• 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!

Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108 mill

Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

Risky Thicket said:
Imma step out on a limb here and suggest that it might be because Walker is the governor of Wisconsin and Walker is presumed to be running for the GOP nomination for President, and will run on his record in, ahhh, you know, Wisconsin? :unsure13:

I mean, I don't know. It's just a wild guess. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The fact that it is only interesting because of what the Governor might do is a sad commentary on journalism. This kind of nonsense used to be reserved for the Sport section of the newspaper.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

Politicians are just like wallstreet CEOs these days. If the company/state can avoid failing under their watch, even if a decision increases the odds it will fail down the road, they will go with that decision to escape blame or at least not be fired before moving onto better opportunities. It's extremely self centered, but the problem lies as much in the ignorance of those meant to hold them accountable.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

VanceMack said:
You are absolutely right. it IS a relevant question to ask and Walkers positions are absolutely something people nationwide should be concerned about because he is ASKING them to be concerned about them. The question is not why are Walkers positions relevant. The question is, why are people that accept and tolerate the identical actions of his predecessors in the governors mansion suddenly ****ting themselves intentionally because Walker did what they have done. THAT is a relevant question.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, he won't be held accountable for his failures/successes as a mere governor anyway. I mean, under Bush II texas was dead last or very close to last in just about every category - health care, education, environment, prison population - and that didn't make a damn bit of difference
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

joko104 said:
Not agreeing to wage and pension increases for school administrators and teachers is not cutting education.
Click to expand...

it is if the decent teachers go elsewhere or it deters would-be teachers. At some point, people look at average salary $25,000 vs $50,000 and say screw it, i'll go into accounting instead
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

chromium said:
it is if the decent teachers go elsewhere or it deters would-be teachers. At some point, people look at average salary $25,000 vs $50,000 and say screw it, i'll go into accounting instead
Click to expand...

Between what we pay teachers and the situations we put them into in the classroom...I am surprised we have teachers.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

Blue_State said:
Between what we pay teachers and the situations we put them into in the classroom...I am surprised we have teachers.
Click to expand...

Indeed. There is a school of ed at my college, but the only ones who seem to join it are those who can't pass the other curriculum (foreign language, upper level classes), or they're confident in landing a wealthy husband basically

But my state cut $1 billion from K-12 last year, pushing the student teacher ratio to 50:1! If this continues, we may have to invite illegals who don't speak english to take over

Or lower the drop out age to 7
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

chromium said:
Don't worry, he won't be held accountable for his failures/successes as a mere governor anyway. I mean, under Bush II texas was dead last or very close to last in just about every category - health care, education, environment, prison population - and that didn't make a damn bit of difference
Click to expand...
Fascinating. Where are the actual statistical sites regarding the state of Texas under Bush's governorship?
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

chromium said:
it is if the decent teachers go elsewhere or it deters would-be teachers. At some point, people look at average salary $25,000 vs $50,000 and say screw it, i'll go into accounting instead
Click to expand...


it isnt the teachers

it is their unions, and the bull**** the unions keep trying

take a look at any school district now.....compare the amount of salaries paid to teachers versus other positions in the schools

how many admins does a school need? there is waste in so many areas......money that could go to teachers if the freaking unions would get out of the way

good teachers should be paid good wages.....but the tenure issue, and the no testing issues are just some of the problems

and the unions are at the root of those issues
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

iguanaman said:
What a load of BS. You need to join the real world.....Not only did the Bush tax cuts reduce revenue by nearly $3 TRILLION but the SLOWER than expected growth that followed cost another 3.5 Trillion in lost revenue. Here's a Reagan man to explain it for you.



http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/are-the-bush-tax-cuts-the-root-of-our-fiscal-problem/?_r=0
Click to expand...

That is absolutely false and a disgraceful lie and typical of liberal propaganda. Liberals believe that every citizen's income belongs to the government and any money left in the pockets of the citizenry is a tax/revenue loss. It's utterly asinine.

The fact of the matter is that after the Bush era tax cuts fully came into effect after 2003 and following the loss in tax revenue resulting from the Clinton tech bubble burst and 9/11, tax revenue, IN REAL DOLLARS, increased by 44% through Bush's last year in office in 2008. Your big lie, as outlined with the $3 trillion in lost tax revenue, is not an actual reduction in revenue to the government as outlined above, but $3 trillion left in the pockets of honest, hard working Americans and that just frosts the ass of any liberal who believes in their heart they can spend your money better than you can.

After Bush Tax Cuts, Payments By Wealthy Actually Increased - Forbes
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
after 2003 and following the loss in tax revenue resulting from the Clinton tech bubble burst and 9/11, tax revenue, IN REAL DOLLARS, increased by 44% through Bush's last year in office in 2008. Your big lie,
Click to expand...



LOL @ big lie, you can't even do simple math correctly or understand the words you are using..
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

SlevinKelevra said:
LOL @ big lie, you can't even do simple math correctly or understand the words you are using..
Click to expand...

Seriously - gratuitous insults from you are the norm here and mean nothing. Show where my words are wrong and/or where the math in the Forbes article is inaccurate.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
That is absolutely false and a disgraceful lie and typical of liberal propaganda. Liberals believe that every citizen's income belongs to the government and any money left in the pockets of the citizenry is a tax/revenue loss. It's utterly asinine.

The fact of the matter is that after the Bush era tax cuts fully came into effect after 2003 and following the loss in tax revenue resulting from the Clinton tech bubble burst and 9/11, tax revenue, IN REAL DOLLARS, increased by 44% through Bush's last year in office in 2008. Your big lie, as outlined with the $3 trillion in lost tax revenue, is not an actual reduction in revenue to the government as outlined above, but $3 trillion left in the pockets of honest, hard working Americans and that just frosts the ass of any liberal who believes in their heart they can spend your money better than you can.

After Bush Tax Cuts, Payments By Wealthy Actually Increased - Forbes
Click to expand...

I find it surprising that the author of the NY Times opinion piece, Bartlett, who to create the air of credibility was pointed out to have had some roll with Reagan and GHW Bush, left out so many facts and events related to the period of time he was commenting on. It's just a tiny slice of data, and an interpretation of that tiny slice, without the context.

The only conclusion I can draw from the Times opinion piece is that it is meaningless.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
Seriously - gratuitous insults from you are the norm here and mean nothing. Show where my words are wrong and/or where the math in the Forbes article is inaccurate.
Click to expand...

your link mentioned nothing about real* (aka inflation adjusted) receipt levels




CanadaJohn said:
The fact of the matter is that after the Bush era tax cuts fully came into effect after 2003 and following the loss in tax revenue resulting from the Clinton tech bubble burst and 9/11, tax revenue, IN REAL DOLLARS, increased by 44% through Bush's last year in office in 2008.
Click to expand...


and
2008-2524$B
2003-1782$B

increase of ~41.6% not 44%.

2008-2524$B
2004-1880$B

increase of ~34.2% not 44%.



The increase of "44%" was measured comparing 2003 to 2007, which has immediate and exact conflict with the words you chose to write.
I'm sorry, but it isn't my fault that you chose write your own words (getting them incorrect) rather than just copy-pasta from the article.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

SlevinKelevra said:
your link mentioned nothing about real* (aka inflation adjusted) receipt levels







and
2008-2524$B
2003-1782$B

increase of ~41.6% not 44%.

2008-2524$B
2004-1880$B

increase of ~34.2% not 44%.



The increase of "44%" was measured comparing 2003 to 2007, which has immediate and exact conflict with the words you chose to write.
I'm sorry, but it isn't my fault that you chose write your own words (getting them incorrect) rather than just copy-pasta from the article.
Click to expand...

So, once again, your focus is on minutia and gotcha games. I stand by the content of the article and the numbers presented from government sources. You haven't the integrity to admit that the initial argument made by Iguanaman was a flat out lie because it harms you argument, but you can nitpick at my argument in an attempt to dismiss it. That makes you nothing but a hack.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
So, once again, your focus is on minutia and gotcha games. I stand by the content of the article and the numbers presented from government sources. You haven't the integrity to admit that the initial argument made by Iguanaman was a flat out lie because it harms you argument, but you can nitpick at my argument in an attempt to dismiss it. That makes you nothing but a hack.
Click to expand...


His "error" was he omitted the word "projected" in front of revenues.
There was no "big lie" in his post, and you ignored his entire point that a REAGANite was even admitting the tax cuts were disastrous. The fact you went out of your way to try and smear "liberals" as evil boogiemen accordingly made you prime target to point out your lack of reading comprehension of math skills. Again, sorry. But it's hard to take anything you say seriously when you can't accomplish these simple tasks. You do realize his article used government sources too, right?
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

SlevinKelevra said:
His "error" was he omitted the word "projected" in front of revenues.
There was no "big lie" in his post, and you ignored his entire point that a REAGANite was even admitting the tax cuts were disastrous. The fact you went out of your way to try and smear "liberals" as evil boogiemen accordingly made you prime target to point out your lack of reading comprehension of math skills. Again, sorry. But it's hard to take anything you say seriously when you can't accomplish these simple tasks. You do realize his article used government sources too, right?
Click to expand...

So, you admit you're a hack. Glad to see it. Iguanaman "omitted" the word "projected" and that's no big deal but I used the word "real" to indicate actual dollars taken in, and not in technical economic terms, and that's worth insulting. The dishonesty of your posts is blatant, as with all hacks.

And for the record, I don't need you to take anything I say seriously since your opinion of my posts couldn't be lower on my "give a ****" meter.

Take care and have a good day.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
So, you admit you're a hack. Glad to see it. Iguanaman "omitted" the word "projected" and that's no big deal but I used the word "real" to indicate actual dollars taken in, and not in technical economic terms, and that's worth insulting. Your dishonestly is blatant, as with all hacks.

And for the record, I don't need you to take anything I say seriously since your opinion of my posts couldn't be lower on my "give a ****" meter.

Take care and have a good day.
Click to expand...


LMAO, you called his whole post a "big lie" because he omitted a single word (which was implied to anyone who read the link)
yet it's a "hack" to point out that you actually used an incorrect word, and then butchered math.

LMAO. wow. "glass houses, yada yada"
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
That is absolutely false and a disgraceful lie and typical of liberal propaganda. Liberals believe that every citizen's income belongs to the government and any money left in the pockets of the citizenry is a tax/revenue loss. It's utterly asinine.

The fact of the matter is that after the Bush era tax cuts fully came into effect after 2003 and following the loss in tax revenue resulting from the Clinton tech bubble burst and 9/11, tax revenue, IN REAL DOLLARS, increased by 44% through Bush's last year in office in 2008. Your big lie, as outlined with the $3 trillion in lost tax revenue, is not an actual reduction in revenue to the government as outlined above, but $3 trillion left in the pockets of honest, hard working Americans and that just frosts the ass of any liberal who believes in their heart they can spend your money better than you can.

After Bush Tax Cuts, Payments By Wealthy Actually Increased - Forbes
Click to expand...

First of all the author of the link I quoted is not a liberal! He is a Republican who worked for Reagan and Bush senior
Where are the cites for this ridiculous statement from your link?
What happened after the Bush tax cuts was accelerated growth of our economy (GDP) and a significant reduction in unemployment
Click to expand...
Since when is 2% GDP growth called "accelerated growth"? And as far as employment, Bush had the worst record of any modern President in growing private sector jobs.
But the GOP meme suggesting that tax cuts equals jobs while, conversely, tax increases on the so-called “job creators” mean less work for the rest of us, simply does not survive any reasonable scrutiny.

Putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy may create a few jobs for the foreign bankers who get to count the extra money funneled into into the off-shore accounts of the rich, but there is nothing in the way of actual data to support the notion that putting more money into the pockets of the wealthiest Americans will inure to the benefit of those looking for work.

I wish it were otherwise.
Click to expand...
The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

faithful_servant said:
This is such common knowledge that I'm embarrassed for you. Tax revenues during the Bush admin. were at all time highs. Get educated about the real effect of the tax cuts so that we can have an intelligent conversation.
Click to expand...

Really. So common, at times what you refer to as common knowledge is Urban Legend material.

The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton
View attachment 67180761

Fiscal FactCheck


Income-tax receipts are down sharply since the Bush tax cuts. In fiscal 2000, the year before the cuts began to take effect, receipts from the federal income tax on individuals amounted to 10.2 percent of GDP. That figure was down to 6.2 percent of GDP last year.
Spending for the military and for homeland security has risen substantially since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Spending for national defense rose from 3.0 percent of GDP that year to 4.8 percent last year.
Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the "Social Security surplus" makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while.

The Truth About Who's Responsible For Our Massive Budget Deficit - Business Insider
The chart below provides a look at federal receipts (taxes) and spending during the same period. (The deficit is the difference between them).

Republicans howl that President Obama has exploded the size of federal government spending in his short tenure as President, and it is true that he has increased it. But President Bush actually increased federal spending by more than 2X as much as Obama has. So it is unfair to lay the explosion in spending at the feet of President Obama: Both presidents are responsible.
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

iguanaman said:
First of all the author of the link I quoted is not a liberal! He is a Republican who worked for Reagan and Bush senior
Where are the cites for this ridiculous statement from your link?
Since when is 2% GDP growth called "accelerated growth"? And as far as employment, Bush had the worst record of any modern President in growing private sector jobs.
The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes
Click to expand...

Under Obama
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

CanadaJohn said:
So, once again, your focus is on minutia and gotcha games. I stand by the content of the article and the numbers presented from government sources. You haven't the integrity to admit that the initial argument made by Iguanaman was a flat out lie because it harms you argument, but you can nitpick at my argument in an attempt to dismiss it. That makes you nothing but a hack.
Click to expand...



I love it too.

While the Obama administration goes into debt faster than the Starship Enterprise can find disaster, this thread about Scott Walker has become a debate of the minutea of the Bush administration and its activities eleven years ago.

Nothing happens in Obamaland that does not include a few hundred posts about the Bush administration even down to whether figures are adjusted for inflation.

How come no one ever asks such detailed questions of the guy spending the money now?
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

Fearandloathing said:
I love it too.

While the Obama administration goes into debt faster than the Starship Enterprise can find disaster, this thread about Scott Walker has become a debate of the minutea of the Bush administration and its activities eleven years ago.

Nothing happens in Obamaland that does not include a few hundred posts about the Bush administration even down to whether figures are adjusted for inflation.

How come no one ever asks such detailed questions of the guy spending the money now?
Click to expand...


Hypocrite much?
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

Jack Fabulous said:
I'm afraid it's going to be hit piece after hit piece until election day or until the day he is no longer a candidate. Whichever comes first.

The stories will be written and the little partisans will get all riled up and huff and puff and point their fingers seemingly oblivious to the fact that their own candidate's closets are bursting at the seams...

Gotta love elections.:lol:
Click to expand...

The stories coming out of the Washington Post will be one hit piece after another on Republican candidates, during the primary season. And don't be surprised if there is an absent of hit pieces on Jeb Bush because that is the candidate the left wants to see on the right still standing.
Walker wasn't the only hit piece this week that came out of the Washington Post, Christie got his own also. But when you think about it, Christie is the closest one to Jeb's ideology which drains support from Jeb. And Walker for the past two weeks has been polling very well often ahead of Bush, so he too gets a hit piece. If anyone starts to outshine Jeb, the Post will do their part to tarnish them. So what does that tell ya when the left is rooting for Jeb?
 
Re: Scott Walker cut $541 million in taxes last year. Now his state will miss a $108

vesper said:
The stories coming out of the Washington Post will be one hit piece after another on Republican candidates, during the primary season. And don't be surprised if there is an absent of hit pieces on Jeb Bush because that is the candidate the left wants to see on the right still standing.
Walker wasn't the only hit piece this week that came out of the Washington Post, Christie got his own also. But when you think about it, Christie is the closest one to Jeb's ideology which drains support from Jeb. And Walker for the past two weeks has been polling very well often ahead of Bush, so he too gets a hit piece. If anyone starts to outshine Jeb, the Post will do their part to tarnish them. So what does that tell ya when the left is rooting for Jeb?
Click to expand...

It's not that we are rooting for Jeb as much as we can see that he is the "anointed one". Why do you think Romney dropped out so quick? He got he word from the ones that matter. It is going to be Jeb this time no matter how much you guys kick and scream and no matter who gets votes in the primaries. We will save our ammo for the campaign. Believe me there is plenty on Jeb as if his last name is not enough. A 3rd Bush in a row for the GOP? LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom