• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obamacare enrollment hits 7 million

The republicans didn't reduce taxes lower than they had been before Clinton. Taxes were increased, and revenues, jobs and the economy increased

Republicans cut various taxes during their control during the Clinton years mostly going to businesses. you have no idea what happened with the Contract with America and how much of it Clinton signed. Further, I hope you are putting your money where your mouth is and sending more than required to the Federal Govt. since obviously you believe they need it more than you
 
Republicans cut various taxes during their control during the Clinton years mostly going to businesses. you have no idea what happened with the Contract with America and how much of it Clinton signed.

Nothing in the CWA was put into law.
 
So now you think increasing tax revenues is A Good Thing!!

You must love tax increases that result in increased tax revenues

Oh wait!!


wonder if you or Boo can answer the following question as to who said this

“Every dollar released from taxation that is spared or invested will help create a new job and a new salary.”
 
The only evidence that matters to the people is having more spendable income and more jobs. No study is going to change reality. Your problem is you are a big govt. liberal who doesn't even understand how having more take home pay affects you. Only three times in modern history have the tax rates been cut, JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush so any study outside the terms of those Presidents is irrelevant as are all your studies.

I'm sorry, but you're making stuff up with no support. All those times have been covered in these studies. You're just wrong. Sorry.
 
I'm sorry, but you're making stuff up with no support. All those times have been covered in these studies. You're just wrong. Sorry.

Bet your wife tells you to go ahead and support less take home pay so the govt. could have more. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Your studies are just that opinions based upon how the issue is framed. Do tax cuts create jobs, of course not, they create the atmosphere to create jobs and you don't seem to understand the relationship. Ask your wife how she fees about more money in your paycheck and what she does with it. Still waiting for an answer to the question I posted. Only you and other hard core liberals don't understand the benefits of keeping more of what you earn. Liberals hate it because that creates less dependence.

Me making stuff up? Prove it, name for me what other MODERN DAY President cut income tax rates?
 
Bet your wife tells you to go ahead and support less take home pay so the govt. could have more. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Your studies are just that opinions based upon how the issue is framed. Do tax cuts create jobs, of course not, they create the atmosphere to create jobs and you don't seem to understand the relationship. Ask your wife how she fees about more money in your paycheck and what she does with it. Still waiting for an answer to the question I posted. Only you and other hard core liberals don't understand the benefits of keeping more of what you earn. Liberals hate it because that creates less dependence.

Me making stuff up? Prove it, name for me what other MODERN DAY President cut income tax rates?

Oooo, oooo, oooo!!! (Hand raised) I know :mrgreen:
 
Slyfox, saw your post on another thread claiming that you showed me the "official" website to prove me wrong and I still said I was right. The problem is you didn't read the entire article on that website, so here it is. I do accept apologies

Social Security History

In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget." This is likewise sometimes described by saying that Social Security was placed "on-budget."

This 1968 change grew out of the recommendations of a presidential commission appointed by President Johnson in 1967, and known as the President's Commission on Budget Concepts. The concern of this Commission was not specifically with the Social Security Trust Funds, but rather it was an effort to rationalize what the Commission viewed as a confusing budget presentation. At that time, the federal budget consisted of three separate and inconsistent sets of measures, and often budget debates became bogged-down in arguments over which of the three to use. As an illustration of the problem, the projected fiscal 1968 budget was either in deficit by $2.1 billion, $4.3 billion, or $8.1 billion, depending upon which measure one chose to use. Consequently, the Commission's central recommendation was for a single, unified, measure of the federal budget--a measure in which every function and activity of government was added together to assess the government's fiscal position.

So SS money went on budget and was spent on everything including SS. All Presidents did that until

The FY 1969 budget would not be implemented by President Johnson; it would instead be presided over by President Nixon, who took office on January 20,1969. This was 20 days into the 1969 fiscal year. When President Nixon took office, he too adopted the unified budget approach, and it was used by all Presidents thereafter until 1986.
 
Bet your wife tells you to go ahead and support less take home pay so the govt. could have more. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is? Your studies are just that opinions based upon how the issue is framed. Do tax cuts create jobs, of course not, they create the atmosphere to create jobs and you don't seem to understand the relationship. Ask your wife how she fees about more money in your paycheck and what she does with it. Still waiting for an answer to the question I posted. Only you and other hard core liberals don't understand the benefits of keeping more of what you earn. Liberals hate it because that creates less dependence.

Me making stuff up? Prove it, name for me what other MODERN DAY President cut income tax rates?

Again, before you and j get lost in your silliness. Focus. The issue is whether taxes create jobs and has a significant effect on the economy. I've shown rather handily that taxes don't have a major effect on the economy. They don't create so much as an atmosphere. The links have been quite clear on thus. You've shown shown nothing to dispute this other than your rants.

J's a little better at this. He at least knows hacks to link. But I have give you more than a few links that include conservative business magazines. I challenge to do half as well.
 
Again, before you and j get lost in your silliness. Focus. The issue is whether taxes create jobs and has a significant effect on the economy. I've shown rather handily that taxes don't have a major effect on the economy. You've shown shown nothing to dispute this other than your rants.

J's a little better at this. He at least knows hacks to link. But I have give you more than a few links that include conservative business magazines. I challenge to do half as well.

Let's put the bs aside and tell me how you keeping more of what you earn affects the economy and take that times the 145 million that are working. In a consumer driven economy try to grow it without people having money? You are so hard headed that you cannot even understand common sense. tax cuts create the atmosphere for economic growth and job creation. What happened to jobs when JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush cut taxes?
 
Let's put the bs aside and tell me how you keeping more of what you earn affects the economy and take that times the 145 million that are working. In a consumer driven economy try to grow it without people having money? You are so hard headed that you cannot even understand common sense. tax cuts create the atmosphere for economic growth and job creation. What happened to jobs when JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush cut taxes?

I've told you before, the numbers are not large enough to have any effect on most of us either way. I've shown you that as well. And I've given you studies. There is little evidence to support your claim, and you've produced nothing at all to support it.
 
I've told you before, the numbers are not large enough to have any effect on most of us either way. I've shown you that as well. And I've given you studies. There is little evidence to support your claim, and you've produced nothing at all to support it.

Only BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and Treasury data which of course isn't anything. How about having your wife respond to what it is like getting less in your paycheck because of higher taxes and how that impacts your purchasing history?
 
Only BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and Treasury data which of course isn't anything. How about having your wife respond to what it is like getting less in your paycheck because of higher taxes and how that impacts your purchasing history?

No, it isn't. You misread that data. I've spent some time over the last couple of years showing you that.


According to a new According to a new study by the Congressional Research Service (non-partisan), there's no evidence that tax cuts spur growth.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/study-tax-cuts-dont-lead-to-growth-2012-9#ixzz2yj3GRLuh
 
I believe they say that, which is not equal to that being the reason. As
most get out of paying taxers, and I did link that, it's highly unlikely that would be a real issue. Wages and healthcare are much more likely to be reasons.

People AND Business leave to escape punitive taxation and regulation.

Just look at the exodus out of California and into states like Texas.

To contradict your opinion even further, NY is now promising business that if they move to NY they can get a 10 year tax reprive.

Tax increases are highly destructive to our economy.

Even Clinton lowered Capital Gains taxes.

Obama just increased them along with taxes on dividends. He's a total moron.
 
People AND Business leave to escape punitive taxation and regulation.

Just look at the exodus out of California and into states like Texas.

To contradict your opinion even further, NY is now promising business that if they move to NY they can get a 10 year tax reprive.

Tax increases are highly destructive to our economy.

Even Clinton lowered Capital Gains taxes.

Obama just increased them along with taxes on dividends. He's a total moron.

While I get a laugh at the hyperbolic use of the word punitive, your just ranting. Again, the issue is does taxes create jobs or economic growth? I've given plenty if evidence they don't.


The conventional wisdom on corporate taxes is that the lower they are, the more companies can invest and stimulate the economy. That’s not how it worked in 2012. Among the 34 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the average corporate tax rate had little bearing on economic growth.

Correlations: High Corporate Taxes, Economic Growth Can Coexist - Businessweek
 
Lol !!

No evidence ???

There's plenty of evidence. Its called the State of Texas !

Texas was covered earlier, and cheap labor us the overriding factor there. Not taxes. But go back and look at the link.
 
Texas was covered earlier, and cheap labor us the overriding factor there. Not taxes. But go back and look at the link.

"Covered" by you posting some irrelevant left wing drek that purposely ignores Texas per capita GDP being HIGHER than Californias for the last 4 years running.

With Californias per capita GDP being revised downward in 2011.

Texas's per capita income in 2011 was 4.6 percent HIGHER than Californias and its gotten worse for the left coast since then.

When you take into account California's higher cost of Living, Texans average annual income ( 47,000 ) is 6 thousand dollars higher than Californias. ( 41,000 )

Honestly, all the left has to defend itself these days are lies and misinformation.

I mean you're trying to convince us that both Corporations AND people ( 2 Million Californians ) pick up and move to Texas for "cheap labor " ???

Lol !!!

You need to pinch and remind yourself your'e NOT debating other Obama Supporters.

Conservatives dont buy into left wing mitigations and desperate excuses.
 
Texas was covered earlier, and cheap labor us the overriding factor there. Not taxes. But go back and look at the link.

Yep, people are moving to Texas in droves to escape better pay; not to avoid higher taxes and cost of living. ;)

Would your rather earn $47K/year and pay $1K/month for housing or make $41K/year and pay $2K/month for housing?
 
Yep, people are moving to Texas in droves
to escape better pay; not to avoid higher taxes and cost of living. ;)

Would your rather earn $47K/year and pay $1K/month for housing or make $41K/year and pay $2K/month for housing?

His arguments are ridiculous.

Highly dishonest

I guess NY should just shut down their " Start Up NY " campaign, because lower taxes doesn't equate to growing economies.
 
No, it isn't. You misread that data. I've spent some time over the last couple of years showing you that.


According to a new According to a new study by the Congressional Research Service (non-partisan), there's no evidence that tax cuts spur growth.


Read more: STUDY: Tax Cuts Don't Lead To Growth - Business Insider

You don't seem to get it, the data you show doesn't trump the reality of what drives a consumer driven economy and it isn't govt. spending, it is consumer spending their own money which when there is a tax cut there is more of it. That creates the atmosphere for economic growth, something you don't seem to understand. ask your wife how she feels about more spendable income?

Didn't get a response from you on who made the quote I posted and you ignored?

Every dollar released from taxation that is spared or invested will help create a new job and a new salary.”
 
Last edited:
"Covered" by you posting some irrelevant left wing drek that purposely ignores Texas per capita GDP being HIGHER than Californias for the last 4 years running.

With Californias per capita GDP being revised downward in 2011.

Texas's per capita income in 2011 was 4.6 percent HIGHER than Californias and its gotten worse for the left coast since then.

When you take into account California's higher cost of Living, Texans average annual income ( 47,000 ) is 6 thousand dollars higher than Californias. ( 41,000 )

Honestly, all the left has to defend itself these days are lies and misinformation.

I mean you're trying to convince us that both Corporations AND people ( 2 Million Californians ) pick up and move to Texas for "cheap labor " ???

Lol !!!

You need to pinch and remind yourself your'e NOT debating other Obama Supporters.

Conservatives dont buy into left wing mitigations and desperate excuses.

you out haven't look closely at what I've used. I've used articles from conservative sources, government sources, and peer reviewed studies.

And you guys have used . . . . . . . That's right, nothing.
 
Back
Top Bottom