We have a Spending Problem, NOT a tax revenue problem

[Goshin]

Moderator's Warning:

Posting in a thread after you have been threadbanned is a 5 point infraction. It can be more if the ban is further ignored.

 

[cpwill]

Actually, his comment clearly referred to tax rates

no, his comment was on taxes. discussing the relevant burden is fully legitimate.

The reason the wealthy pay a larger portion of taxes now as a class is not because of any government policy, but because income for the wealthy has risen at a much higher rate than it has for middle class and lower class people.

this is partially correct for the simple reason that they pay a larger percentage of revenue than they earn in income. if (for example) the top 10% earned 70% of the income and paid 70% of the taxes, you would be bang-on. But they don't. They pay 68% of our revenue on one-third of our income. And that is because we have sought to reduce the tax burden for the middle class while ramping up the money we spend on them.

 

[Redress]

no, his comment was on taxes. discussing the relevant burden is fully legitimate.

There is this thing called "context". If you look at the context of his statement, it is clear that one way it is accurate, one way completely not.

this is partially correct for the simple reason that they pay a larger percentage of revenue than they earn in income. if (for example) the top 10% earned 70% of the income and paid 70% of the taxes, you would be bang-on. But they don't. They pay 68% of our revenue on one-third of our income. And that is because we have sought to reduce the tax burden for the middle class while ramping up the money we spend on them.

I was talking the change in the "share" of taxes paid by the wealthy. They pay a larger share now, because their income has gone up faster(ie, their income has gone up vs rest of incomes being mostly stagnant). Again, this is clear if you look at context instead of assuming.

 

[BDBoop]

Obama's sure have, they have kept the economy very week and thus the Fed has kept record low interest rates which affect debt service. Guess you ignored the Obama record.

Orly?

"The spoils have really gone to capital, to the shareholders," says David Rosenberg, chief economist at Gluskin Sheff + Associates in Toronto.

Corporate profits are up by almost half since the recession ended in June 2009. In the first two years after the recessions of 1991 and 2001, profits rose 11 percent and 28 percent, respectively.

And an Associated Press analysis found that the typical CEO of a major company earned $9 million last year, up a fourth from 2009.

Driven by higher profits, the Dow Jones industrial average has staged a breathtaking 90 percent rally since bottoming at 6,547 on March 9, 2009. Those stock market gains go disproportionately to the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans, who own more than 80 percent of outstanding stock, according to an analysis by Edward Wolff, an economist at Bard College.

So - he has done it.

The economic recovery turns 2: Feel better yet? - USATODAY.com

 

[pbrauer]

actually the wealthy pay a larger percentage of our taxes now than they have at any time in living memory. it is the middle class whose taxes are historically low.

This demonstratively false, if you lower the tax rates you lower the tax bill they pay.

 

[TurtleDude]

This demonstratively false, if you lower the tax rates you lower the tax bill they pay.

Only if they don't have additional income as a result of a tax cut. You constantly make the mistake of assuming a static environment other than a change in tax rates which renders your pronouncements rather worthless

 

[pbrauer]

Only if they don't have additional income as a result of a tax cut. You constantly make the mistake of assuming a static environment other than a change in tax rates which renders your pronouncements rather worthless

You have evidence that lower income tax rates produce additional income?

 

[TurtleDude]

You have evidence that lower income tax rates produce additional income?

I have evidence that the economy grows when taxes are cut and that increases tax revenues. This may or may not happen and the timing is not consistent. What were the tax receipts in 1980-the last year of the Carter regime versus 1983?


btw you have no argument unless you can prove that tax hikes lead to more revenue and we still have arguments against that EVEN IF YOU CAN prove your claim

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I have evidence that the economy grows when taxes are cut and that increases tax revenues. This may or may not happen and the timing is not consistent. What were the tax receipts in 1980-the last year of the Carter regime versus 1983?


btw you have no argument unless you can prove that tax hikes lead to more revenue and we still have arguments against that EVEN IF YOU CAN prove your claim

And there is evidence of taxes being increased and the economy growing

Overall tax reciepts as a % of the economy is a more valuable indicator, along with the deficit as a % of GDP of how effective tax cuts or increases were.

 

[Donc]

And there is evidence of taxes being increased and the economy growing

Overall tax reciepts as a % of the economy is a more valuable indicator, along with the deficit as a % of GDP of how effective tax cuts or increases were.

kinda like when Clinton raised taxes and we saw a surplus.:2wave:
\

 

[TurtleDude]

And there is evidence of taxes being increased and the economy growing

Overall tax reciepts as a % of the economy is a more valuable indicator, along with the deficit as a % of GDP of how effective tax cuts or increases were.

yeah during the times where other forces caused that such as the dot com bubble

The problem with such arguments to me is I don't believe in sacrificing the rights of of individuals. For example, Haymarket thinks that complete confiscation of wealth over a certain level is OK if the masses want it. Perhaps he might show it would be "better for society". There are lots of things that might arguably be better for society such as sterilizing people with low IQs, mandatory abortions (like China) euthanasia of those with expensive hard to treat diseases such as ALS or Alzheimers.

so when people talk about something being better for society as a whole I remind them to study history and look around the world.

and my point still stands-there is no sound argument for tax hikes unless you can prove increased receipts and in some cases even if that is true there are other problems hikes create

 

[TurtleDude]

kinda like when Clinton raised taxes and we saw a surplus.:2wave:
\

no one I am aware of has been able to prove that the tex hikes lead to increased economic activity. MOst attribute it to the massive corporate belt tightening under Bush I that lead to increased efficiency and the dot com expansion

 

[Realitybites]

yeah during the times where other forces caused that such as the dot com bubble

Can you point out any fiscal policy during the Bush administration that helped the economy? The quote you have above applies to his Presidency as well. Just substitute housing bubble.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

yeah during the times where other forces caused that such as the dot com bubble

The problem with such arguments to me is I don't believe in sacrificing the rights of of individuals. For example, Haymarket thinks that complete confiscation of wealth over a certain level is OK if the masses want it. Perhaps he might show it would be "better for society". There are lots of things that might arguably be better for society such as sterilizing people with low IQs, mandatory abortions (like China) euthanasia of those with expensive hard to treat diseases such as ALS or Alzheimers.

so when people talk about something being better for society as a whole I remind them to study history and look around the world.

and my point still stands-there is no sound argument for tax hikes unless you can prove increased receipts and in some cases even if that is true there are other problems hikes create

And the tax cuts in the 80s lead to massive government deficit spending ( ie stimulus) leading to the government debt growing faster then the economy. Tax cuts will stimulate the economy when tax rates are a disincentive to invest. Meaning they are at high levels, not at generally low rates. Or when tax rates are high enough to cause individuals and business to leave (actually closing down plants rather then opening up a post office box i the Caymans) and going to lower tax rate jurisdictions. The US is neither of those. Effective US corporate tax rates are among the lowest in the OECD, and especially of any large developed country. Individual tax rates are also the lowest of any major economy. Generally meaning any tax cuts are going to have a very minor effect on economic growth in the US. In a higher tax environement like say Sweden the effect would be greater.

 

[TurtleDude]

Can you point out any fiscal policy during the Bush administration that helped the economy? The quote you have above applies to his Presidency as well. Just substitute housing bubble.

the tax cuts

 

[Gargantuan]

the tax cuts

Maybe the ones on the middle class. The ones on the wealthy never help the economy. Been proven numerous times the wealthy do not put their money back into the economy with tax cuts like the middle class too.

Tax Cuts May Be Good Politics but Poor Stimulus - NYTimes.com


CHART OF THE DAY: Reminder, The Deficit You're Freaking Out About Is Bush's Fault

Daily Kos: 10 Things the GOP Doesn't Want You to Know About the Debt

If so, the Republican's so-called "Job Creators" failed to meet those expectations under George W. Bush. After all, the last time the top tax rate was 39.6% during the Clinton administration, the United States enjoyed rising incomes, 23 million new jobs and budget surpluses. Under Bush? Not so much.

On January 9, 2009, the Republican-friendly Wall Street Journal (Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record - Real Time Economics - WSJ - direct link if you don't believe the dailykos) summed it up with an article titled simply, "Bush on Jobs: the Worst Track Record on Record." (The Journal's interactive table quantifies his staggering failure relative to every post-World War II president.) The dismal 3 million jobs created under President Bush didn't merely pale in comparison to the 23 million produced during Bill Clinton's tenure. In September 2009, the Congressional Joint Economic Committee charted Bush's job creation disaster, the worst since Hoover.

Lots of jobs made due to the Bush cuts right guys?

 

[Realitybites]

the tax cuts

You're funny. In that case where was his surplus like Clinton?

The only reason I joined this thread is because I am tired of people spouting some fake conservative view on cutting taxes with no real historical economic facts. I think Ireland has one of the lowest tax rates in the world, but thier economy is in the toilet. Why?? because they have a service/trade based economy. We will be heading down the road of Greece if we do not start producing products again.

 

[Gargantuan]

You're funny. In that case where was his surplus like Clinton?

The only reason I joined this thread is because I am tired of people spouting some fake conservative view on cutting taxes with no real historical economic facts. I think Ireland has one of the lowest tax rates in the world, but thier economy is in the toilet. Why?? because they have a service/trade based economy. We will be heading down the road of Greece if we do not start producing products again.

Obama unveils manufacturing initiative - Science Fair: Science and Space News - USATODAY.com

Obama in Iowa: President Obama highlights manufacturing revival, jobs in Iowa - Los Angeles Times

 

[TurtleDude]

Maybe the ones on the middle class. The ones on the wealthy never help the economy. Been proven numerous times the wealthy do not put their money back into the economy with tax cuts like the middle class too.

Tax Cuts May Be Good Politics but Poor Stimulus - NYTimes.com


CHART OF THE DAY: Reminder, The Deficit You're Freaking Out About Is Bush's Fault

Daily Kos: 10 Things the GOP Doesn't Want You to Know About the Debt


Lots of jobs made due to the Bush cuts right guys?

tax cuts help those who already pay too much of the taxes

 

[Gargantuan]

tax cuts help those who already pay too much of the taxes

To do what, invest it?

 

[TurtleDude]

You're funny. In that case where was his surplus like Clinton?

The only reason I joined this thread is because I am tired of people spouting some fake conservative view on cutting taxes with no real historical economic facts. I think Ireland has one of the lowest tax rates in the world, but thier economy is in the toilet. Why?? because they have a service/trade based economy. We will be heading down the road of Greece if we do not start producing products again.

well this forum is full of fake libertarians who are really socialists so it makes sense we have a conservative who thinks the government should get more and more money.

 

[TurtleDude]

To do what, invest it?

that's what I did plus gave more to charity and endowed another scholarship in honor of my late father at yale.

The biggest problem facing this country is an ever growing government and the lies fed to the middle class that the rich can fund everything they want

 

[BDBoop]

To do what, invest it?

I wonder if they would respond to hiring incentives. Bringing the jobs back home incentives.

 

[Gargantuan]

I wonder if they would respond to hiring incentives. Bringing the jobs back home incentives.

I would give them as many tax cuts as they want if they had some kind of a quota to return American jobs here.

 

[Realitybites]

well this forum is full of fake libertarians who are really socialists so it makes sense we have a conservative who thinks the government should get more and more money.

Unfortunately for most fake conservatives I actually think for myself. I don't just listen to sound bites. I live in one of, if not the most so called liberal states in the country. Let me tell you a little story about how smart they are regarding taxes.

In 1978 they added a constitutional amendment to limit tax increases on property taxes. They sold this bill of goods to the people under the deception of keeping taxes low for the elderly and of course tax cuts. Now unlike your rampling about increase in taxes curbing economic growth, there is a direct correlation between the decline of the California school system and Prop13. What is really ironic is for the people that spout they are saving tax dollars by not paying maybe 2,000 more a year in taxes are paying 10,000/yr to send their kids to private schools. Who's the real conservative now....