Sorry, GOP: Tax revenue needs to go up

[X Factor]

Agreed. Lets also look at the other side of the ledger. After all, there are only two sides to a budget.

Yeah, but can you honestly think of any government programs you'd be ok with cutting?

 

[VanceMack]

The 2011 deficit will be $1.56 Trillion. 2011 Deficit - How does Obama's 2011 projected deficit compare? - Los Angeles Times

We have to do a helluva lot more than cut some spending.

Aaaaaaamen. The tired mantra is raise taxers on the rich, make them pay their fair share. Its horse****. The rick already pay their fair share and the fair share of the middle to low income families who not only DONT pay their fair share but get back money they didnt put in AND are recieve the bulk of the government welfare spending. yeaaaaaaah...thats 'fair'...right?

There HAS to be dramatic cuts across the board. Defense, medicare, social systems. Entire programs should be eliminated such as redunandant departments like the Dept of education (every state has their own). And yes...with those cuts, the wealthy in this country are going to have to pay more to pay down the debt. I dont like it...but its a reality. However in addition to making the rich pay MORE, the poor and lower middle income who are pay virtually nothing need to start doing THEIR fair share. Lets start by killing off the EIC. A lot of the spending programs could actually take significant hits if they just paid more attention to fraud and excessive administrative costs. Lets see how chippy people are when talking about a willingness to make across the board cuts AND across the board financial contributions to pay down the debt.

 

[VanceMack]

Yeah, but can you honestly think of any government programs you'd be ok with cutting?

Silly question...of course he can...defense.

 

[apdst]

this sums up how i feel...spending cuts alone will not get the job done...taxes will have to be raised.

Stop killing jobs will over-regulation and tax revenues will automatically go up. There's no telling how many billions were lost when Obama imposed the drilling ban.

Obama want's gas prices to go up, to push his green agenda. Well, guess what...that's going to cause tax revenues to shrink.

Anti-smoking laws kill jobs and...you guessed it...cost tax revenues. The same goes for anti-junk food legislation.

That's the problem with Liberal. Ya'll want to buy the cart, before the horse.

 

[randel]

Stop killing jobs will over-regulation and tax revenues will automatically go up. There's no telling how many billions were lost when Obama imposed the drilling ban.

Obama want's gas prices to go up, to push his green agenda. Well, guess what...that's going to cause tax revenues to shrink.

Anti-smoking laws kill jobs and...you guessed it...cost tax revenues. The same goes for anti-junk food legislation.

That's the problem with Liberal. Ya'll want to buy the cart, before the horse.

like it or not, we need to develop alternative sources of energy...do you like being bent over a barrel of oil by some of those we buy oil from? do you like being dependent on them for your energy needs? do you like being dependent on them knowing that some fund terrorists? i don't we get some of these 'green' projects going, and you will see the cost of a barrel of oil, a gallon of gas, come down significantly, real quick. as for anti- smoking laws, don't smoke myself, dont understand the attraction, but let that be a choice of the establishment owner...over regulation? eh, debateable...we need some regulation.

 

[TheBook]

Stop killing jobs will over-regulation and tax revenues will automatically go up. There's no telling how many billions were lost when Obama imposed the drilling ban.

Obama want's gas prices to go up, to push his green agenda. Well, guess what...that's going to cause tax revenues to shrink.

Anti-smoking laws kill jobs and...you guessed it...cost tax revenues. The same goes for anti-junk food legislation.

That's the problem with Liberal. Ya'll want to buy the cart, before the horse.

You do realize the current reason for unemployment is deregulation, right? A lack of regulation is what caused the financial collapse. It is what inflated a standard boom/bust cycle into a massive boom and a devastating bust.

 

[Badmutha]

Sure. But both those taxes came AFTER a recession,

Correction.....they both helped bring us out of a recession.

......the same would happen if the Kenyan Tyrant slashed tax rates......so its a safe bet this recession will linger.

and after significant economic growth had already started. You really can't prove anything one way or another.

Well one thing was proven beyond a doubt.....the liberal belief that tax revenue falls off the charts after tax cuts......is a complete and utter lie.

One thing that is a proven fact is that directly after the Reagan tax cuts, tax revenues significantly declined and did not reach the pre tax cut level for six years (adjusted for inflation).

We are CLEARLY on the left side of the Laffer curve, I can't find one true economist (doctorate degree in economics) who claims that we are on the right hand side of the Laffer curve.

Surprised Liberal Economists and Unexpected Democrat Economists have lost any and all credibility.

Lots of economist like to talk about the Laffer curve and explain how reducing taxes improves our economy and improves tax revenues, but the are talking about if we are on the right hand side of the curve, and they ommit the fact that we are clearly on the left hand side of the curve - it's called "political spin"

Talk to 99.9% of US Business Owners.......ask them what side of the Laffer curve were on.
.
.
.
.

 

[Renae]

You do realize the current reason for unemployment is deregulation, right? A lack of regulation is what caused the financial collapse. It is what inflated a standard boom/bust cycle into a massive boom and a devastating bust.

Keep telling yourself that.

 

[apdst]

You do realize the current reason for unemployment is deregulation, right? A lack of regulation is what caused the financial collapse. It is what inflated a standard boom/bust cycle into a massive boom and a devastating bust.

De-regulation caused the drilling ban? It caused the loss of thousands of tobacco industry jobs? Really?

Are you prepared to lose even more revenue, when corporate taxes are raised and small businesses can no longer keep the doors open? What about the jobs lost when small businesses are forced to pay for government regulated health care?

"De-regulation caused job losses", is the biggest lie ever hoisted upon the American people.

 

[apdst]

like it or not, we need to develop alternative sources of energy

I don't disagree, but those industries need to be self sufficient and be able to operate free of government subsidies. You can hardly complain about the lack of tax revenue when you replace one energy industry that pays billions in tax revenue with an energy industry that doesn't pay any. Common sense has to take over, at some point.

...do you like being bent over a barrel of oil by some of those we buy oil from?

Vice what? being bent over a barrel by the government for more taxes? I'll take my chance with the oil companies, because the last time I checked, they can't levy my bank account, leaving with nothing.

do you like being dependent on them for your energy needs?

Better them, than the government.

do you like being dependent on them knowing that some fund terrorists?

If the government would stop mucking things up, we wouldn't be funding terrorists.

i don't we get some of these 'green' projects going, and you will see the cost of a barrel of oil, a gallon of gas, come down significantly, real quick.

Green projects have been, "going", for decades and I haven't seen ****. What's the hold up? Could it be that, "green energy", is a joke and doesn't work?

as for anti- smoking laws, don't smoke myself, dont understand the attraction, but let that be a choice of the establishment owner...over regulation? eh, debateable...we need some regulation.

Actually, I was referring more to tobacco taxes that are designed to discourage people to quit smoking.

 

[VanceMack]

like it or not, we need to develop alternative sources of energy...do you like being bent over a barrel of oil by some of those we buy oil from? do you like being dependent on them for your energy needs? do you like being dependent on them knowing that some fund terrorists? i don't we get some of these 'green' projects going, and you will see the cost of a barrel of oil, a gallon of gas, come down significantly, real quick. as for anti- smoking laws, don't smoke myself, dont understand the attraction, but let that be a choice of the establishment owner...over regulation? eh, debateable...we need some regulation.

ALternative sources of energy is a catch phrase. We HAVE alternative sources...its just that people dont LIKE them. We could be using more solar for the 110 needs of homes. Its too expensive and not overly efficient. We've been developing that for 40 years. We can enhance the use of coal but enviros pee themselves at the thought of mining (hey...theres a thought...people opposed to fossil fuels...until you have these other magical sources of energy...STOP USING ELECTRICITY. We have nuclear power but underutilize it. Should they continue to explore new sources? OF COURSE. Are they? You bet! but in the meantime we either utilize the resources we have or we are screwed. Its time to act a little more grown up about our energy needs and a little less like petulent children guided by feeeeelings.

 

[washunut]

You do realize the current reason for unemployment is deregulation, right? A lack of regulation is what caused the financial collapse. It is what inflated a standard boom/bust cycle into a massive boom and a devastating bust.

I find it funny that you make a supposition and pronounce it a fact. You can think whatever you want, but can you at least explain was deregulated and by whom that caused this problem.

I will also note that in one sentence you talk about deregulation and in the next lack of regulation. Not sure if you understand those are two diffeent things.

 

[imagep]

I dont know...George Clooney seemed to do it pretty easily. So did Madonna, Johnny Depp...etc...

But maybe their 'leaving' isnt what people should be concerned about. Its the investment of their income and wealth in foreign markets. And they WILL invest. The wealthy dont get wealthy by burying their income in jars in the back yard or stuffing their mattress.

I wouldn't assume that just because a handful of celebraties leave that they will stop investing in the US. Anyhow, they will most likely come back to the US to work. Other countries simply don't offer the huge salaries that the US does. I really believe that the wealth drain is a myth as is the talent drain.

 

[imagep]

Yes, I meant trillion. My mistake. And yes, especially if we keep cutting taxes like we have for the past 50 years or so, we will have to cut spending a helluvalot to balance the budget. I do agree!

 

[imagep]

Consumption based taxes should be an option on the table. If the goal is revenue than taxing most consumption would work. The Fair Tax proposal is a good place to start. Prebates are set up for people of lower income so they do not take the tax hit on nessesities. Used items such as cars and houses would not fall under the tax, allowing for people to have the option to buy used or new. Working people could take home their entire paychecks. I know Fair Tax is far from perfect, but our current system is unacceptable.

Go easy , I'am a newbie

Yes, we need to increase the cost of products in America. They are way to cheap. We need to get rid of some of these dang jobs also, and if any middleclass people manage to hang onto their jobs after they cut their spending, they need to start investing. Of course with reduced sales our businesses will also have reduced profits, so investing in American business or the stock market will not be a very good idea. We should just all start buying gold and silver. yea, thats the solution.

 

[imagep]

Aaaaaaamen. The tired mantra is raise taxers on the rich, make them pay their fair share. Its horse****. The rick already pay their fair share and the fair share of the middle to low income families who not only DONT pay their fair share but get back money they didnt put in AND are recieve the bulk of the government welfare spending. yeaaaaaaah...thats 'fair'...right?

There HAS to be dramatic cuts across the board. Defense, medicare, social systems. Entire programs should be eliminated such as redunandant departments like the Dept of education (every state has their own). And yes...with those cuts, the wealthy in this country are going to have to pay more to pay down the debt. I dont like it...but its a reality. However in addition to making the rich pay MORE, the poor and lower middle income who are pay virtually nothing need to start doing THEIR fair share. Lets start by killing off the EIC. A lot of the spending programs could actually take significant hits if they just paid more attention to fraud and excessive administrative costs. Lets see how chippy people are when talking about a willingness to make across the board cuts AND across the board financial contributions to pay down the debt.

We have been cutting taxes on the rich for decades. I would have to argue that the "mantra" is "cut taxes on the rich". So far that hasn't worked too well though. But I know, if we keep doing it, maybe we will have a different result.

I do agree that we should cut the heck out of government though.

 

[imagep]

like it or not, we need to develop alternative sources of energy...do you like being bent over a barrel of oil by some of those we buy oil from? do you like being dependent on them for your energy needs? do you like being dependent on them knowing that some fund terrorists? i don't we get some of these 'green' projects going, and you will see the cost of a barrel of oil, a gallon of gas, come down significantly, real quick. as for anti- smoking laws, don't smoke myself, dont understand the attraction, but let that be a choice of the establishment owner...over regulation? eh, debateable...we need some regulation.

As the price of oil increases alternative energy will become relatively more affordable. When oil gets so high that it is cheaper to utilize affordable energy, then we will all be clamoring for alternative energy. It's gonna happen, it's just a matter of time. Based on the price increases that I have seen at the pump, it's gonna happen pretty soon, maybe just a few more year.

 

[imagep]

You do realize the current reason for unemployment is deregulation, right? A lack of regulation is what caused the financial collapse. It is what inflated a standard boom/bust cycle into a massive boom and a devastating bust.

Our unemployment was caused by the lack of regulation in some areas, and by over regulation in others. We don't particularly need more or less regulation, we just need more sensable regulation.

 

[TheBook]

Alan Greenspan was in a large part responsible for the lack of regulation of derivatives (one of which is known as a mortgage-backed security, you know, the collapse of which was responsible for the economic crisis of 2008) as well as lowering the Federal funds rate at 1% for more than a year, allowing a large amount of credit-based money to be injected into the financial system which created an unsustainable boom.

Again we see a lack of regulation causing the crisis. And to those claiming this is not the case, why do you think the economic crisis happened, if not a failure to regulate?

 

[washunut]

Alan Greenspan was in a large part responsible for the lack of regulation of derivatives (one of which is known as a mortgage-backed security, you know, the collapse of which was responsible for the economic crisis of 2008) as well as lowering the Federal funds rate at 1% for more than a year, allowing a large amount of credit-based money to be injected into the financial system which created an unsustainable boom.

Again we see a lack of regulation causing the crisis. And to those claiming this is not the case, why do you think the economic crisis happened, if not a failure to regulate?

Poor regualtion was clearly a reason of the crisis. The Fed did not regulate the new types of mortgages that were created that made the system worse. Derivatives by themselves had little impact, excpet perhaps for AIG, which had poor business practices. Interest rates played a role, congress pressing Feddie and Fannie and the greed of those two companies hurt. Rating Agencies did such a bad job and yet have come under no scrutiny. Bank regulators allowed banks to take off balance sheet debt (SIVS) which deepened the mess. Pensions reaching for yields, and other investtors and pensions bought lousy packages of paper. The ist goes on. Your post is fine as far as it goes, but the list of culprits in by view is much longer.

 

[American]

Make significant cuts first, then lets talk about taxes.

I hear you brother, but....

...frankly I'm sick of hearing this word "discretionary". All government spending is discretionary. Okay so maybe interest on the debt isn't, but what else? When the left talks about discretionary, they really mean defense spending. Oh there is no end to what can be cut there. But don't you touch all that "general welfare" spending they're built up over 70 years. You know that $2 trillion we spend .....uh errr....invest annually in our seniors and everyone else that isn't working. You can't touch that Ponzi circus created 70 years ago, nosirree!

 

[washunut]

I hear you brother, but....

...frankly I'm sick of hearing this word "discretionary". All government spending is discretionary. Okay so maybe interest on the debt isn't, but what else? When the left talks about discretionary, they really mean defense spending. Oh there is no end to what can be cut there. But don't you touch all that "general welfare" spending they're built up over 70 years. You know that $2 trillion we spend .....uh errr....invest annually in our seniors and everyone else that isn't working. You can't touch that Ponzi circus created 70 years ago, nosirree!

I do agree that the country should have a real national debate on ALL spending. Not sure how we have that but I am all for it. you mention things you dont want to spend on, defense social security medicare. How do we really have a debate on priorities on spending. How do we tie in that debate, with saying that whatever we deicde to spend on we have to find a way to pay for it. No more adding 30 million people to a health care system without paying for it.

BTW- If we do away with social security and medicare, what do you do with the money that was taxed and was set up as an annuity to pay that money back when people retire it. I am guessing you are suggesting the government essentially steal it.

That is a good example why nothing gets done. Everyone agrees that we need sacrifice, just not them. We have a president who nobly suggests that we all share. But by all he really means the top 2% of achievers in the country who largely are not part of his political base.