The Bush Tax cuts...

[Dozyproductions]

A few issues I have, from a new guy:

A) This isn't a tax cut, it's maintaining the current rates. I'm still trying to wrap my head around just how this will add to the current deficit, considering it's currently unearned non-existing revenue. The thought of "Well, we would have 700 bil, now we won't, so it automatically increases our current debt." .

Welcome to a couple of years ago. Bush made some tax cuts. What is being discussed is extending them.

[sn8kbit]

No, I'm not. I never said one was the same as the other.

They both do add to the national debt however. And seeing as how these tax cuts were not paired with any spending cuts, it works out to have the same effect.

Whether you take $100 out of your savings account (spending) or take in $100 less on a paycheck (tax cut), you still have $100 less.

Not an accurate analogy. It's only an increase in debt (money owed) if you spent the 100 from savings and received 100 less in a check. Again, debt is money spent not in possession, money borrowed over a term to be paid back. Revenue only affects debt on how money in hand is spent prior to receiving that revenue.

Better ananlogy maybe (?):

You buy a 300k house, when you can only afford a 150k house, HOPING you get that pay raise next year. Just because you didn't get the raise, doesn't mean your debt increased by the difference your raise would have made. You simply still just don't have enough money to pay for what you couldn't afford in the first place. That's the boat this country is in right now.

[sn8kbit]

Welcome to a couple of years ago. Bush made some tax cuts. What is being discussed is extending them.

Thanks for drawing that out in crayon for those that may not have understood. You're absolutely right, Bush made the cuts, 10 years ago, they're the current rate at the moment.

[Dozyproductions]

Thanks for drawing that out in crayon for those that may not have understood. You're absolutely right, Bush made the cuts, 10 years ago, they're the current rate at the moment.

Don't you get they were supposed to be temporary? Do I have to go even simpler than crayon for you?

[Ryan Stewart]

SOmething that I've heard argued by Republicans, that I honestly haven't researched and need to, is that many small business owners handle the taxes for their business on their personal tax returns. So raising taxes on families that make more than $250k ($200k individual) will end up taxing many small businesses.

The vast majority are S-corps. Meaning the corporation pays little to no income (exemptions for gains and such). All of the income tax liability is passed onto the shareholders, aka the owner.

[wannaBMthree]

IMO, $88 Billion is beer money compared to the overall deficit, and with the way the Federal Reserve runs this country were never going to get rid of it.

[gwb72tii]

the top 1% of wage earners earn 21% of all income and pay 40% of all income taxes
the top 5% of wage earners pay more than the bottom 95% combined

the wealthy pay enough, end of fucking argument

the financial mess facing this country is a result of the federal government never controlling spending

[z31maniac]

the top 1% of wage earners earn 21% of all income and pay 40% of all income taxes
the top 5% of wage earners pay more than the bottom 95% combined

the wealthy pay enough, end of fucking argument

the financial mess facing this country is a result of the federal government never controlling spending

The top 10% pay 73% of income taxes and the bottom 45% don't pay any, with the bottom 40% making money on the income tax.

So while I agree with you, your numbers are a bit off.

[gwb72tii]

The top 10% pay 73% of income taxes and the bottom 45% don't pay any, with the bottom 40% making money on the income tax.

So while I agree with you, your numbers are a bit off.

in all seriousness, just how far does anyone expect to squeeze taxpayers in general, and the "rich" specifically?
i read this but can't find the source; for every tax dollar collected since FDR, congress has spent $1.17.
raising taxes is not and has never been the issue or the cause of the deficit and debt, it's been our federal government spending too much.
the budget was last balanced by the gingrich congress when taxes were cut and congress refused to spend more. the economy grew, tax receipts grew, and we had a surplus.
amazing!

[Dozyproductions]

the budget was last balanced by the gingrich congress when taxes were cut and congress refused to spend more. the economy grew, tax receipts grew, and we had a surplus.
amazing!

How many wars, how many health "reforms" and how many bailouts were there back then?

[Ryan Stewart]

the budget was last balanced by the gingrich congress when taxes were cut and congress refused to spend more. the economy grew, tax receipts grew, and we had a surplus.
amazing!

Gotta love/hate being prez since he gets credit for everything. Most people dont know the house controls the budget.

[z31maniac]

Really the Senate controls everything. Bills originate in the House, but the Senate is who dictates the agenda.

[Massive Lee]

How many wars, how many health "reforms" and how many bailouts were there back then?

And how about the current financial depression? It's interesting that people still don't realize that these are hard times and want to keep all their privileges while others can't even put food on the table... Just when you would have expected a great nation to come together and fight adversity, then you still have the rich who wants all their benefits.

[gwb72tii]

And how about the current financial depression? It's interesting that people still don't realize that these are hard times and want to keep all their privileges while others can't even put food on the table... Just when you would have expected a great nation to come together and fight adversity, then you still have the rich who wants all their benefits.

oh please tell me in specifics which benefits you're talking about and who pays for them Lee.

for crying out loud

tell me then why oh canada is starting to privatize medicine

you want a snap shot of the future? look to london where the state has finally realized the promised benefits cannot be paid for. this is the beginning of a long loud argument for the next ten years as canada, europe and the USA take away unpaid for benefits, and its about time.

[Massive Lee]

oh please tell me in specifics which benefits you're talking about and who pays for them Lee.

Here's one specific: Tax cuts for wealthy people earning over $250k... Isn't it what we were talking about? They probably have a few buck more at the end of the month than the average joe who supports a familly on $30k... Not to mention that when you earn $250k, there are probably a few tax shelters that already lessen what you pay in taxes, that the $30k dude can't have.

Do you remember what "We stand united" means?