All three of those sources have a conflict of interest in that they have close ties to the current administration and make money from those ties. Cheap money is good for their business but not for the economy as a whole. Moodys much less so than JPMorgan and GSG.Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Moody’s Analytics Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Kemp Assails Tax Withholding Change as a 'Gimmick'":
The other was elimiating the capital gains tax in inner cities (whatever the "inner city" part means). But let's focus on the payroll tax deduction since it is the topic of discussion at the moment.[Jack]Kemp said the Administration had not adopted two of his major strategies--cutting payroll taxes by 15% to stimulate job growth (being one)...
At the time, it was estimated that the tax cut "could inject $25 billion into the economy." So, I ask if a 15% payroll tax reduction (1.14% of 7.65% payroll tax) could potentially generate $25 billion by "provid[ing] each taxpayer with an average of $1 a day in increased disposable income" why then couldn't a 41% reduction (3.1%) do far better 19 years later?
There is, of course, the question of how to pay for it. Well, if you accept the "multiplier effect" theory then you know that the more people who are employed the more income tax revenue goes into the Treasury. Moreover, if as a conservative you subscribe to the believe that "the more money you earn and allowed to keep, the more disposable income you have" then how can you denounce the President's economic plan when this component of economic stimulus was encourage 19 years ago by a Republican administration?
Last edited by Objective Voice; 09-11-11 at 06:30 PM.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911
I've long had a problem with the Bush tax cuts...I prefer that they didn't get extended but understand why they were. And while I'm not too keen on the FICA tax being cut still, I can live with it as long as the cut is temporary. At some point taxes will have to be raised, but in today's economy I can live with temporary tax reductions as long as they expire at the end of 2012, as appropriate.