Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit

[26 X World Champs]

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.

No way Gore invades Iraq and starts a war thereby eliminating half a trillion dollars in spending so far...I'm not even sure if the Iraq War expenses are being counted in these numbers? Does anyone know for sure and can show us if that is the case? If they are not included then what does that do to your argument and to the "good news" report?

I also noted that from my post you again did not address it's key points from thje NY Times article that you chose as the basis of this thread and that you misrepresented so dramatically? How about addressing the ENTIRE article and it's true statements and not keep trying to spin that story into something it most definitely was not?

As a matter of fact - Calling all of you who developed a major boner by this threads supposed good news! Why is it that NONE of you are addressing my post that clearly debunked the entire premise of this thread by using the very same newspaper article that started this thread?

It's time to stop "stroking your members" and to actually speak to the truth...is it that "hard" for you all?

 

[ProudAmerican]

There you go. Mantra pass the buck generation.

if anyone is passing the buck it is YOU.

YOU want to raise MY taxes, while never sending your own money voluntarily.

as soon as you deem the situation severe enough that YOU VOLUNTEER YOUR OWN MONEY, then we can discuss me sending mine.

pass the buck indeed.

 

[hipsterdufus]

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.......

If you want to spread the blame around, go ahead, but the facts are the facts.

1. Bush diverted funding away from shoring up the levees=Katrina disaster

2. Bush did not heed warnings of 8-6-01 PDB warning of Bin Laden attacks, warnings of Bin Laden's danger from Clinton Admin=9/11

3. Bush invaded Iraq as misguided response to 9/11

4. In all of the above, there is rampant corruption, war/hurricane profiteering and no GOP fiscal oversight.

Hence the fiscal mess.

 

[hipsterdufus]

NPR has a good take on the story today:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5546830

 

[ProudAmerican]

1. Bush diverted funding away from shoring up the levees=Katrina disaster

where did you get this "factual" information?

2. Bush did not heed warnings of 8-6-01 PDB warning of Bin Laden attacks, warnings of Bin Laden's danger from Clinton Admin=9/11

yeah, clinton thought he was such a threat he let him get away twice.

3. Bush invaded Iraq as misguided response to 9/11

nope. it was a legitimate response. we are now fighting the same group in Iraq that hit us on 9-11. looks like it was sound strategy to me.

4. In all of the above, there is rampant corruption, war/hurricane profiteering and no GOP fiscal oversight.

there is no more corruption in the current administration than in any other administration. and if there is, the reason is simple. you cant have war/hurricane corruption when you refuse to fight wars and dont have any major hurricanes to deal with.

 

[PeteEU]

Funny how tax cuts gets all the credit for this supposedly surge in tax revenues... what about the IRS becoming more efficient?

After all Tax revenue in Russia is also dramaticly rising because of Flat Tax and the right wing wack jobs who promote this continue to promote this.. what they dont promote is the fact that if you dont pay your takes (and even if you do) you risk nazi like stormtroopers raiding your busines and home with stun grenades and military hardware.. and if you survive the assult, the chances of you getting a fair trial is near zero and you will probally rot in jail for a long time.. that is if you aint a buddy with Putin.

But I am sure that cutting taxes would boost tax revenues, however the debate would be how big tax cuts and where, and when... there are after all limits going both ways.

 

[Goobieman]

Funny how tax cuts gets all the credit for this supposedly surge in tax revenues... what about the IRS becoming more efficient?

What about it?

After all Tax revenue in Russia is also dramaticly rising because of Flat Tax and the right wing wack jobs who promote this continue to promote this..

Because its a good idea...?

what they dont promote is the fact that if you dont pay your takes (and even if you do) you risk nazi like stormtroopers raiding your busines and home with stun grenades and military hardware..

You're confusing the IRS with the FBI and the Branch Davidians.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Funny how tax cuts gets all the credit for this supposedly surge in tax revenues... what about the IRS becoming more efficient?

you think the IRS has gotten that much more efficient since 2003?

hell that would be a record for a government run organization.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I don’t mean to be condescending here, but do any of your righties possess any knowledge of macro-economics at all?

1. The increases in tax receipts are not going to pay down the debt, they merely seem to be on track to reduce the amount of money the government has to borrow this year compared to last year.

2. If you will note from the article on this subject, the bulk of the increase is in corporate tax revenues and individual income revenues at the top. The economy has grown at a decent clip for several years now, yet median income has declined every year Bush has been in office and the poverty rate has increased every year that Bush has been in office. Do you guys not get it? You are getting screwed here. The GDP has grown, yet if you are in the Middle Class, you are statistically worse off today than you were the day Bush took office. Why is this rising tide not lifting all boats? Why is it that virtually all real income growth has been at the top? The fact that the top is now paying a slightly higher percentage of federal income taxes is not indicative of a fairer tax code, its indicative of a shift in wealth an income from the middle to the top.

3. Roughly a forth of our economy is in the public sector. That is never going to change, and some how that forth is going to need to be funded. The size of the public sector relative to GDP is about the same today as it was the day you were born (assuming you are not like 90 or something) and is about the same as it will be the day you will die. The problem is that we have fiscal obligations in the pipeline that we should be paying down debt today in order to get ready for. Instead, we are incurring more debt, and you guys are out celebrating the fact that we might incur a little less debt this year than we did last year.

 

[PeteEU]

What about it?


Because its a good idea...?


You're confusing the IRS with the FBI and the Branch Davidians.

So you are denying that the Russian tax man uses military style shock troops to gather taxes from people he sees as evading paying thier taxes? Dont you think the urge to pay taxes on time and in full would be enhanced if the IRS used military style shock troops against all it suspected of evading taxes?

Flat tax works? where? Even the whole idea is so pro rich that its funny.. the biggest promoter is very rich and would stand to benifit hugely with such a system... of course it all depends on how you implement a flat tax system and how many ifs and buts there are.

Fix the present tax system, by plugging the massive holes the rich often have to avoid paying thier fair share of taxes. And this goes for most countries around the world, not only the US.

 

[PeteEU]

you think the IRS has gotten that much more efficient since 2003?

hell that would be a record for a government run organization.

its a valid hypothosis as yours on why there are more revenues incoming. Personally I think its a bit of both actually. Maybe even small changes in law have affected the revenue upward a bit.

 

[ProudAmerican]

1. The increases in tax receipts are not going to pay down the debt, they merely seem to be on track to reduce the amount of money the government has to borrow this year compared to last year.

and how would raising taxes be any different? increased revenue is increased revenue.....no matter how you created it. Im not an economics expert, but I am a thinker.

 

[Goobieman]

1. The increases in tax receipts are not going to pay down the debt, they merely seem to be on track to reduce the amount of money the government has to borrow this year compared to last year.

Increased tax receipts wont pay down the debt?
The why raise taxes?

You do have a point in that all the revenue increases in the world wont kill off deficits so long as spending is greater than revenu receipts -- but for whatever reason, meaningful spending cuts never seem to make it into the conversation -- just tax increases.

2. If you will note from the article on this subject, the bulk of the increase is in corporate tax revenues and individual income revenues at the top. The economy has grown at a decent clip for several years now, yet median income has declined every year Bush has been in office and the poverty rate has increased every year that Bush has been in office. Do you guys not get it?

Both of those thingsm expecially poverty rates, are lagging indicators - and something the President has no control over. What's your point?

You are getting screwed here. The GDP has grown, yet if you are in the Middle Class, you are statistically worse off today than you were the day Bush took office. Why is this rising tide not lifting all boats?

Speak for yourself. The last 4 years have been great for me and my paycheck. The rising tide has allowed me to BUY a boat.

Why is it that virtually all real income growth has been at the top?

Clearly, its because GWB is an evil bastard. :roll:

The problem is that we have fiscal obligations in the pipeline that we should be paying down debt today in order to get ready for. Instead, we are incurring more debt, and you guys are out celebrating the fact that we might incur a little less debt this year than we did last year.

When the deficits went down under Clinton, Democrats were overjoyed. When they do down under Bush, its meaningless?

Must be a (D) v (R) thing.

 

[Gill]

2. If you will note from the article on this subject, the bulk of the increase is in corporate tax revenues and individual income revenues at the top. The economy has grown at a decent clip for several years now, yet median income has declined every year Bush has been in office and the poverty rate has increased every year that Bush has been in office. Do you guys not get it? You are getting screwed here. The GDP has grown, yet if you are in the Middle Class, you are statistically worse off today than you were the day Bush took office. Why is this rising tide not lifting all boats? Why is it that virtually all real income growth has been at the top? The fact that the top is now paying a slightly higher percentage of federal income taxes is not indicative of a fairer tax code, its indicative of a shift in wealth an income from the middle to the top.

Not true!

1995 - $34,076
1996 - $35,492
1997 - $37,005
1998 - $38,885
1999 - $40,696
2000 - $41,990
2001 - $42,228
2002 - $42,409
2003 - $43,318

Median household income per the Census Bureau

 

[Gill]

I also noted that from my post you again did not address it's key points from thje NY Times article that you chose as the basis of this thread and that you misrepresented so dramatically? How about addressing the ENTIRE article and it's true statements and not keep trying to spin that story into something it most definitely was not?

Maybe that's because this was already brought up by another poster. Read the entire thread before jumping in and making accusations.

 

[Gill]

You're blaming Bush for Katrina? :2rofll:

Haven't you heard? Bush is to blame for everything... unless it's something good.

I think Bush was to blame for the headache I had yesterday.

Bush Derangement Syndrome is a terrible disease, and very contagious among libs.

 

[mpg]

No way Gore invades Iraq and starts a war thereby eliminating half a trillion dollars in spending

Considering how many Democrats were behind the invasion, it seems unlikely that Gore wouldn't have done the same thing.

 

[aquapub]

Considering how many Democrats were behind the invasion, it seems unlikely that Gore wouldn't have done the same thing.

I don't know about that. Judging by Clinton-Gore's eight year non-response to Al Queda attacks and their appeasements for North Korea, I'm guessing Gore would have tried to "reach out" to bloody Islam, and apologize for horrible America causing their anger.

 

[aquapub]

We all know it's coming. The New York Times cannot allow good news for Republicans or America to go unanswered. They always find some obscure figure to cling to so they can undermine good economic news, just like they did to Reagan.

So my question is:

What do you suppose the objective NYT will print tomorrow?

 

[aquapub]

Twice now, we have witnessed aggressive pro-growth administrations drastically cut taxes for the small businesses who create most of the jobs. Both times, Democrats portrayed them as, "tax cuts for the rich," told us they wouldn't get us out of recessions, and that our budget couldn't handle any tax cuts. Twice now, Democrats have been proved wrong. Revenues are way higher than projected and we are a full year ahead of schedule in reducing the deficit by half. Now if Congress will pass a line item veto and commit to fixing the broken Social Security system like Bush wants, this exciting economic news will be sustainable.

 

[Blitz]

You actually buy that crap. This economy is not what it seems. Those numbers are absolute garbage. There are far less people working in this economy than there was during the clinton Admin. You can get simliar numbers from smaller quantities. to equal 4.6%!!!:spin: Try more like 6.6-7.0% unemployment. This admin loves to cherrypick info just to drive thier cause. It absolutely sickens me that American fall for this hook, line, and sinker. A workers market is better than an investors market. Oh, good there is you bumper sticker for the mid-term elections that the Dems can use.... Cherrypickers!!!!!!!

 

[Gill]

You actually buy that crap. This economy is not what it seems. Those numbers are absolute garbage. There are far less people working in this economy than there was. You can get simliar numbers from smaller quantities. 4.6% my foot!!!:spin: Try more like 6.6-7.0% unemployment. This admin loves to cherrypick info just to drive thier cause. It absolutely sickens me that American fall for this hook, line, and sinker. A workers market is better than an investors market.

Who are you talking to???? Your post makes no sense and what does umemployment have to do with the thread's topic??

If you believe that the government's employment figures are incorrect, post some proof.

 

[Blitz]

Tax Revenues are not cumming from normal Americans. They are comming from most of the wealthy corporations. They admin leaves out Iraq War cost and future Pork projects that they know what the American people don't know. Oh, by the way, you can't prove in any court of law that these unemployment numbers are wrong. Can you say RIGGED!!! Think of me as a person simliar who defected from the NSA. I'm telling the American people the truth so they can make accurate decisions. I don't care if it is an election year or not. This guy and his gang are a bunch of crooks and until someone can break in and truely show proof, Bush and his admin will get away with murder in all aspects.:twisted:

 

[oldreliable67]

Tax Revenues are not cumming from normal Americans. They are comming from most of the wealthy corporations. They admin leaves out Iraq War cost and future Pork projects that they know what the American people don't know. Oh, by the way, you can't prove in any court of law that these unemployment numbers are wrong. Can you say RIGGED!!! Think of me as a person simliar who defected from the NSA. I'm telling the American people the truth so they can make accurate decisions. I don't care if it is an election year or not. This guy and his gang are a bunch of crooks and until someone can break in and truely show proof, Bush and his admin will get away with murder in all aspects.:twisted:

Rant, rhetoric and invective are one thing. Proof is quite another. Got proof?

 

[Goobieman]

You actually buy that crap. This economy is not what it seems. Those numbers are absolute garbage.

Prove it.

There are far less people working in this economy than there was during the clinton Admin.

Prove it.

It absolutely sickens me that American fall for this hook, line, and sinker.

It absolutely sicklens me that your bigoted, partisan hatred for the Bush administration warps your reality so much that if the Bush administration said the sky was blue, you'd argue against it.