Would you support increasing taxes to pay down the national debt?

[phattonez]

Tim Geithner was a civil servant all of his life, Hank Paulson was Secretary of the Treasury under Bush 43, and Rahm Emanuel is the current mayor of Chicago.

And all with backgrounds in banking/finance. Don't pretend like I'm saying something that can't be easily confirmed on Wikipedia.

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

 

[Conservative]

I am focused on corporate tax revenue because we are discussing the impacts of corporate tax cuts.

You can keep circling around all you want, but the undeniable fact is that the corporate tax cuts reduced corporate tax revenue, as was predicted by virtually everyone.

You focus on numbers and I focus on results and the benefits corporations provide to employees, the cities, states, and GDP growth, keep ignoring total revenue

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Bullseye]

Right on trend.

Yeah, went try to smooth seven years worth of date. Try starting from 2016. You guys love popping up charts that cover decades of data which buries the recent trends.

 

[MTAtech]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

No. Why? Because we don't have to raise taxes to the point of running surpluses to deal with the debt. Nor does the budget have to be balanced to put us on a fiscally sustainable path; all we need is a deficit small enough that debt grows more slowly than the economy. To take the classic example, America never did pay off the debt from World War II -- in fact, our debt doubled in the 30 years that followed the war. But debt as a percentage of GDP fell by three-quarters over the same period.

 

[Conservative]

Where?

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

Suggest you get out of this forum and drive around the country and see what's going on I have and it's amazing

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Kushinator]

Yeah, went try to smooth seven years worth of date. Try starting from 2016. You guys love popping up charts that cover decades of data which buries the recent trends.

You are welcome to show the recent trends.

 

[Kushinator]

And all with backgrounds in banking/finance. Don't pretend like I'm saying something that can't be easily confirmed on Wikipedia.

Hank Paulson was the Secretary of the Treasury... under GWB. :thinking

 

[phattonez]

Suggest you get out of this forum and drive around the country and see what's going on I have and it's amazing

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Not an answer.

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

 

[phattonez]

Hank Paulson was the Secretary of the Treasury... under GWB. :thinking

[/QUOTE]Therefore what? Bush didn't also surround himself with bankers?

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

 

[Conservative]

Not an answer.

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

That's because you have been indoctrinated into believing what the left tells you and that isn't reality. Traveled all over this country this past year and infrastructure spending is everywhere. Prove me wrong

 

[Kushinator]

Therefore what? Bush didn't also surround himself with bankers?.

The CEO of Goldman isn't is many leagues above, with respect to being called a banker than Geithner (a career civil servant) and Rahm (who worked at a boutique investment bank for 2.5 years). I find the comparison odd. I also responded to this:

Yeah, Obama cared so much about the people that he brought bankers and financiers into the highest positions of his administration, people like Tim Geithner, Hank Paulson, and Rahm Emanuel. Real champions of the people, eh?

 

[phattonez]

The CEO of Goldman isn't is many leagues above, with respect to being called a banker than Geithner (a career civil servant) and Rahm (who worked at a boutique investment bank for 2.5 years). I find the comparison odd. I also responded to this:

You inferred that it was an Obama specific criticism. I was responding to post arguing that Obama would have done so much more if not for the dastardly Republicans. All these politicians surround themselves with bankers and financiers. Bush, Obama, Trump, all of them. It's all corrupt.

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

 

[Bullseye]

You are welcome to show the recent trends.

IF you insist, lets compare the first two months of this fiscal year versus last year"

Corporate income taxes rose by $5 billion (from $1 billion in the first two months of fiscal year 2018 to about $6 billion so far this year), primarily because refunds declined by $8 billion; that decrease in refunds increased net receipts. Because corporate income tax receipts in October and November generally represent a small percentage of the year’s total, the results for those two months are not a significant indicator of receipts for the whole fiscal year. The first quarterly estimated payment of those taxes in the current fiscal year, for most corporations, is not due until December 17

 

[phattonez]

That's because you have been indoctrinated into believing what the left tells you and that isn't reality. Traveled all over this country this past year and infrastructure spending is everywhere. Prove me wrong

https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/infrastructure-spending-trends/

Sent from my phone. Instaurare omnia in Christo.

 

[Kushinator]

IF you insist, lets compare the first two months of this fiscal year versus last year"

Cherry pick? I mean, at least read what you quote! :lamo

Because corporate income tax receipts in October and November generally represent a small percentage of the year’s total, the results for those two months are not a significant indicator of receipts for the whole fiscal year.

****ing priceless.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Reversing the tax cuts could reduce the debt while punishing the people who caused the Bush crash creating much of it, and walked away.

 

[Bullseye]

Cherry pick? I mean, at least read what you quote! :lamo





****ing priceless.

I read it. Maybe you should read it a little closer.

 

[MTAtech]

IF you insist, lets compare the first two months of this fiscal year versus last year"

Corporate income taxes rose by $5 billion (from $1 billion in the first two months of fiscal year 2018 to about $6 billion so far this year), primarily because refunds declined by $8 billion; that decrease in refunds increased net receipts. Because corporate income tax receipts in October and November generally represent a small percentage of the year’s total, the results for those two months are not a significant indicator of receipts for the whole fiscal year. The first quarterly estimated payment of those taxes in the current fiscal year, for most corporations, is not due until December 17

Yeah, instead let's look at the the first 9 months (three quarters) of 2018. The first two months of 2019 may be up by $5 billion a month -- but 2018 dropped by over $40 billion a month. It still is far in the red.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

We have all of the boomers retirements and healthcare to pay for, almost all, very little was ever set aside for that.....The debt will continue until we cant borrow anymore because that is the only way that the numbers work.....and then the crash happens.

The destination is well known, people dont get to turn in as poor quality work as we have provided and avoid the pain that evil causes....the Christians were never wrong about that.

 

[distraff]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

Its impossible to pay down a 20 trillion national debt with a government with just 3.5 trillion in income. Thats like someone with 35,000 in income paying off a 200,000 debt. A better idea is to stop increasing the national debt and let inflation and GDP growth reduce the debt relative to GDP. The GDP grows by 4% not adjusting for inflation, so that means that in 10 years the real value of the debt is just 13.5 trillion, and in 20 its 9.1 trillion, and in 30 years its just 6.2 trillion.

 

[Bullseye]

Yeah, instead let's look at the the first 9 months (three quarters) of 2018. The first two months of 2019 may be up by $5 billion a month -- but 2018 dropped by over $40 billion a month. It still is far in the red.

Yeah, let's compare apples, with oranges, with pineapples, and maybe drop a FRED chart that doesn't include the quarter in question in the post. :roll:

 

[Hawkeye10]

Its impossible to pay down a 20 trillion national debt with a government with just 3.5 trillion in income. Thats like someone with 35,000 in income paying off a 200,000 debt. A better idea is to stop increasing the national debt and let inflation and GDP growth reduce the debt relative to GDP. The GDP grows by 4% not adjusting for inflation, so that means that in 10 years the real value of the debt is just 13.5 trillion, and in 20 its 9.1 trillion, and in 30 years its just 6.2 trillion.

Then we can talk about how unless the young positively revolt the way this works is that the boomers will suck up every dollar they can get their hands on because they were never willing to sacrifice to save for their non working years and they have extremely high standard of living expectations.....and a long record of ****ing over whom ever they need to **** over to get what they want.

 

[distraff]

Then we can talk about how unless the young positively revolt the way this works is that the boomers will suck up every dollar they can get their hands on because they were never willing to sacrifice to save and they have extremely high standard of living expectations.....and a long record of ****ing over whom ever they need to **** over to get what they want.

What specifically are we talking about here?

 

[MTAtech]

Yeah, let's compare apples, with oranges, with pineapples, and maybe drop a FRED chart in the post. :roll:

The comparison is apples to apples. Your argument, such as it was, was to say, 'see, revenue from corporations is up by $5 billion a month in 2019!' I was merely pointing out, correctly, that that $5 billion a month gain is in the shadow of revenue from corporations dropping by over $40 billion a month in 2018.

Your argument is like saying, "honey, I'm sure glad I quit my old job because my pay is up 3% in 2019" -- and your wife pointing out that you earned 25% more at your old job.

 

[Hawkeye10]

What specifically are we talking about here?

The retirement of the boomers almost completely unfunded because of a combination of lack of willingness of the boomers to put their own money aside for the end years and a decimation of corporate retirement accounts in both scale and risk to the senior. Much of this money is in the stock market now, which is a rough equivalent to putting it on the roulette wheel in Vegas. Special mention of having a very crap very expensive healthcare system and a propensity to completely waste often over $100,000 per on useless sometime suffering prolonging end of life care.