politicians
raising taxes on the wealthy won't end the deficits because that scheme will do nothing to cut government spending and actually encourages more government spending
If/when the GOP regains the majority, they'll just have to come up with a weak stimulus and call it something else... Maximus. The Maximus-taximus.
They'll call public works projects - Patriot Projects.
And they'll call their earmarks and pork - Empowerments to the states.
Hopefully they won't try to sell us another unfunded war.
Just shows you how brilliant Reagan was: (before election) No new taxes... (after election)...what I meant was...
TurtleDude I agree that "jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster". But who actually drives the economy? Is it that top 1%er in income, or is it the other 99% of us who actually build stuff and design stuff and directly start businesses and directly manage businesses? Is it possible that the top 1% contribute more than the other 99%?
Write the CBO. Explain their error.The funny thing is that most small busineses already have that "write off". Last time I checked the section 179 deduction allows a 100% immediate deduction for most equipment purchases up to $250k/yr - that amount exceeds what most small businesses spend each year on equipment purchases. I will rarely purchase more than a couple pieces of expensive equipment in any given year and the highest price piece of individual equipment that I have ever purchased was $65k.
TurtleDude I agree that "jacking up taxes on the people who drive the economy will be a disaster". But who actually drives the economy? Is it that top 1%er in income, or is it the other 99% of us who actually build stuff and design stuff and directly start businesses and directly manage businesses? Is it possible that the top 1% contribute more than the other 99%?
I agree with that also, to a certain degree.
But at the same time, lowering taxes on the wealthy isn't gonna fix anything. There are even some very well recognized right wing economists like Ben Stein who agree with me - but they rarely will publicly speak to that fact because they fear being belittled by the other little conservative boys and girls. I once hear Stein say something to the effect of "tax policy concerning the wealthy has little bearing on our economy" on Fox News and the camera immediately cut to another speaker who then changed the topic. Far right wingers just don't want to go there, even if they know it to be true.
Who drives the economy?
Consumers and the middle class.. If the middle class doesn't have purchasing power, then the business execs and CEOs in the top 2% won't have a reason to stay in business. A widening gap between rich and poor should be seen as a warning that market instability is soon to follow. Such a gap was noted before both major recessions in America.
Yes businesses create jobs, when the economy is growing and people are spending cash. Giving businesses tax cuts is entirely pointless if there is no demand or consumption in the economy.
Giving corporate America a tax cut in this economy makes as much sense as bailing them out, except bailing them out probably gave them more cash. Did all that extra cash in corporate hands trickle down and create jobs for Americans??
you don't seem to understand the point that it is unsustainable to continue to expect a small minority of voters to pay more and more taxes to fund out of control government spending because that scheme contains no deterrent for the majority of voters to put an end to the runaway spending
A more apt title would be
THE OBAMA/CLINTON TAX HIKES WON'T FIX THE ECONOMY BUT COULD WELL WRECK IT
there is no advantage to jacking up taxes on the wealthy and Laffer has predicted a disaster if those taxes are raised. I tend to believe him over Stein. besides there are fundamental concepts of fairness that motivate my position-its unfair to make a group that makes 22% of the income pay 40% of the income tax and the tax hikes will make that even higher
The Laffer curve doesn't support continual cutting of taxes.. The curve predicts equal amount of disaster if taxes are too high or too low. Laffer curve supports the idea that tax cuts have to stop somewhere because the government will lose revenue. Cutting taxes is only appropriate when on the right side of the curve, and raising taxes is appropriate when on the left side of the curve.
Neither of those options, though, would do as much to stimulate the economy as offering direct payments to the unemployed and Social Security recipients or reducing the payroll taxes of workers, the study found.
Read: "article contradicts world view, must engage talking point defense....head exploding, everything I think I know is wrong...help..."
The Laffer curve doesn't support continual cutting of taxes.. The curve predicts equal amount of disaster if taxes are too high or too low. Laffer curve supports the idea that tax cuts have to stop somewhere because the government will lose revenue. Cutting taxes is only appropriate when on the right side of the curve, and raising taxes is appropriate when on the left side of the curve.
SheWolf:
Save your breath.
Turtle has no clue what the Laffer curve is. Trust me, I've been through this with him already. I posted pages of examples trying to discuss some basic economic principles of Gov-biz partnership etc. He only knows that 40% of tax revenue comes from the wealthiest 2% and that's unfair in his mind...
'redistribution of wealth'...'evil estate tax'... He's a broken record of talk radio Obama=Robin Hood nonsense.
your arrogance is getting annoying. I would be happy to compare education and my CV with you any day of the week but you apparently are unable to even tell us your profession. Not only do I know what the laffer curve is, I know the man in question given his nephew was one of my better friends at Yale and due to that I was able to have dinner with the economist at least twice when he spoke to the yale politican union when I was an officer of that organization. You not only are wrong you lie about what I have said-the top ONE (read ONE NOT TWO) percent pay forty percent of the income tax.
your posts are that of an envious whiner
Yale...:lamo:lamo
yours are of a phony, talk radio fan trying to pretend he knows something...
Prove it. Write an actual post that doesn't include the partisan nonsense we've all heard repeated on Rush, Hannity, etc. Write something that actually addresses a specific point. Your answers are just broken record, Hannity copy/pastes. You repeat them like they mean something. They don't.
Give us an original analysis of the OP.
Prove you're as educated as you say.
Right now your little strings of hyper-partisan talking points don't prove crap!
ten grand little man-put up or shut up
you sound like you received alot of thin envelopes from college admission offices
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?