Page 25 of 29 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 285

Thread: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

  1. #241
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Here you go

    Debt-To-GDP Chart "Wrong," US Debt Levels Fine

    Look at the charts and not the moronic commentary by Blodget
    That has nothing to do with post 224

    What does it have to do with private sector?

    The private sector will not grow with new taxes.
    Bottom line business does not trust Obama after watching what he did with the bailouts.

    http://www.redstate.com/congressman_...sticks-coming/


    Did you catch that little two-step? Small businesses can get money for lending that comes from TARP but somehow…isn’t TARP. The distinction sounds like nothing more than window dressing, but why hide the truth? Maybe it’s because past TARP recipients (sometimes forced recipients) have been stigmatized and demonized by their association with this seemingly endless bailout fund. Or maybe it’s because businesses have learned an important lesson about TARP: where there’s a carrot, there will be sticks. Big sticks, and if I was a business owner considering an entanglement with TARP, I’d be more than a little wary of getting whacked.

    Anyone can see that small businesses have been struggling. But even if President Obama assigned every last penny of TARP to this new TARP-redux for small businesses, he still won’t have addressed the real issue preventing robust private sector growth – the looming impact of smothering new taxes, mandates, regulations, and payoffs for Big Labor. These are some serious sticks that will beat down private enterprise with or without a loan from TARP.

    If we continue down this path, the sustainable economic growth and long-term job creation we want simply won’t appear. Instead, we need to provide a commerce-friendly environment of lower taxes, lower debt, and lower spending. Not to mention we need to close down TARP to prevent the White House from using $700 billion of your money to bailout whatever company, industry, or sector it wants.
    Last edited by ptif219; 02-16-10 at 11:50 PM.

  2. #242
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    That has nothing to do with post 224
    It has everything to do with it

    It show the private sector debt in relation to the GDP

    It shows that private sector debt in the US is at least 75% higher then past averages

    Which means that the private sector is in debt to far higher level in the past. Do you think that when debt levels are already higher, people and business should take on even more debt. Such high debt levels generally should indicate that lowering the debt is going to be in order, not increasing it. To increase it makes the chance of defaulting higher, not a good thing.

  3. #243
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    I am not your researcher.


    Tax Cut Government Income Cuts Rate Argue Effects Economy

    A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government, for example on personal or corporate income. Whether a given tax cut will increase or decrease total tax revenues is much discussed by both economists and politicians.

    The immediate effects of a tax cut are, generally, a decrease in the real income of the government and to increase the real income of those whose tax rate has been lowered. In the longer term, however, the effect on government income may be reversed, depending on the response that tax-payers make. Supply-siders argue that tax cuts for corporations and wealthy individuals provide them an incentive for investments which stimulate so much economic activity that even at the lower rate more net tax revenue will be collected.

    Some economists argue that even in the short term cutting some taxes, for example capital gains tax, may raise government income immediately due to long-postponed sales of securities being made at the lower rate.
    Tax cuts can stimulate the economy or they can do nothing

    If the US government gave everyone who paid federa income tax a $1000 tax cut (just as an example amount) and 75% of the people who received the tax cut used it to pay down debt rather then invest in capital equipement or spending it on goods, then the 75% would not have stimulated the economy

    And if the government cut spending by an equal amount to the total cost of the tax cut, the overall effect on the economy would not be stimulative but subtract from the economy as overall activity would have decreased not increased. If the government borrowed the money to pay for the tax cut then it would be stimulative, but inefficient in doing so

  4. #244
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    It has everything to do with it

    It show the private sector debt in relation to the GDP

    It shows that private sector debt in the US is at least 75% higher then past averages

    Which means that the private sector is in debt to far higher level in the past. Do you think that when debt levels are already higher, people and business should take on even more debt. Such high debt levels generally should indicate that lowering the debt is going to be in order, not increasing it. To increase it makes the chance of defaulting higher, not a good thing.
    Yet the sight says it may be wrong.

  5. #245
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    Yet the sight says it may be wrong.
    Yes the sight says it is wrong but what do you say

    Do you feel comfortable as a person with total debts 4 times your annual earning and taking on more debt


    Or would you feel more comfortable with a debt load only 2 times your annual earnings and taking on more debt

    That iis basically what the charts are saying

    It is the overall amount of private sector debt in relation to the GDP. It is at historic highs as of the article. Do you honestly feel that taking on more debt is going to be the answer to the economic crisis. If so go get a credit card and max it out right now

    Do exactly what the government is doing, basically

  6. #246
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Yes the sight says it is wrong but what do you say

    Do you feel comfortable as a person with total debts 4 times your annual earning and taking on more debt


    Or would you feel more comfortable with a debt load only 2 times your annual earnings and taking on more debt

    That iis basically what the charts are saying

    It is the overall amount of private sector debt in relation to the GDP. It is at historic highs as of the article. Do you honestly feel that taking on more debt is going to be the answer to the economic crisis. If so go get a credit card and max it out right now

    Do exactly what the government is doing, basically
    I say if they trusted Obama they would move. They seen Obama's control during the TARP and bailouts and do not trust him. Obama has not shown he supports business but rather that Obama thinks government is the answer.

    Obama has screwed himself and us.

  7. #247
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    I am not your researcher.


    Tax Cut Government Income Cuts Rate Argue Effects Economy

    A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government, for example on personal or corporate income. Whether a given tax cut will increase or decrease total tax revenues is much discussed by both economists and politicians.

    The immediate effects of a tax cut are, generally, a decrease in the real income of the government and to increase the real income of those whose tax rate has been lowered. In the longer term, however, the effect on government income may be reversed, depending on the response that tax-payers make. Supply-siders argue that tax cuts for corporations and wealthy individuals provide them an incentive for investments which stimulate so much economic activity that even at the lower rate more net tax revenue will be collected.

    Some economists argue that even in the short term cutting some taxes, for example capital gains tax, may raise government income immediately due to long-postponed sales of securities being made at the lower rate.
    Tax cuts that are saved will have no short term effects on boosting aggregate demand, and therefore will only increase budget deficits without equal cuts in spending.

    Now..... If the Ricardian equivalence does not hold, tax cuts will boost aggregate demand because people will spend. We can either spend or save, and investment does not equal saving (it is still considered spending). Why would this happen? Lets assume that a country has a huge stock of debt to coincide with the new budget deficit that is created. If consumers believe that the tax cuts are only temporary and consider the fiscal path, then of course they will save to offset subsequent tax hikes.

    Do you understand?
    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

  8. #248
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Tax cuts that are saved will have no short term effects on boosting aggregate demand, and therefore will only increase budget deficits without equal cuts in spending.

    Now..... If the Ricardian equivalence does not hold, tax cuts will boost aggregate demand because people will spend. We can either spend or save, and investment does not equal saving (it is still considered spending). Why would this happen? Lets assume that a country has a huge stock of debt to coincide with the new budget deficit that is created. If consumers believe that the tax cuts are only temporary and consider the fiscal path, then of course they will save to offset subsequent tax hikes.

    Do you understand?
    That is why the Bush tax cuts should have been permanent but the dems would not allow that

  9. #249
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    So say what you want about macro stabilizers, the fact of the matter remains.....
    Doing nothing would have been worse. How much worse? Think 1930's worse.
    Still waiting for thos 'fact' to be proven as true.

    Withoug said proof, any premise which rests on this argument is necessarily unsound.

  10. #250
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Still waiting for thos 'fact' to be proven as true.

    Withoug said proof, any premise which rests on this argument is necessarily unsound.
    Government bonds are the standard by which all bonds are rated. Therefore, they strongly reflect the strength of a countries financial sector.

    Lets look at a few graphs.



    Compare this to the 30's



    The 10 year treasury note



    The 30 yr bond



    Why did yields drop in all government bonds? The financial sector was running for shelter, putting money into the safest place possible, government bonds. Yields went negative on 1 month treasury bills. Banks were paying the government to use there money. This all happened because one investment bank, Lieman Brothers, collapsed. Do you think we could have allowed another large investment bank to collapse?

Page 25 of 29 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... 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
  •