• 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!

We Don't Need a Middle Class Tax Cut

Harshaw said:
Who, exactly, is "we"?

And for whatever problem you think this "we" needs more revenue for, why does the solution have to be on the revenue side?
Click to expand...

I think we in his phrase are people who benefit from government handouts and entitlements.

As far as the solution always having to be on the revenue side I don't think it is what I think's going on here is the desire to destroy the middle class.
 
Harshaw said:
Who, exactly, is "we"?
Click to expand...

The 90% majority....

208ce4bd8244535f571d55243f26442a.png
 
Fraggle Rock said:
Oh how the Republicans are caring for us middle class folks.....increasing the fee for Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon and Yosemite from $40 dollars a car to $70. Thank you thank you.....oh the stewards of the middle class. And don't forget that they passed a bill today so that the Consumer can not sue credit card companies and bankers. Wells Fargo must love it....with all the fake accounts they opened. It brings a tear to my eye how much they care for me. Boy you Trumperters are morons......any minute now the electricity is going to spark in that brain an send a signal to a synapse. Boy are you going to be surprised what Commander "bone Spur" in Chief does to this country. If you put an ear to Fox News you will hear the rushing of water. It is the Great Orange Pumpkin flushing what is left of this Republic down the drain
Click to expand...

About two months ago, I bought a pass good for all National Parks for free entry and it cost $10.00.
 
Harshaw said:
The 90% majority doesn't need a middle-class tax cut?
Click to expand...

The reality of U.S. taxes is that they are at historically low rates. The bottom 90% would do better with policies that raise wages instead of focusing on tax cuts. The only reason why there seems to be tax cut hysteria is that rich Republican donors demand from the GOP that they receive tax cuts for the money provided for campaigns.
 
MTAtech said:
The reality of U.S. taxes is that they are at historically low rates. The bottom 90% would do better with policies that raise wages instead of focusing on tax cuts. The only reason why there seems to be tax cut hysteria is that rich Republican donors demand from the GOP that they receive tax cuts for the money provided for campaigns.
Click to expand...

Missed the point.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
We need both tax hikes and spending cuts, long term. Instead of targeted tax cuts for wealthy families, we need to stop the capital gains discount, reduce defense spending, trim the federal bureaucracy, and implement universal health care. As usual, Republican policy is short-sighted and counter-productive.
Click to expand...

You mean like democrat policies of spend baby spend? Government programs cost money. This isn't a republican democrat issue. It is a government issue. They waste money all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
You mean like democrat policies of spend baby spend? Government programs cost money. This isn't a republican democrat issue. It is a government issue. They waste money all the time.
Click to expand...
While the belief that Democrats are big spenders is conservative folk-law, it's a myth. The actual results are the opposite. George W. Bush was president from Jan. 2001 to Jan 2009. Barack Obama was president from Jan 2009-Jan 2016. The figures on spending speak for themselves.

usgs_line.php


Moreover, you asserted that government wastes money all the time. Can you elaborate upon what specific waste of money -- that has any significant scope, you are referring?
 
MTAtech said:
The reality of U.S. taxes is that they are at historically low rates. The bottom 90% would do better with policies that raise wages instead of focusing on tax cuts. The only reason why there seems to be tax cut hysteria is that rich Republican donors demand from the GOP that they receive tax cuts for the money provided for campaigns.
Click to expand...

LOL, yep, another big govt. liberal wanting more dollars coming out of the state and local economy to go to the federal govt. tp pay for social engineering. A tax cut is basically a pay increase as it puts more money into the hands of the consumers regardless of income status. The promotion of globalism and socialism by the left ignores the fact that the left will never generate enough money from those evil rich people to fund the liberal spending appetite. there is absolutely no way that the Federal Govt. needs to be 4 trillion a year and therein lies the difference between the left and the right. The left's answer to everything is raise wages, raise taxes, raise govt. spending totally ignoring basic economics
 
Conservative said:
LOL, yep, another big govt. liberal wanting more dollars coming out of the state and local economy to go to the federal govt. tp pay for social engineering. A tax cut is basically a pay increase as it puts more money into the hands of the consumers regardless of income status. The promotion of globalism and socialism by the left ignores the fact that the left will never generate enough money from those evil rich people to fund the liberal spending appetite. there is absolutely no way that the Federal Govt. needs to be 4 trillion a year and therein lies the difference between the left and the right. The left's answer to everything is raise wages, raise taxes, raise govt. spending totally ignoring basic economics
Click to expand...

Were you on vacation? Seems like you've been gone for a bit.

Anyhow, did you miss the part where the MTA post you quoted said that bit about 90% of the country being better off with wage increases? Not that a tax cut wouldn't help at all. But I think all us working stiffs would be better off with a 5% wage increase, than a 0.5% reduction in Federal tax, which then insults us with removing the ability to deduct our Federal taxes from the income reported on our State income tax return.

(And to boot, an across the board 5% wage increase actually would increase Federal tax revenue!! Unlike the tax cuts being proposed)
 
MTAtech said:
While the belief that Democrats are big spenders is conservative folk-law, it's a myth. The actual results are the opposite. George W. Bush was president from Jan. 2001 to Jan 2009. Barack Obama was president from Jan 2009-Jan 2016. The figures on spending speak for themselves.

usgs_line.php


Moreover, you asserted that government wastes money all the time. Can you elaborate upon what specific waste of money -- that has any significant scope, you are referring?
Click to expand...

Not sure what point you think you're making. Your own graph shows that every year of the BHO administration had spending higher than any year of the GWB administration. Moreover, BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all previous Presidents combined.
 
Critter7r said:
Were you on vacation? Seems like you've been gone for a bit.

Anyhow, did you miss the part where the MTA post you quoted said that bit about 90% of the country being better off with wage increases? Not that a tax cut wouldn't help at all. But I think all us working stiffs would be better off with a 5% wage increase, than a 0.5% reduction in Federal tax, which then insults us with removing the ability to deduct our Federal taxes from the income reported on our State income tax return.

(And to boot, an across the board 5% wage increase actually would increase Federal tax revenue!! Unlike the tax cuts being proposed)
Click to expand...

Yes, just got back from Hawaii but regarding wage increases, market conditions determine wages as they always should not the federal govt. unless you want to take responsibility for the expenses and what they do to prices?

Just what we need more tax revenue to the bureaucrats to waste, why do we need 50 state and local budgets along with a 4 trillion dollar federal govt.? Maybe it is time for a civics class for all leftists to find out the true role of the Federal Govt. and the actual taxes paid and their purpose? FICA(Payroll taxes), excise taxes(Roads and infrastructure), and FIT( operating expenses for the Federal govt.) Seems like a lot of left confusion on that plus the unified budget which distorts the deficit and debt
 
Jack Hays said:
Not sure what point you think you're making. Your own graph shows that every year of the BHO administration had spending higher than any year of the GWB administration. Moreover, BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all previous Presidents combined.
Click to expand...

I have noticed that about many of the posters here that post charts they don't either read or understand.
 
Conservative said:
I have noticed that about many of the posters here that post charts they don't either read or understand.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that Obama had more growth in spending than Bush?
 
Jack Hays said:
Not sure what point you think you're making. Your own graph shows that every year of the BHO administration had spending higher than any year of the GWB administration. Moreover, BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all previous Presidents combined.
Click to expand...
The point of the graph, which escapes both you and Conservative, is that the previous post said that liberals spend more and more. The graph shows that Bush increased spending each year, for a total of a 50% real increase in spending. Obama's spending from 2009 to 2016 was flat. That's the point that you don't want to get. It's clear as day.

usgs_line.php
 
Jack Hays said:
The safeguard is important no matter how few people are affected.
Click to expand...

That's a really terrible argument, anyway. Why is a $6m inheritance suddenly off-limits when it includes a farm?

If farmers should always be treated with so much reverence that they shape the tax code, why don't we just give them all huge cash handouts?
 
Jack Hays said:
Not sure what point you think you're making. Your own graph shows that every year of the BHO administration had spending higher than any year of the GWB administration. Moreover, BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all previous Presidents combined.
Click to expand...

And every year of GWB was higher than Clinton, so na na na na na naaaaaa.

Don't be obtuse, you know he was pointing out that spending levels increased every year under GWB, and they didn't under Obama, his admin didn't spend above what was spent in his first year. And even if you attribute the entire $500B increase between 2008 and 2009 (although I don't know how you could), GWB STILL increased spending by more than Obama. ($750B increase for GWB)
 
Last edited:
MTAtech said:
The point of the graph, which escapes both you and Conservative, is that the previous post said that liberals spend more and more. The graph shows that Bush increased spending each year, for a total of a 50% real increase in spending. Obama's spending from 2009 to 2016 was flat. That's the point that you don't want to get. It's clear as day.

usgs_line.php
Click to expand...

I suppose that's because it's not a point worth making or discussing. Fact is that BHO spent more each year than GWB did in any year, and BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all his predecessors combined. To try to make that a story of spending restraint is ludicrous.:lol:
 
Jack Hays said:
Not sure what point you think you're making. Your own graph shows that every year of the BHO administration had spending higher than any year of the GWB administration. Moreover, BHO added as much to the federal deficit as all previous Presidents combined.
Click to expand...

Conservative said:
I have noticed that about many of the posters here that post charts they don't either read or understand.
Click to expand...

This is ironic. Apparently, you have no concept of inflation. Here is a chart that shows you how debt changed under various presidents:

e6e07bcbfe608140c3975eb087ed20fc.png
 
Absentglare said:
"That's a really terrible argument, anyway. Why is a $6m inheritance suddenly off-limits when it includes a farm?

If farmers should always be treated with so much reverence that they shape the tax code, why don't we just give them all huge cash handouts?
Click to expand...
Tales of struggling family farms disbanded because they can’t afford the taxes when the patriarch dies have flourished for decades, despite the absence of any examples. I don’t mean examples are rare: I mean that advocates of estate tax repeal haven’t been able to come up with a single example at least since the late 1970s, when exemption levels were raised to the equivalent of around $2 million in today’s dollars.

Lately Trump has added a new twist, portraying the estate tax as a terrible burden on hard-working truckers. For who among us doesn’t own an $11 million fleet of trucks?

The reality, as this graphic from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows, is that only a small number of very large estates pay any tax at all, and only a tiny fraction of those tax-paying estates are small businesses or family farms":


101417krugman2-tmagArticle.png


link
 
Critter7r said:
And every year of GWB was higher than Clinton, so na na na na na naaaaaa.

Don't be an obtuse dick, you know he was pointing out that spending levels increased every year under GWB, and they didn't under Obama, his admin didn't spend above what was spent in his first year. And even if you attribute the entire $500B increase between 2008 and 2009 (although I don't know how you could), GWB STILL increased spending by more than Obama. ($750B increase for GWB)
Click to expand...

Every POTUS plays the hand he is dealt. I made no other claim about any other POTUS, but I objected to a clearly false claim of spending restraint by BHO.
 
Absentglare said:
This is ironic. Apparently, you have no concept of inflation. Here is a chart that shows you how debt changed under various presidents:

e6e07bcbfe608140c3975eb087ed20fc.png
Click to expand...

I can't unsee the Ford Carter Reagan Bush portion of the chart looking like someone flipping me the bird. That's Reagan giving the country the finger.
 
Jack Hays said:
Every POTUS plays the hand he is dealt. I made no other claim about any other POTUS, but I objected to a clearly false claim of spending restraint by BHO.
Click to expand...

So if your first 43 wives spend more and more each year until you finally divorce the last one, and your latest wife comes in and only spends each year the amount that your last wife spent in her last year, that's not spending restraint? She didn't increase the amount each year like the previous wives did ... :shrug
 
Critter7r said:
So if your first 43 wives spend more and more each year until you finally divorce the last one, and your latest wife comes in and only spends each year the amount that your last wife spent in her last year, that's not spending restraint? She didn't increase the amount each year like the previous wives did ... :shrug
Click to expand...

And she ran up as much debt as the previous 43 combined.
 
Jack Hays said:
And she ran up as much debt as the previous 43 combined.
Click to expand...

The same could be said of most of the previous 43 wives.

But the latest one reduced the amount she put on the credit cards each year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom