• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit


Expecting our children to pay outrageous taxes for the outrageous costs of *our* Govt (not to mention the costs of boomer retirement and health care and the costs of their Govt) is a lot shittier than expecting us to to pay for it ourselves. But that's just my opinion. Most Republicans seem to agree with you. That's why we are the pass the buck generation.
 
Iriemon said:
Expecting our children to pay outrageous taxes for the outrageous costs of *our* Govt is a lot shittier than expecting us to to pay for it ourselves. But that's just my opinion. Most Republicans seem to agree with you.
Click to expand...


Most Republicans will be paying for it, so I don't know how that assumption is feasible?
 
Navy Pride said:
three words.........1994 Republican Congress......
Click to expand...

Let's see, 1, 2 ... yep, 3 words, unless "1994" is an amalgamation of different words (ninteen nintey four). Then it would be five.

But as to making any relevant point, that I don't see.
 
Originally Posted by Iriemon
Expecting our children to pay outrageous taxes for the outrageous costs of *our* Govt is a lot shittier than expecting us to to pay for it ourselves. But that's just my opinion. Most Republicans seem to agree with you.
Click to expand...


Deegan said:
Most Republicans will be paying for it, so I don't know how that assumption is feasible?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are asking about. Most Republicans will be paying for what?
 
Iriemon said:
I'm not sure what you are asking about. Most Republicans will be paying for what?
Click to expand...

The debt, so why on earth would we want one?
 
RightatNYU said:
From today's NYTimes

But then, wasn't Bush the one who kept on cutting corporate taxes?
Click to expand...
Wow did you mislead this forum about this story! Why'd you leave out this part of the very same story?
Funny how one can edit out the part that doesn't serve one's hidden agenda, iisn't it? Let's go over this again, shall we?

overall revenues have barely climbed back to the levels reached in 2000, and that the government has borrowed trillions of dollars against Social Security

In other words the decline under this awful President was so severe that even with an extraordinary rebound the revenues are not even where they were the year before Bush became President!

Lets also repeat this important part of the same story:

One reason the run-up in taxes looks good is because the past five years looked so bad. Revenues are up, but they have lagged well behind economic growth.

Did you know that the price of gas has DOUBLED since Bush became President? Do you know that the REAL income of Americans over the last two years has declined by 1%? Do you know that since the Republican Congress passed it's "ENERGY BILL" in June 2005 the price of Gas went from $2.05 per gallon to $3.00 per gallon...but real income for Americans in the last TWO years has declined by 1%....

Very interesting how someone can take a story and only tell the part that they want you to hear....where have we seen this before? Iraq you say? The parts where Bush only revealed the intelligence that served his purposes to get the Congress and the Public to back the war?

The apple doesn;t fall far from the tree in GOP land, now does it?
 
Deegan said:
The debt, so why on earth would we want one?
Click to expand...

Good question, in the long term view of things. In the short term, there are those that prefer to maximize their wealth now at the expense of more debt that others will have to pay for.
 


this thread is proof the buck hasnt been passed. revenue is up. the deficit is being cut.

i hate how the left passes the buck on national defense....so I guess we are even.

as I have stated before.....the question isnt if spending should be cut, the question is, what spending should be cut on.

allowing people to keep more of what is theirs to begin with is hardly "passing the buck"

liberals want to continue spending and raise taxes. that is unacceptable.

if the next democratic president cuts spending, and doesnt raise taxes, I will publicly appologize in this forum and admit I was wrong.
 
Last edited:
ProudAmerican said:
this thread is proof the buck hasnt been passed. revenue is up. the deficit is being cut.
Click to expand...

I see. And the fact the Govt is $2.7 trillion more in debt doesn't matter.

Typical pass the buck attitude.

as I have stated before.....the question isnt if spending should be cut, the question is, what spending should be cut on.
Click to expand...

And since Republicans won't cut spending, just keeping screwing the next generation, right?

allowing people to keep more of what is theirs to begin with is hardly "passing the buck"
Click to expand...

It is when the Govt borrows 1/2 trillion a year to do it.

liberals want to continue spending and raise taxes. that is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

But borrowing 1/2 a trillion a year is.

if the next democratic president cuts spending, and doesnt raise taxes, I will publicly appologize in this forum and admit I was wrong.
Click to expand...

Hopefully the next president will focus some degree of energy on balancing the budget, whatever is necessary to make that happen.

We know if the pass the buck Republicans stay in power we will have four more years of ever growing debt.
 
I see. And the fact the Govt is $2.7 trillion more in debt doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

who said it doesnt matter? we just dissagree on where to cut spending.

And since Republicans won't cut spending, just keeping screwing the next generation, right?
Click to expand...

yep. cause I already pay my fair share.

It is when the Govt borrows 1/2 trillion a year to do it.
Click to expand...

I dont care how they do it. its MY MONEY.

But borrowing 1/2 a trillion a year is.
Click to expand...

its a better alternative to your option. continue spending and raise taxes.

Hopefully the next president will focus some degree of energy on balancing the budget, whatever is necessary to make that happen.
Click to expand...

cutting spending is what is necessary. not taking more of my money.

We know if the pass the buck Republicans stay in power we will have four more years of ever growing debt.
Click to expand...

take a look at the first post in this thread. you know, the part you are INTENTIONALLY IGNORING.

revenues are up, the deficit is comming down. you continue to make claims about republicans while ignoring the progress that is being made.

typical.
 
Deegan said:
So did 9/11, two wars, and the worst natural disaster in 100 years, but that is of no consequence huh?
Click to expand...

All of those events could have been avoided too if Bush had made different decisions. It's hardly a valid excuse.
 
hipsterdufus said:
All of those events could have been avoided too if Bush had made different decisions. It's hardly a valid excuse.
Click to expand...


theres not a war in history that couldnt have been avoided if the agressor had just been allowed to do as it damn well pleased.
 
can I see a show of hands of Democrats that want a tax increase that have voluntarily given to the government during tax time and ear marked their gift as "payment to help the ridiculous debt George Bush has created"
 
hipsterdufus said:
All of those events could have been avoided too if Bush had made different decisions. It's hardly a valid excuse.
Click to expand...

So you were against going into Afghanistan after 9/11?

How could President Bush have avoided Katrina?
 
Bergslagstroll said:
But instead you still have a druged economy they you even in good econimical times spend more then you got.
Click to expand...

Well maybe if we hadn't paid the bulk of the cost of the cold war, provided more aid to more people than any other country in history, protected those seeking freedom and tried to bring liberty to as many as we could we wouldn't have to spend as much.

But I'll put our economy up against any other there.
 
ProudAmerican said:
can I see a show of hands of Democrats that want a tax increase that have voluntarily given to the government during tax time and ear marked their gift as "payment to help the ridiculous debt George Bush has created"
Click to expand...
Great question! Good going! Wow! You really showed up 'dem Dems!

How the people in this forum who have a constant erection for Bush can justify his runaway spending and without doubt consciousless and irresponsible managing of the budget is truly laughable. Had ANY Democrat spent and debted the way Bush has ALL of you would be writing over and over again about those TAX AND SPEND Democrats. The reality is that Bush is the biggest and worst Debtor our nation has ever endured...by a lot...and for the Bushies to not criticize him for his fiscal policies is like a Democrat trying to justify Clinton and Lewinsky...
 
ProudAmerican said:
theres not a war in history that couldnt have been avoided if the agressor had just been allowed to do as it damn well pleased.
Click to expand...

That's not my point. Had Bush not diverted funding away from strengthening the levees, Katrina wouldn't have cost as much.

Had the warnings Al Qaeda made been heeded - 9/11 could have been avoided (PDB August 6, 2001)

And, of course, starting a war in Iraq for totally unjustified reasons is the biggest fiscal disaster any American President has EVER made.
 

hips, your and intelligent guy but as partisan as you are you don't believe that crap............Those levies have been like that for over a century....You can't put that on the president......

Had Clinton accepted Bin Laden on 2 occasions when he was offered on a silver platter we would have never heard of 9.11.01.......

As far as Iraq goes why do the senators in your party keep voting to stay the course.........How many votes did Kerry's cut and run amendment get? six.......
 
Iriemon: And since Republicans won't cut spending, just keeping screwing the next generation, right?
Click to expand...

ProudAmerican said:
yep. cause I already pay my fair share.
Click to expand...

There you go. Mantra pass the buck generation.

Most Republicans, if not most Americans think like you. Maybe for others the issue is to not cut spending versus raising taxes. But the bottom line is don't cut *my*spending, don't raise *my* taxes, and so we get the Govt we deserve -- a Govt that increases spending and cuts taxes, and as a result our Govt is over $8 trillion in debt.

We sadly are the pass the buck generation because that is what we as a generation are doing. We elect politicians who will give us the easy way out. For now. Those that are running our Govt know what is going on, but don't have the political courage to do the right thing. So they pass the buck too.

It will be interesting to see the upcoming battle. Hordes of tax cut supporting Republicans will become "don't cut spending" Democrats when it is their SS benefits and health care at stake. On one side, we will have the political might of the baby boomers -- my generation, that spoiled generation that put "me first" on the map as their motto -- that generation that is cutting its own taxes to fob off the costs of its Govt to future tax payers. The baby boomers will not be willing to concede an inch on *their* social security benefits or other Govt benefits.

And on the side you will have GenX and beyond. They will be the current workers, facing the problems in their world, but will have demands for *huge* tax increases to pay for the boomers' retirements, health care, and interest on the $10+ trillion Govt debt the Republicans are leaving them (and that's assuming we get a fiscally responsible Govt in '08). They will balk at the much higher taxes that will be required to pay for the boomers' benefits, the debt, and there own Govt.

Who will win this unnecessary, but thanks to the Republican debt and theft of pension funds, now almost inevitable clash between generations?

This inter-generational battle brought to you by Ron, George, George, and folks like Proud American, leaders and members of the pass the buck generation.

But enjoy your tax cut. It's YOUR money, and the great thing is, its THEIR debt, right?
 
Last edited:
Liberals and democrats only have one solution.......That is exactly why there have only been 2 democratic presidents since 1968 and if it had not been for Perot taking votes away from Bush 1 in 1992 there would have only been 1.......Think about it...........

I guess we know where the american people stand.........
 

Yes we know were you and the pass the buck generation stands. Borrow and stick it to the next generation. That is exactly why your leaders, the pass the buck Repandercans, took the House in '94 and were elected in '00 and '04.
 
I agree fully with this statement Iriemon. It's called a delayed tactic. The American people don't know what they are really voting for and wouldn't if they really new what they were going to get. It's called getting the shaft in the end. Literally.:agree
 
hipsterdufus said:
I was hoping someone here would pick up on this story.

I had to laugh when I saw this. The NYT has their but so far up the Bush admin's as s, they should do a colonoscopy while they're at it.
Click to expand...

Hrm....lets see, where to begin picking apart your statement.

Corporate revenues still aren't where they were in 2000. A fact that most in this debate have missed.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Flat out wrong.

In 2000, corporate tax revenues were $207.3 billion. In 2005, they were almost $280 billion. This year, they're on pace to easily break $300 billion. Simply put, a flat out misrepresentation by you.

So with all this extra revenue the deficit will shrink a whopping 18 billion to 300 billion this year. :roll:
Click to expand...

In 2004 the deficit was $418 billion on a $12.2 trillion GDP, which is 3.4%. In 2006, the deficit is on pace to be $300 billion on a projected $13.7 trillion GDP, which is 2.2%.

It's still obviously a problem, but I certainly see that as improvement.

The Supply Siders keep saying "tax cuts work" OK - so cut them to ZERO and see how we do.
Click to expand...

What a fallacious argument. I suppose you would say that increasing taxes would work. OK LOL LETS RAISE THEM TO 100% AND SEE!! HAHAHAH!!11

Come on, be reasonable.
 
hipsterdufus said:
All of those events could have been avoided too if Bush had made different decisions. It's hardly a valid excuse.
Click to expand...


Absolute bullshit.

1) It's ridiculous speculation to say that Bush could have prevented 9/11. Sure, perhaps he could have. Or perhaps bad weather could have. Or perhaps who knows.

2) Katrina was Bush's fault? I thought this meme went out of style months ago along with Kanye...ugh.
 

Flip your boat around for a second there, chief.

If Gore had been elected and had to suffer through 9/11, and the costs associated with fighting the war on terror/katrina/rebuilding the economy, you'd be defending his "excessive" spending to the teeth.

Hypocrisy doesn't look good on anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.