Hey Dumbass: Tax-Cuts Don't Have To Be Paid For

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mudwhistle, Sep 26, 2010.

  1. mudwhistle
    Online

    mudwhistle Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    65,267
    Thanks Received:
    11,926
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Wetwang With Fimber, Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +26,211
    I keep hearing Progressives and Liberals talking about paying for tax-cuts. This is the problem with them. They feel that our money belongs to them. They assume that what you earn is their's, not ours.:cuckoo:

    For all of the denials of being Socialists this alone gives away the honest to God truth about them. This is ether a lie or just a mind-set that is based on their socialist mind-set.



    Nobody knows how much revenue will be collected until it is collected....so a tax-cut doesn't need to be paid for because it's not a solid number.

    As a matter of fact tax-cuts do the opposite of what Democrats claim. They raise revenue....however tax increases lower revenue because of lost jobs and lower earnings which stifles growth.

    If we had a flat-tax this would be a bit different. Automatic deductions would be taken out of your paycheck. The Dems would love this. You pay according to what you earn and the government gets your money before you get it. That is the only way they could change this in part. Jobs would still be lost because of high taxes. Less money to spend on consumables results in less demand for commercial products which results in less trade....lower cash flow....and less jobs.....which causes recessions and even depressions.

    The other dirty little secret, if you want to call it a secret, is that over spending is the primary cause of a deficit...not tax-cuts. Sounds simple doesn't it? Well the Dems don't want you to think that way.

    [​IMG]

    Another lie that the Dems used to great advantage is that the Bush tax-cuts were just for the rich...but now they've had to admit they benefited everyone who pays taxes. This bold-faced lie has been repeated for years and now they've tried to claim that voting on extending the middle-class portion is now a tax-cut. In fact it will be a tax increase for the rich. Nothing would change for the rest of us. They want to act like they're doing us a friggen favor.

    The Bush tax-cuts were working....till the Dems took control of Congress Jan. 07' and they've done everything in their power to reverse that. The recession started in Dec. of 07' and lasted till the Summer of 09'. Are they trying to tell us that they had nothing to do with that? :blahblah:

    Looks bad for the Democrats, doesn't it? :eusa_whistle:

    Not in their minds. The party of snappy slogans thinks they can blame all of this on the GOP. The GOP's ideas worked before but they're old, worn out, and out dated. We need something new this time. :happy-1:

    Ever heard them say that?? Sounds reasonable, doesn't it? New ideas are needed, Right??

    I'd settle for something that works.....not something that just sounds good.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,097
    Thanks Received:
    6,893
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,949
    Yea, let's see how long the country lasts without government.
     
  3. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    Fiscal conservatism in action.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,291
    Thanks Received:
    19,831
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,356
    Taxes are revenue in
    Spending is revenue out

    Both impact the deficit. Republicans cut taxes and increased spending to pay for two wars. If you cut taxes and maintain spending the same ....you still run a deficit
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Mr. Shaman
    Offline

    Mr. Shaman Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    23,892
    Thanks Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +819
    Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....so, we DON'T have to cut spending (somewhere-else), to "pay" for tax-cuts, huh??

    Good thinkin', there.....MUDD-BUTT!!!!!!

    [​IMG]*[​IMG]*[​IMG]

     
  6. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    Note that if tax cuts aren't a cost, the stimulus bill actually came in at around $500 billion, significantly smaller than the number usually cited.
     
  7. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,748
    Thanks Received:
    4,242
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,156
    You did good, posting many of the axioms of today's Republican in an almost coherent editorial. Of course we missed the evidence to support the axiom, and for this we must drop your grade.
    And, to be honest, if tax cuts were the panacea, wouldn't our economy be a high speed train taking our entire population towards economic security?
    For taxes were cut in 1981 and 1983. And yet, and yet ... our economy collapsed under the watch of President Bush and his economic advisers.
    Failing to explain this event means we must drop your grade some more.
    If taxes are bad, why is borrowing good. Or, if both are bad, why would we engage a war of choice without raising taxes or at least selling war bonds?
    Sadly Mudd, you failed. But don't feel bad, turn on Fox 'News', listen to Rush & Sean, and cheer on the New Right & the 'ideas' of the leaders of the tea party. They will erase any doubts you may have. Doing nothing and creating gridlock is a great idea - one wonders why the founding fathers of this nation didn't stay home, smoke some hemp and count their money.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    It would depend on the tax being cut. The cut in dividend taxes in the Bush tax cuts produced substantially more revenue than the old tax rate.
    The tax credits for cash for clunkers produced less revenue.
    Tax cuts for the top 20% of earners always end up producing more revenue for the government than tax cuts for the bottom 20% because high earners can scale up or down their earnings in response to changes in the tax code and have greater incentive to do so.

    I wish the left would cease its stupid pointless and self destructive class warfare. Of course then they wouldn't be the Democratic Party, the Party of Fuck You.
     
  9. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,767
    Thanks Received:
    6,622
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,094
    Increasing spending with the medicare pill bill, growing the military spending, creating homeland security, the cost of 2 wars, the boomers nearing retirement, while cutting taxes- was the most non fiscal thing the republicans did or could do and this grew our national debt by over $6 TRILLION dollars in just 8 years, let alone the future deficits coming from the programs they instituted.

    the tax cuts did not increase our revenues as you claim, it reduced our revenues and they did not even reach the level they were at in 2000 until the year 2005, and under any normal situation tax revenues would have increased each year on their own just by the growth in gdp, in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004. In addition to this, with these tax cuts still in place and our crappy economy we went back to collecting less revenues than we did in 2000 BEFORE the tax cuts.

    Cut us a break Mudwhistle...and do some research on this before making false claims, as you did.

    Those tax breaks, are and will continue to add trillions upon trillions to our national debt for the next 20 years or even forever, if changes are not made....and are putting this debt on many generations of our children to come.

    Tax cuts without cutting spending is IMMORAL....it puts the spending they've done during our time on to others that had nothing to do with the spending imo.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  10. mudwhistle
    Online

    mudwhistle Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    65,267
    Thanks Received:
    11,926
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Wetwang With Fimber, Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +26,211
    Explain how they increased spending yet the deficit was shrinking up until 07'.
     

Share This Page