Senate Republicans vote 40-0 against re-establishing PAYGO

[Slartibartfast]

U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote

Lets see, democrats try to establish a debt reduction commission and republicans vote against it and now this. :doh

 

[Grim17]

The main reason they oppose "Paygo", is because the current rules would hinder any attempt at tax relief for the American people, should it ever be considered. The republicans wanted the rules altered to allow for this, but as usual, the democrats weren't interested in compromise.

.

 

[liblady]

The main reason they oppose "Paygo", is because the current rules would hinder any attempt at tax relief for the American people, should it ever be considered. The republicans wanted the rules altered to allow for this, but as usual, the democrats weren't interested in compromise.

.

what a load of crap.

 

[Conservative]

U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote

Lets see, democrats try to establish a debt reduction commission and republicans vote against it and now this. :doh

So the Republicans couldn't stop this plan and liberals get upset over it? 40 votes doesn't stop this SYMBOLIC attempt to sway public opinion of those who really haven't a clue how our govt. works.

You don't need a commission to find wayt so cut spending. Congress simply needs to do its job.

 

[jamesrage]

I support paygo assuming cuts are being made so that it doesn't screw the tax payers. Paygo doesn't mean **** if my taxes are going to jump up to pay for what ever nonsense they have going on right now. It should be a pay as you go system(excluding emergencies/war).

 

[Slartibartfast]

So the Republicans couldn't stop this plan and liberals get upset over it? 40 votes doesn't stop this SYMBOLIC attempt to sway public opinion of those who really haven't a clue how our govt. works.

You don't need a commission to find wayt so cut spending. Congress simply needs to do its job.

Ok, so they are only symbolically against some sort of concrete action to get the deficit back under control?

 

[Conservative]

I support paygo assuming cuts are being made so that it doesn't screw the tax payers. Paygo doesn't mean **** if my taxes are going to jump up to pay for what ever nonsense they have going on right now. It should be a pay as you go system(excluding emergencies/war).

I agree and that is the point. Everytime tax rate cuts happened govt. revenue grew but liberals use the arithmetic approach to the budget.

If someone makes a 1000 and the tax rate is 15% then 150 is paid in taxes. Raising the rate to 20% raises the tax to 200. the problem is when you raise the tax rate you change the behavior of that person making 1000. Instead of paying the extra 50 in taxes he will move out of the state or cut his production so that he continues to pay 150. There is no incentive to increase production.

 

[Conservative]

Ok, so they are only symbolically against some sort of concrete action to get the deficit back under control?

Why does this Congress that is paid to do this job need a commission to tell them what to cut? If that is the case why do we need a full time Congress, just create a commission to make the laws?

 

[Slartibartfast]

Why does this Congress that is paid to do this job need a commission to tell them what to cut? If that is the case why do we need a full time Congress, just create a commission to make the laws?

That's a good question. But you know as well as I do that congress not doing its job and making hard choices is what got us into this mess in the first place, so it stands to reason they would need to do something different to try and fix it.

 

[Conservative]

That's a good question. But you know as well as I do that congress not doing its job and making hard choices is what got us into this mess in the first place, so it stands to reason they would need to do something different to try and fix it.

Problem is that doesn't fix anything as any recommendation has to be approved by that same Congress which continues to pass the buck. All this does is give the perception that the Congress cares. If they truly cared we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. Their number one job seems to be to get re-elected and to do that they create dependence.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Problem is that doesn't fix anything as any recommendation has to be approved by that same Congress which continues to pass the buck. All this does is give the perception that the Congress cares. If they truly cared we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. Their number one job seems to be to get re-elected and to do that they create dependence.

So you would prefer to do nothing and let the problem get worse than? If nothing different is tried, I don't see how we will ever get different results.

 

[Kushinator]

I agree and that is the point. Everytime tax rate cuts happened govt. revenue grew but liberals use the arithmetic approach to the budget.

Forget the labels. Do deficits matter?

If someone makes a 1000 and the tax rate is 15% then 150 is paid in taxes. Raising the rate to 20% raises the tax to 200. the problem is when you raise the tax rate you change the behavior of that person making 1000. Instead of paying the extra 50 in taxes he will move out of the state or cut his production so that he continues to pay 150. There is no incentive to increase production.

You act as though 150 is some important number to a person. Reality dictates something else entirely. A tax increase is usually passed on to the consumers.

 

[Conservative]

So you would prefer to do nothing and let the problem get worse than? If nothing different is tried, I don't see how we will ever get different results.

The Republican cannot stop the Democrats from creating this commission so the title of this blog is accurate but misleading. Tell me how creating a commission solves the problem?

President Obama proposed a spending freeze NEXT year, not this year when discretionary spending went up 24% so the freeze next year is on an inflated budget. How does that help solve the problem?

 

[Kushinator]

Another point:

Without a serious consideration of tax increases, the ever increasing deficit will have tumultuous effects on the economy. During a deflationary recession, cutting spending and/or lowering taxes will induce further decay on prices.

 

[Conservative]

Forget the labels. Do deficits matter?



You act as though 150 is some important number to a person. Reality dictates something else entirely. A tax increase is usually passed on to the consumers.

Tax increases are always passed on to consumers who have less money to spend with tax increases. The example given was just that an example. Anytime you raise taxes on individuals or businesses you create less demand and higher prices thus less revenue.

 

[Kushinator]

Tax increases are always passed on to consumers who have less money to spend with tax increases. The example given was just that an example. Anytime you raise taxes on individuals or businesses you create less demand and higher prices thus less revenue.

I think you are a bit confused. You create the situation for marginal revenue to decrease, not total revenue. Holding supply side so dear to the heart usually allows for this illusion to surface. Reason be, you are assuming high to perfect elasticity. This is a common error.

 

[Conservative]

Another point:

Without a serious consideration of tax increases, the ever increasing deficit will have tumultuous effects on the economy. During a deflationary recession, cutting spending and/or lowering taxes will induce further decay on prices.

that is theory and hardly fact, cutting taxes gives the American people more of their money and takes away some of the power of the Govt. It allows people to pay off more of their debt or to save more money and both make them less dependent on the govt.

 

[misterman]

The main reason they oppose "Paygo", is because the current rules would hinder any attempt at tax relief for the American people, should it ever be considered.

No it wouldn't. Just reduce spending to go with the tax cuts. That's what Republicans want, don't they?

Or maybe they want to have tax cuts without spending cuts? Naaaah. Not them.

 

[misterman]

that is theory and hardly fact,

It's funny when you actually have the nerve to say those words.

 

[Conservative]

I think you are a bit confused. You create the situation for marginal revenue to decrease, not total revenue. Holding supply side so dear to the heart usually allows for this illusion to surface. Reason be, you are assuming high to perfect elasticity. This is a common error.

Only three times in modern history have tax rate cuts occurred, JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush. In all three govt. revenue grew, income tax and corporate taxes. There is no illusion, that is fact. The U.S. Treasury shows those results.

 

[misterman]

Tax increases are always passed on to consumers who have less money to spend with tax increases. The example given was just that an example. Anytime you raise taxes on individuals or businesses you create less demand and higher prices thus less revenue.

That's right, ladies and gentlemen - a tax increase will always result in less revenue. And a tax cut will lead to more. So let's simply cut taxes to zero and have unlimited revenue!!!!

 

[Slartibartfast]

The Republican cannot stop the Democrats from creating this commission so the title of this blog is accurate but misleading. Tell me how creating a commission solves the problem?

President Obama proposed a spending freeze NEXT year, not this year when discretionary spending went up 24% so the freeze next year is on an inflated budget. How does that help solve the problem?

Both are steps towards solving a problem. It may or may not help, but it is better than doing nothing or simply complaining, which is what you seem to be doing.

 

[Kushinator]

that is theory and hardly fact, cutting taxes gives the American people more of their money and takes away some of the power of the Govt.

Wrong.... And i can prove it mathematically.

It allows people to pay off more of their debt or to save more money and both make them less dependent on the govt.

Long run analysis. This assumes that the economy (right now) is not in a state of disequalibria.

 

[Conservative]

Both are steps towards solving a problem. It may or may not help, but it is better than doing nothing or simply complaining, which is what you seem to be doing.

How about forcing Congress to do its job? Vote the bastards out of office, all of them? We don't need a commission, we need a Congress with guts.

 

[misterman]

Wrong.... And i can prove it mathematically.

Math? No fair!