Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 130

Thread: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    that's a very revealing article, there are several direct quotes from treas secty geithner, tax cheat in charge of the irs, that lay out the extreme statist perspective assumed by the leaders of this white house

    under aggressive questioning from renee ellmers, freshman from north carolina, small biz cmte, geithner testified, "only 3% of your small businesses" will be effected by his proposal to raise taxes on the rich, that "modest change in revenue" of some 3/4 of a tril

    failing to raise income taxes, he explains, is tantamount to govt "financing a tax benefit" to upper earners

    income taxes simply must be raised, continues the treas secty, else we must "shrink the overall size of govt programs"

    yes, mr secty, if you don't shrink overall size of govt, you're gonna have to raise taxes on the very americans the rest of us look to to create jobs---in the midst of our collective depression

    it's obama's ball, it's really always been obama's ball

    he's gonna have to come out in the spotlight, like geithner, for tax increases---on income

    of course, 6 months ago in LAME DUCK the party's position, tho petulant, was plain:

    Obama signs tax deal into law - CNN

    of course, what can you expect from a president whose only scoreable budget in going on now 3 years was defeated by the senate HIS PARTY CONTROLS, ninety seven to zero

    the president's lack of leadership relative to the deficit has been disgraceful, #3 in house leadership says obama doesn't have time

    our fiscal outlook is fatal

    there are plainly 2 models before us---the directions pointed to and taken by governors cuomo and brown and christie in NY, CA and NJ, on the one hand

    or the road taken by greece, on the other

    which way will washington wend?
    Last edited by The Prof; 06-24-11 at 08:35 PM.

  2. #72
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    andrew cuomo on the need for his state to become "business friendly:"

    GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

    "we have the worst business tax climate in the nation, period, our taxes are 66% higher than the national average"

    "the costs of pensions are exploding... a 476% increase and its only getting worse"

    "the state of new york spends too much money, it is that blunt and it is that simple"

    "an unsustainable rate of growth and it has been for a long time"

    "not only do we spend too much, but we get too little in return"

    "the large government we have is all too often responsive to the special interests over the people"

    "new yorkers are voting with their feet, two million new yorkers have left the state over the past decade"

    "what does this say, it says we need radical reform, it says we need a new approach, we need a new perspective and we need it now"

    "this is a fundamental realignment for the state"

    "the old way wasn't working anyway, let's be honest"

    "we want a government that puts the people first and not the special interests first"

    "what made new york the empire state was a not a large government complex, it was a vibrant private sector that was creating great jobs"

    "and that's what's going to make us the empire state again"

    "at the heart of this state is business"

    "we have to relearn the lesson our founders knew and we have to put up a sign that says new york is open for business, we get it, and this is going to be a business friendly state"

    "we are going to have to confront the tax situation in our state, property taxes in this state are killing new yorkers, thirteen of the sixteen highest tax counties are in new york when assessed by home value"

    "westchester county has the highest property taxes in the united states, nassau county has the second highest"

    "it has to end, it has to end this year"

    "we have to hold the line on taxes for now and reduce taxes in the future, new york has no future as the tax capital of the nation, our young people will not stay, our business will not come"

    "put it simply, the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"

    "we have to start with an emergency financial plan to stabilize our finances, we need to hold the line and we need to institute a wage freeze in the state of new york, we need to hold the line on taxes, we need a state spending cap and we need to close this $10 billion gap without any borrowing"

    and in new york it aint just rhetoric:

    Cuomo budget: $10 billion deficit cut, no new taxes, layoffs likely

    leadership, anyone?

  3. #73
    Educator

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    07-08-11 @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    You don't even know New York prof. The amount of **** we have in our government and ridiculous departments all over the place is insane. Our taxes here are already ridiculously high and raising them will not pay for David Patterson's bull****. We have state agents driving around in boats and searching people for fish. Our DEC budget is over 1 billion dollars alone. They also carry weapons. It's insane. I got pulled over by one once and they asked to see my fish and I showed them my ICE badge and they took off in their gigantic twin 350 boat like babies. By the way it was 4 of them on one boat.
    Last edited by Gargantuan; 06-24-11 at 08:49 PM.

  4. #74
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    That's right cpwill. That's not the discussion. No one is attempting to raise rates. They are refusing to do exactly what you are FOR.
    no, because simply stripping them out merely raises effective tax rates, just without raising nominal ones to give themselves political cover. All of the economic damage of a tax hike, but with less of the danger of being labeled a tax-hiker as we go into an election season. I want to squeeze out all those extra costs without raising effective tax rates.


    quick and easy example.


    Bob makes 50,000, and his nominal tax rate is 25% (I know it's not, but I like easy numbers and it's an example, work with me here ). This would leave him paying $12,500 in taxes. Except that Bob has kids, greens his house, gives some to charity, so on and so forth, and so after all the deductions are made, he gets a check back for $4,500. Bob's effective tax rate - what he actually sends to the government is $8,000, or 16%. That's his real tax rate, not the nominal 25% marker. If you were to strip out all of the deductions and credits Bob gets, you would be increasing his actual tax rate by 9%. Hiking taxes like that on the populace in the middle of an already anemic recovery is a very, very, Bad Idea, and it's one that is exceedingly unlikely to actually get us any extra revenue (but rather the opposite).

    You see, tax revenue isn't actually a function of tax rates; it's a function of GDP:



    now, it's worth noting that that line has recently dipped - we increased the size of government from about 20% of GDP to about 24.5% of GDP... and revenue fell from 19.5% of GDP to 15% of GDP..... government, you see, is not in the habit of taxing itself the same as it does for work, production, or investment, and so as government increases, taxes as a percent of GDP decreases.

    If you want to boost revenues relative to government spending, therefore, you have to sharply reduce government spending and spur growth in GDP. Now, the above example with Bob had some hidden costs that we didn't discuss. He had to go to the effort and expense of greening his house just enough to get the credit. He had to maintain all the paperwork, he probably had to use a tax service to get it all put in the system and to make sure he could "maximize his return". These are called "compliance costs", and under our current tax structure, they are huge. We are talking $431 BILLION. That's the money that we Americans spend before the Treasury ever see's a single dime - that's how much it costs us just to figure out how to work our own tax code. The Laffer Center has estimated that you could increase GDP by fully half a percent annually, compounding, if you could cut complexity in half. I would argue that this is an underestimate because they are only accounting for saved costs, and not increased investment that would come with such an improvement. In addition, the Republican provision strips out much more than that. However, let's not add on too much, and let's only suggest that a massive in-flooding of investment and a radically simplified tax structure will only produce (say) 0.65 of a point of added GDP each year. That's low-balling, but that's okay. GDP in 2010 was about $14.7 Trillion, and we are probably going to add around 2.3% to that for this year. So let's make a couple of happy assumptions and state that as of 2012 we were able to bring down state spending to the point where we matched historical revenue returns of around 19%, and that GDP without any alteration would grow at 3% annually after that. So if we compare 3 to 3.65% rates of growth starting in 2012....

    in ten years we will have collected over $1.2 Trillion in extra revenue.... while boosting economic growth (instead of dragging it, which you see with tax hikes). Assuming a populace of 310 million, GDP per capita will be increased by $4,233; that''s more than 4 grand extra for every man, woman, and child, per year, increasing. And we're not counting the second order growth that will come from increased employment, wage growth, so on, and so forth.

    That's the Republican solution: Increase growth without raising real tax rates so as to provide jobs and increase revenue. The Democrat solution thus far seems to be to raise real tax rates and hope that producers and investors don't notice and change their behavior accordingly.

    And many times. Someone posted all of it in this thread. Obama has publicly admitted.
    I've seen him agree to take $500 Bn out in general to pay for his brand new entitlement, and I've seen him promise that the IPAB will be able to reduce costs.... somehow.... in a manner not to be mentioned before the election... But I haven't seen Obama agree to Medicare reform in the debt ceiling deal; and Google is giving me nothing. Frankly I find such a move exceedingly unlikely, as the President has already made it clear he intends to make MediScare the centerpiece of his 2012 campaign. Perhaps you could provide me with some specifics.

  5. #75
    Educator

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    07-08-11 @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    Your argument can be an attack at someone who just wants to get rid of loopholes, but I want to lower the whole code and simplify it. We haven't seen a comprehensive medicare reform from Obama yet because it's still in deliberation. He has admitted publicly it needs to be cut, though he probably didn't use the word cut.

  6. #76
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,053

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    This year, me and my company made 40 grand in profit, after deductions. And, you want me to pay more?

    yeah! That's going to encourage small business growth.

    BTW, what was your tax bill for 2010?
    Its actually the conservatives that want people making $40K to pay more, they think that group is exempt from income tax. Most of the discussion on tax increases is aimed at persons/small business with [B][taxable/B] incomes (which only occurs on revenues or total income much in excess of that) north of $250K or $1M.

  7. #77
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    a broad bipartisan coalition of congress, according to msm's the last couple months, intends to undertake comprehensive tax reform this year

    but debt ceiling talks are certainly not the place, tax reform takes months if not years

    it's your move, president obama

    america is and has been waiting

    we're well into three years since the party has passed a budget

    leadership, anyone?

  8. #78
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Call it what you want, but the end result is people/businesses will be paying more taxes. I can't afford to pay more taxes right now.
    My uncle is a small business owner. Employs about 60 folks. He used to employ 100, but has had to slash business in the recession. Adding in State and Local, his tax bill right now is about 40% of income - I can only imagine how many jobs he could have kept if his income hadn't been cut nearly in half. Increase his effective tax rate, and he will probably be able to afford that as well. It will force him to fire more people.... but he will be able to afford it. So more blue-collar workers without college degrees will find themselves unable to support their families, out on the street, hunting for jobs in a high-unemployment environment... but hey, at least we'll be sticking it to the rich guy, eh? Hey, maybe we should have a Luxury Tax! That can only effect the rich guys, right?

    ...In theory, the idea of a luxury tax on new boats costing more than $100,000 made perfect sense to the politicians who came up with it.

    In practice, the luxury tax stinks.

    ``The tax took aim at the rich and hit the little guy right in the wallet,`` said Congressman E. Clay Shaw Jr., R-Fort Lauderdale.

    The luxury tax was a last-minute addition to a federal budget deficit reduction bill passed last October. The tax was supposed to raise about $3 million this year. What its proponents never considered was that the tax would put people out of work. The loss of corporate and income taxes, along with unemployment compensation, could add up to $60 million....

    doh!



    You cannot hurt the wage payer without hurting the wage earner.
    Last edited by cpwill; 06-24-11 at 09:24 PM.

  9. #79
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,067

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    Quote Originally Posted by Gargantuan View Post
    Your argument can be an attack at someone who just wants to get rid of loopholes, but I want to lower the whole code and simplify it.
    that is precisely the Ryan plan - lower nominal rates at the same pace as we strip out deductions, credits, loopholes, and shelters to achieve revenue neutrality - the Rich (and everyone else) pay just as much as they did before, but without the complexity and with dramatically reduced compliance costs.

    We haven't seen a comprehensive medicare reform from Obama yet because it's still in deliberation. He has admitted publicly it needs to be cut, though he probably didn't use the word cut.
    He has stated that he intends to reduce Medicare expenditures through the magical unicorn of the IPAB. He refuses to say how they will do it, because that will force him to admit that rationing is really his only idea. But that was part of the ACA, and in no way is the same as agreeing to Medicare reform as part of the Debt Ceiling talks. Personally, as much as it would hurt us, I'd be willing to trade repealing the Bush Tax cuts for small business owners in return for Ryan's Medicare Reform measure. Yeah, it would mean extra pain for a couple of years, but only a couple - once Republicans took the White House and the Senate in 2013 we could pass his tax-code simplification as well; and try to make up for it on the back end. In the meantime, we remove the centerpiece of Obama's reelection campaign - demagouging the need for Medicare reform.
    Last edited by cpwill; 06-24-11 at 09:30 PM.

  10. #80
    Educator

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    07-08-11 @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: Key republican bolts from debt ceiling talks

    You consider Ryan's plan to be fiscally conservative? obama's deficit commission reduction plan is more fiscally conservative than Ryan's lets borrow for 10 years in gigantic numbers and icnrease the debt, then have a balanced budget in 2051!!

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •