Should Republicans agree to Tax Increases.....and commit political suicide?

Norquist is an idiot to support any and all tax loopholes. These tax breaks are often put in place to pressure certain behaviors. They increase the cost of compliance, which is money that is totally wasted, and are used to give certain companies a competitive advantage over others. Why would Republicans make this a deal breaking condition when we desperately need spending cuts?

Norquist apparently does not understand that the cost of government is not represented by tax revenues. It is represented, primarily, by spending. The government has no magic wand and can not create REAL resources out of thin air. When it inflates it burdens anyone who is holding a dollar. When it borrows it burdens those that are seeking loans and investments. How it finances spending not reduce the burden. Spending is the cost of government, not taxes. A tax cut does not reduce the burden of government unless it is accompanied with spending cuts. It simply shifts the burden. Dubya cut taxes and increased the burden of government.

Coburn is right on this one and I don't know what Norquist's game is, but limited government does not appear to be it. You could have a very low tax rate and the government could still be a considerable drag on the American people through incoherent red tape, unjust laws and inflationary policies.

To be fair, some of the supposed "loopholes" that Dems are attacking are nothing of the kind and they are simply trying to single out a few companies for special tax treatment. Obama has been hesitant to close "loopholes" that would harm commodity traders because that is a big part of the economies of Chicago and Illinois.

The only real reason Republicans should oppose closing tax loopholes is that tax reform is a very complicated issue. We need real spending cuts NOW. The Dems are only using the "loopholes" as a red herring. They KNOW the American people do not want higher taxes. The soak the rich well that they have relied on for years has dried up. But they can still scapegoat a few of the rich who may appear to be getting special treatment and use it as cover to punish their political opponents. The Dems can then blame the Republicans and call them uncompromising. Norquist is helping them.

19 Different Polls Show That Americans Support Tax Increases To Cut Deficit

"The Republican Party may be playing to their base with their hard line cuts ideology, but most Americans disagree. For all the talk among the pundit class, and the hope among Republicans that Obama will be blamed if there is no deal on the debt ceiling, the polling tells a different story.

If the president offers a mix of tax increases and spending cuts and Republicans walk away from it, they will be blamed for trying to impose their radical and unrealistic agenda on the American people.

Once again, the collective Republican ideological blind spot on taxation is pushing them out of the American mainstream."

Catawba said:

19 Different Polls Show That Americans Support Tax Increases To Cut Deficit

"The Republican Party may be playing to their base with their hard line cuts ideology, but most Americans disagree. For all the talk among the pundit class, and the hope among Republicans that Obama will be blamed if there is no deal on the debt ceiling, the polling tells a different story.

If the president offers a mix of tax increases and spending cuts and Republicans walk away from it, they will be blamed for trying to impose their radical and unrealistic agenda on the American people.

Once again, the collective Republican ideological blind spot on taxation is pushing them out of the American mainstream."

Click to expand...

Well according to the most recent poll that matters.............that being Nov. 2,2010--The Largest Political Ass Whooping in history.....

Republicans took Control of the House with 63 House Seats, 6 Senate seats, 10 Governorships, 680+ State legislative seats, and control of 19 more State legislatures..

I do believe if the majority of Americans wanted tax increases.........they would of voted for more Tax Happy Liberals........rather than tossing them out on their asses....
.
.
.
.

what do tax hikes have to do with cutting spending?

dems act as if all the current spending is proper

Badmutha said:

Well according to the most recent poll that matters.............that being Nov. 2,2010--The Largest Political Ass Whooping in history.....

Republicans took Control of the House with 63 House Seats, 6 Senate seats, 10 Governorships, 680+ State legislative seats, and control of 19 more State legislatures..

I do believe if the majority of Americans wanted tax increases.........they would of voted for more Tax Happy Liberals........rather than tossing them out on their asses....

Click to expand...

I know it's pointless to reason with such ignorance, but all of the polls Catawba mentioned were taken in 2011. Of course' now you're going to say, "but they don't really matter, the only one that matters is the one I like." Imagine a whiny little kid saying that. That's you

Badmutha said:

Well according to the most recent poll that matters.............that being Nov. 2,2010--The Largest Political Ass Whooping in history.....

Republicans took Control of the House with 63 House Seats, 6 Senate seats, 10 Governorships, 680+ State legislative seats, and control of 19 more State legislatures..

I do believe if the majority of Americans wanted tax increases.........they would of voted for more Tax Happy Liberals........rather than tossing them out on their asses....
.
.
.
.

Click to expand...

That poll is outdated now. That was before the American people got reacquainted with the GOP shell game where they promise jobs and a better economy and then only work for further tax cuts for the wealthiest and a radical religious agenda. All the polls now are showing a great majority of Americans understand that both spending and revenues have to be addressed to reduce the deficit..

TurtleDude said:

what do tax hikes have to do with cutting spending?

dems act as if all the current spending is proper

Click to expand...

The Democrats have offered to cut spending by $2 for every $1 of tax increases. They get what the majority of the country knows, that we can only address our debt by BOTH cutting spending and increasing revenues. Either one by itself won't be enough to address our huge debt.

Catawba said:

The Democrats have offered to cut spending by $2 for every $1 of tax increases.

Click to expand...

that is crap. they offered pretend cuts for actual tax increases. "not surging in Afghanistan for 10 years straight" is not "cutting spending"

cpwill said:

that is crap. they offered pretend cuts for actual tax increases. "not surging in Afghanistan for 10 years straight" is not "cutting spending"

Click to expand...

Really!?!?!?!? That savings would mean something to me.

TurtleDude said:

what do tax hikes have to do with cutting spending?

dems act as if all the current spending is proper

Click to expand...

But the issue is not solely "cutting spending" and anyone who tells you that has already diverted from the rational path and is pursuing a purely partisan or ideological. There are two sided to a budget. Any basic accounting book or course tells us that.

Both sides of the ledger must be dealt with. We need to both cut spending and increase revenues.

haymarket said:

Really!?!?!?!? That savings would mean something to me.

Click to expand...

they would mean nothing because that's not the plan. they just hiked the baseline to something ridiculous, "cut" from there back to what was already the plan, and then claimed to have "cut the deficit". no actual spending was cut - just smoke and mirrors.

cpwill said:

they would mean nothing because that's not the plan. they just hiked the baseline to something ridiculous, "cut" from there back to what was already the plan, and then claimed to have "cut the deficit". no actual spending was cut - just smoke and mirrors.

Click to expand...

Was a long term war in Iraq "in the plan"? Was a never ending war on terror "in the plan"?

haymarket said:

Was a long term war in Iraq "in the plan"? Was a never ending war on terror "in the plan"?

Click to expand...

"The plan" was to go after the guy who tried to kill his daddy, I don't think Bush had a long-term plan, he just used an excuse that was dropped in his lap.

haymarket said:

Was a long term war in Iraq "in the plan"? Was a never ending war on terror "in the plan"?

Click to expand...

maintaining surge levels of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan indefinitely was never the plan. claiming to have 'cut spending" by not doing so, therefore, is meaningless.


Republicans might as well claim to have already raised tax rates, as they aren't lowering them to the Simpson-Bowles suggested rates, and demand that those rate increases count for them.

Catawba said:

That poll is outdated now. That was before the American people got reacquainted with the GOP shell game where they promise jobs and a better economy and then only work for further tax cuts for the wealthiest and a radical religious agenda. All the polls now are showing a great majority of Americans understand that both spending and revenues have to be addressed to reduce the deficit..

Click to expand...

Yeah.....tell me how outdated it was when Republicans retake the Senate and the Presidency in 2012........
.
.
.
.

Badmutha said:

Yeah.....tell me how outdated it was when Republicans retake the Senate and the Presidency in 2012........

Click to expand...

You're funny when you think you're right

Catawba said:

That poll is outdated now. That was before the American people got reacquainted with the GOP shell game where they promise jobs and a better economy and then only work for further tax cuts for the wealthiest and a radical religious agenda. All the polls now are showing a great majority of Americans understand that both spending and revenues have to be addressed to reduce the deficit..

Click to expand...

Well according to the most recent poll........only 34% of Americans support Tax Increases........the most recent poll/Gawd has spoken..........

55% Oppose Tax Hike In Debt Ceiling Deal - Rasmussen Reports™

55% Oppose Tax Hike In Debt Ceiling Deal

Just 34% think a tax hike should be included in any legislation to raise the debt ceiling. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% disagree and say it should not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

There is a huge partisan divide on the question. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Democrats want a tax hike in the deal while 82% of Republicans do not. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 35% favor a tax hike and 51% are opposed.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

interesting.


so in this mythical reality there is no baby boomer generation? and tax rates directly effect tax revenue?


In reality, unfortunately, Two Trillion will not even cover future Social Security and Medicare, much less any other government function. Furthermore, hiking the Bush Tax Rates won't get you more revenue. You could cut the entire DOD and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, except that the loss of world wide security would likely lead to an international economic collapse to make 2008 look like a dress rehearsal.

Click to expand...

If you cut it down to 2 trillion (adjust for inflation to what it would need to be based off of the 2002 budget set by Bush Jr.) then yeah you could. Here, according to the CBO are the #1 causes of our deficit:

Revenue declines due to two recessions, separate from the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 28%
Defense spending increases: 15%
Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 13%
Increases in net interest: 11%
Other non-defense spending: 10%
Other tax cuts: 8%
Obama Stimulus: 6%
Medicare Part D: 2%
Other reasons: 7%

Roughly 33% of that could be taken out, not counting any of the spending cuts Obama has proposed bringing the overall budget to between 2-2.5 trillion.

JohnWOlin said:

If you cut it down to 2 trillion (adjust for inflation to what it would need to be based off of the 2002 budget set by Bush Jr.) then yeah you could. Here, according to the CBO are the #1 causes of our deficit:

Revenue declines due to two recessions, separate from the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 28%
Defense spending increases: 15%
Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 13%
Increases in net interest: 11%
Other non-defense spending: 10%
Other tax cuts: 8%
Obama Stimulus: 6%
Medicare Part D: 2%
Other reasons: 7%

Roughly 33% of that could be taken out, not counting any of the spending cuts Obama has proposed bringing the overall budget to between 2-2.5 trillion.

Click to expand...

no, you couldn't; for the simple reason that these programs are not static. both Social Security and Medicare as currently scheduled will rise 74% in the next decade - and we haven't begun to implement Obamas new entitlement program (remember that) which doesn't fully start until 2014.

you simply can't cut the budget to 2 Trillion unless you are willing to make deep cuts in the entitlements.

furthermore, the CBO is forced to utilize static scoring in its' treatment of taxes. in reality, rates matter very little - it's growth that is important.

cpwill said:

that is crap. they offered pretend cuts for actual tax increases. "not surging in Afghanistan for 10 years straight" is not "cutting spending"

Click to expand...

Here you go since you are unfamiliar with the President's proposal:

* Non-security discretionary spending: The President is proposing to build on the savings from the FY 2011 budget agreement, while investing in key drivers of economic growth like energy innovation, education, and infrastructure. This would entail cutting non-security discretionary spending to levels consistent with the Fiscal Commission, saving $770 billion by 2023.


* Security spending: The President’s framework will go beyond the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget to achieve deeper reductions in security spending. It sets a goal of holding the growth in base security spending below inflation, while ensuring our capacity to meet our national security responsibilities, which would save $400 billion by 2023.

* Health care: The President’s framework builds on the Affordable Care Act by including new reforms aimed at further reducing the growth of health care spending – a major driver of long-term deficits. The President opposes any plan that would simply shift costs to seniors and the vulnerable by undermining Medicare and Medicaid. Building on the foundation of the historic deficit reduction achieved through the Affordable Care Act, the framework would save an additional $340 billion by 2021, $480 billion by 2023, and at least an additional $1 trillion in the subsequent decade. These savings complement the new patient safety initiative that could lower Medicare costs by another $50 billion over the next decade by providing better care. The President’s framework includes initiatives that will:

* Bend the long-term cost curve by setting a more ambitious target of holding Medicare cost growth per beneficiary to GDP per capita plus 0.5 percent beginning in 2018, through strengthening the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

* Make Medicaid more flexible, efficient and accountable without resorting to block granting the program, ending our partnership with States or reducing health care coverage for seniors in nursing homes, the most economically vulnerable and people with disabilities. Combined Medicaid savings of at least $100 billion over 10 years.

* Reduce Medicare’s excessive spending on prescription drugs and lower drug premiums for beneficiaries without shifting costs to seniors or privatizing Medicare. Combined Medicare savings of at least $200 billion over 10 years.

* Other mandatory spending: Outside of health care, comprehensive deficit reduction must include savings in other mandatory programs, including agricultural subsidies, the federal pension insurance system, and anti-fraud measures, while protecting and strengthening programs that serve low-income families and other vulnerable Americans. The President’s framework includes a target of $360 billion in savings from other mandatory programs by 2023.

* Tax reform: the President is calling for individual tax reform that closes loopholes and produces a system which is simpler, fairer and not rigged in favor of those who can afford lawyers and accountants to game it. The President supports the Fiscal Commission’s goal of reducing tax expenditures enough to both lower rates and lower the deficit.

* Social Security: The President does not believe that Social Security is in crisis nor is a driver of our near-term deficit problems. But, in the context of an aging population and a Social Security wage base that is declining as a share of overall earnings, Social Security faces long-term challenges that are better addressed sooner than later to ensure that the program remains for future generations the rock-solid benefit for older Americans that it has been for past generations. That is why the President supports bipartisan efforts to strengthen Social Security for the long haul. These efforts should be guided by several principles, including strengthening the program and not privatizing it, improving retirement security for the vulnerable while protecting people with disabilities and current beneficiaries, and not slashing benefits for future generations."

FACT SHEET: The President's Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility | The White House

Badmutha said:

Well according to the most recent poll........only 34% of Americans support Tax Increases........the most recent poll/Gawd has spoken..........

Click to expand...

Oh, you finally found one poll out of 20 to say what you want it to! Only 19 more to go and you'll be there! :sun

Catawba said:

Oh, you finally found one poll out of 20 to say what you want it to! Only 19 more to go and you'll be there! :sun

Click to expand...

Well I did find the only poll that matters.........



Im betting if a majority of Americans wanted Tax and Spend Happy Liberals.......they would have elected them......rather than tossing them out on their asses in the biggest political ass whooping in history.

But tell us more about your polls in 2012.....when Republicans retake the Senate and the Kenyan turd is flushed.
.
.
.

cpwill said:

no, you couldn't; for the simple reason that these programs are not static. both Social Security and Medicare as currently scheduled will rise 74% in the next decade - and we haven't begun to implement Obamas new entitlement program (remember that) which doesn't fully start until 2014.

you simply can't cut the budget to 2 Trillion unless you are willing to make deep cuts in the entitlements.

furthermore, the CBO is forced to utilize static scoring in its' treatment of taxes. in reality, rates matter very little - it's growth that is important.

Click to expand...

Maybe I should have been more specific, if you take out the Bush tax cuts, and thoroughly rollback spending along with trimming the fat on other programs by 1-1.5% you can easily do that.