Page 199 of 212 FirstFirst ... 99149189197198199200201209 ... LastLast
Results 1,981 to 1,990 of 2119

Thread: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

  1. #1981
    Sage

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

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes


  2. #1982
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Where do you get this nonsense from? Are you plucking these gems from some fruitcake rightwing site or do you simply make them up yourself?

    Obamaís 2011 Budget Proposal: How Itís Spent

    Published: February 1, 2010
    So why don't we have a 2011 budget since Obama controlled the entire Congress in 2010?

  3. #1983
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    Thanks, Prof, that isn't going to sit well with liberals. The point always has been where is the 2011 budget that was due prior to October 1, 2010. Now we have a President complaining about the fact that there is a debt ceiling problem. As usual he wants the issue, never the solution or he would have handled it last year.

  4. #1984
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post

    So why don't we have a 2011 budget since Obama controlled the entire Congress in 2010?
    Seriously, Conservative, where are you getting your information from? The FY2011 budget passed back in April ...

    H.R. 1473: Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (GovTrack.us)

  5. #1985
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Seriously, Conservative, where are you getting your information from? The FY2011 budget passed back in April ...

    H.R. 1473: Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (GovTrack.us)
    A continuing resolution isn't a budget. I am really concerned about your total incompetence yet claims of brilliance.

  6. #1986
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I will never accept the statement that tax cuts are an expense to the govt. I posted the line item expenses of the govt. and tax cuts isn't there. Tax cuts give people more spendable income and that scares the hell out of liberals. It makes economic growth easier because of consumer spending which always happens when people have more spendable income. GDP growth means more tax revenue and more employees. Happens every time unless there are economic conditions that prevent it, i.e. recessions, 9/11, and the financial crisis.
    Since roughly 1/3 of the Stimulus was tax cuts, you shouldn't consider that spending either, right?


  7. #1987
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    The Republican handling of this is just ludicrous. They are spending the entire week on "cap, cut and balance" which everybody- absolutely everybody- knows has a zero percent chance of passing. In fact, it was designed not to pass. A cap of 18% of GDP is just, frankly, insane. Not only would it mean massive, truly massive, cuts across the board, but it would devestate our ability to deal with recessions. Normally when the economy slows down, govenment spending automatically increases (because of things like food stamps) and taxation automatically decreases (because people make less income in a recession). When the economy booms, the opposite happens- revenues increase and spending decreases. That stabilizes the economy. It moves money from the peaks to the valleys. Every economist in the world agrees that is a very important function of government. But this crazy plan would force the government to do the opposite- cut spending every recession and only increase it during booms. That is economically insane. It amounts to intentionally destabilizing the economy... And then a requirement for a supermajority to eliminate special interest tax loopholes on top of that? It's just flat out ridiculous. No serious policy people on either side of the aisle actually want that. It would tank the country flat out and everybody knows it.

    What the Republicans want is to make a big noise about balancing the budget, to get Democrats on record opposing their plan. They figure they can achieve both those goals without actually destroying the country by using the McConnell plan- just give the president the authority to raise the debt ceiling whenever he wants... How anybody could possibly tolerate a politician spewing out this much rhetoric and causing a stir like this just for the politics of it is beyond me.

    But, the bigger issue is all the actual deals that they turned down in favor of this dramatic performance. Plans involving cuts of up to $4 TRILLION in spending have been proposed by Democrats. Even the initial $2 trillion cuts Obama proposed right out of the gates would have been the biggest cut in government spending ever, but $4 trillion is huge. But the Republicans sunk those plans because they didn't want to distract from their big fake performance that everybody knows will result in nothing whatsoever. It is absurd. They are clearly putting political theater ahead of even their own policy goals...

  8. #1988
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Since roughly 1/3 of the Stimulus was tax cuts, you shouldn't consider that spending either, right?
    No true tax cut is spending. Most of Obama's so called tax cuts were expenses thus weren't cuts. Calling it a tax cut doesn't make it one. The items highlighted in bold are tax cuts and that doesn't add up to 237 billion. All the items not in bold were funded by line items in the budget thus were expenses. Keep trying Pb

    Total: $237 billion
    • $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[29]
    • $70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[29]
    $15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).
    • $14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
    • $6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[41]
    • $4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
    • $4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers — for families with at least three children.
    • $4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
    • $1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.

  9. #1989
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    The Republican handling of this is just ludicrous. They are spending the entire week on "cap, cut and balance" which everybody- absolutely everybody- knows has a zero percent chance of passing. In fact, it was designed not to pass. A cap of 18% of GDP is just, frankly, insane. Not only would it mean massive, truly massive, cuts across the board, but it would devestate our ability to deal with recessions. Normally when the economy slows down, govenment spending automatically increases (because of things like food stamps) and taxation automatically decreases (because people make less income in a recession). When the economy booms, the opposite happens- revenues increase and spending decreases. That stabilizes the economy. It moves money from the peaks to the valleys. Every economist in the world agrees that is a very important function of government. But this crazy plan would force the government to do the opposite- cut spending every recession and only increase it during booms. That is economically insane. It amounts to intentionally destabilizing the economy... And then a requirement for a supermajority to eliminate special interest tax loopholes on top of that? It's just flat out ridiculous. No serious policy people on either side of the aisle actually want that. It would tank the country flat out and everybody knows it.

    What the Republicans want is to make a big noise about balancing the budget, to get Democrats on record opposing their plan. They figure they can achieve both those goals without actually destroying the country by using the McConnell plan- just give the president the authority to raise the debt ceiling whenever he wants... How anybody could possibly tolerate a politician spewing out this much rhetoric and causing a stir like this just for the politics of it is beyond me.

    But, the bigger issue is all the actual deals that they turned down in favor of this dramatic performance. Plans involving cuts of up to $4 TRILLION in spending have been proposed by Democrats. Even the initial $2 trillion cuts Obama proposed right out of the gates would have been the biggest cut in government spending ever, but $4 trillion is huge. But the Republicans sunk those plans because they didn't want to distract from their big fake performance that everybody knows will result in nothing whatsoever. It is absurd. They are clearly putting political theater ahead of even their own policy goals...
    Good, veto it, defeat it in the Senate and let the people decide who is right.

    You haven't been paying much attention so here it is, the Obama record. Enjoy? Still brainwashed? 2 trillion over 10 years is 200 billion a year which would pay the debt service. Thanks, Obama, now how are you going to put 24 million unemployed and underemployed Americans back to work actually paying full taxes? How about the 65 million working Americans that aren't paying any taxes? If you think we have a revenue problem then there is a good place to start in raising revenue, not on those of us that do pay net taxes.

    Obama record, 15.1 million officially unemployed TODAY 2 1/2 years later, 16.2% total unemployment or underemployment over 24 million TODAY, 4 trillion added to the debt as of the end of fiscal year 2011, and a rising misery index(7.83 to 12.67).

  10. #1990
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Haha, where do you keep finding this crap?
    • Are we supposed to believe that a 38.6% tax creates almost no jobs, but a 39.6% tax creates huge amounts of jobs?
    • That 35% is the magic number for no jobs, and 28-31% will get you some jobs?

    And what's up with these ranges anyway?
    • Why do you bother to but the 38.6% number on the chart (in effect for one year) -- and not put the 92% tax bracket on the chart, which was in effect for two years?
    • Is it because at 92% tax, there was negative job growth (-1.0), so you hide that in a 90+ category?
    • You wouldn't be using ranges for the high income tax brackets because you know that job creation goes up predictably with a few blips during recessions, and by averaging out over long periods of time you're guaranteed a nice, high value... nahh, couldn't be.

    Why 1950-2010?
    • Is it because including the 63% and 73% tax brackets from the 1930's and the pitiful growth associated with that period would destroy the illusion you're trying to put together?


    Those folks at the Center for American Progress are a real class act.
    Or if you really want to go back before WW2, you could go to Hoover's oh-so-wonderful 20% tax rate that led immediately to the collapse of our economy.

    Hoover cuts taxes, income inequality soars, economy collapses.

    Bush cuts taxes, income inequality soars, economy collapses.

    See a pattern here...

Posting Permissions

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