More not less taxes needed for economic recovery.

[LilOlLady]

MORE NOT LESS TAXES NEEDED FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY.

What got us in this mess was Bush’s tax cut for the rich and spending money we did not have. If Obama had let the tax breaks expire like Bush had intended it we would be in economic recovery. Taxes create revenue that federal and state Government need to run the system. Taxes create revenue that create jobs. Government spending is the only way the economy will recover but it has to have revenue to do that and revenue is taxes. We need to raise taxes all around. State, local, federal, income, payroll and sales taxes and any other way we can taxs. It has been proven that cutting taxes do not create jobs and jobs create revenue that pay down the deficit. When taxes are cut, Government spending is cut and Government programs are cut, cutting programs result in unemployment ( paid with money we don’t have) thus cutting revenue. And it results in more spending. Taxes pay down the deficit and create a surplus and prevent federal and state law offs. The reason unemployment is at 8.1% or higher is because of tax cuts. Use your God given brains and figure it out. Taxes create revenue, revenue pay the bills and prevent unemployment and prevent spending money we don’t have thus creating a deficit. You have to spend money in order to make money. Even if you are gambling you have to spend money. Every business venture Romney started, he had to have money to start it.
Radical Reich Wing Extremist should know that by now.

Worst economic mistake Obama made was extending the tax cuts.Working consumers create jobs when the pay taxes. Small busineses cannot create jobs without consumers even if they paid NO taxes at all. ONLY Federal Government can afford to stimulate the economy and best by infrastructure work. Cutting government programs cut workers and cuts revenue.
Feingold is right; it's past time to let these tax cuts expire.

If you don't like paying taxes . . .
If you don't like paying taxes . . .

All of these services are jobs and when taxes are cut it creates lay offs of people who provide these services and loss of consumers’ spending, thus loss of revenue.

 

[LilOlLady]

No evidence that if you give people more money they will spend more. 12 years of tax breaks and government programs cuts has resulted in a failing economy and deficit.

Reagan did not just cut taxes, either — he signed eight tax increases, and between Reagan and Bush 41, payroll taxes quadrupled.
http://www.laprogressive.com/raising-taxes-is-good-for-the-economy/

 

[chikenwing]

You have to spend money in order to make money. Even if you are gambling you have to spend money. Every business venture Romney started, he had to have money to start it.
Radical Reich Wing Extremist should know that by now.

So taking said money from individuals will help them fast track to prosperity??

crazy people with crazy ideas

 

[alan1]

MORE NOT LESS TAXES NEEDED FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY.

What got us in this mess was Bush’s tax cut for the rich and spending money we did not have. If Obama had let the tax breaks expire like Bush had intended it we would be in economic recovery. Taxes create revenue that federal and state Government need to run the system. Taxes create revenue that create jobs. Government spending is the only way the economy will recover but it has to have revenue to do that and revenue is taxes. We need to raise taxes all around. State, local, federal, income, payroll and sales taxes and any other way we can taxs. It has been proven that cutting taxes do not create jobs and jobs create revenue that pay down the deficit. When taxes are cut, Government spending is cut and Government programs are cut, cutting programs result in unemployment ( paid with money we don’t have) thus cutting revenue. And it results in more spending. Taxes pay down the deficit and create a surplus and prevent federal and state law offs. The reason unemployment is at 8.1% or higher is because of tax cuts. Use your God given brains and figure it out. Taxes create revenue, revenue pay the bills and prevent unemployment and prevent spending money we don’t have thus creating a deficit. You have to spend money in order to make money. Even if you are gambling you have to spend money. Every business venture Romney started, he had to have money to start it.
Radical Reich Wing Extremist should know that by now.

Worst economic mistake Obama made was extending the tax cuts.Working consumers create jobs when the pay taxes. Small busineses cannot create jobs without consumers even if they paid NO taxes at all. ONLY Federal Government can afford to stimulate the economy and best by infrastructure work. Cutting government programs cut workers and cuts revenue.
Feingold is right; it's past time to let these tax cuts expire.

If you don't like paying taxes . . .
If you don't like paying taxes . . .

All of these services are jobs and when taxes are cut it creates lay offs of people who provide these services and loss of consumers’ spending, thus loss of revenue.

The Bush tax cuts were cuts for all tax brackets, not just the rich.
The premise is flawed (and false) in the first sentence.
When you start a thesis with a false and flawed initial statement, it pretty much negates the rest of your argument.

 

[Katzndogz]

More taxes does not mean higher taxes. Cut taxes, money becomes more fluid, than tax revenues rise.

 

[Rozman]

You have to spend money in order to make money. Even if you are gambling you have to spend money. Every business venture Romney started, he had to have money to start it.
Radical Reich Wing Extremist should know that by now.

So taking said money from individuals will help them fast track to prosperity??

crazy people with crazy ideas

Government can't spend the money they have now wisely...
And you guys want to give them more.....
Unbelievable...

 

[Rozman]

What Democrats want higher taxes.....
Wait...
That sounds about right...Democrats always want higher taxes.

 

[Oddball]

The Bush tax cuts were cuts for all tax brackets, not just the rich.
The premise is flawed (and false) in the first sentence.
When you start a thesis with a false and flawed initial statement, it pretty much negates the rest of your argument.

For the lolberals, "tax cuts" and "for the wealthy" go together like peas-n-carrots.

 

[alan1]

What Democrats want higher taxes.....
Wait...
That sounds about right...Democrats always want higher taxes.

Liberals think that the government knows better how to spend your money than you do.

 

[Rozman]

They also act like it's the government's money first.
Then they decide how much we should be "allowed" to have,

 

[eflatminor]

...government programs cuts has resulted in a failing economy and deficit.

Yea, we've cut government programs; that's what we've been doing for the last decade...

Profoundly ignorant you are.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Z Taxes create revenue that create jobs. .

if this was true no one would ever have to suffer through unemployment ever again. What really happens is that one job created with tax revenue is one job less that the private sector can not afford to pay for.

This is simple common sense.

 

[brudder]

How about a compromise, we raise taxes on all liberals!!!

 

[DSGE]

Z Taxes create revenue that create jobs. .

if this was true no one would ever have to suffer through unemployment ever again. What really happens is that one job created with tax revenue is one job less that the private sector can not afford to pay for.

This is simple common sense.

Holy shit. You used logic to arrive at a correct conclusion and didn't use idiotic rhetoric like "that's perfectly liberal" or any of that bullshit. Are you growing into a real human being?

 

[ShackledNation]

Higher taxes mean that individuals in society will have lower incomes.

Higher taxes will only result in more productivity if government is more productive than individuals acting voluntarily on the free market.

Our government is a shit show. You have to be a fool to think it can be more productive.

 

[Middleoftheroad]

MORE NOT LESS TAXES NEEDED FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY.

What got us in this mess was Bush’s tax cut for the rich and spending money we did not have. If Obama had let the tax breaks expire like Bush had intended it we would be in economic recovery. Taxes create revenue that federal and state Government need to run the system. Taxes create revenue that create jobs. Government spending is the only way the economy will recover but it has to have revenue to do that and revenue is taxes. We need to raise taxes all around. State, local, federal, income, payroll and sales taxes and any other way we can taxs. It has been proven that cutting taxes do not create jobs and jobs create revenue that pay down the deficit. When taxes are cut, Government spending is cut and Government programs are cut, cutting programs result in unemployment ( paid with money we don’t have) thus cutting revenue. And it results in more spending. Taxes pay down the deficit and create a surplus and prevent federal and state law offs. The reason unemployment is at 8.1% or higher is because of tax cuts. Use your God given brains and figure it out. Taxes create revenue, revenue pay the bills and prevent unemployment and prevent spending money we don’t have thus creating a deficit. You have to spend money in order to make money. Even if you are gambling you have to spend money. Every business venture Romney started, he had to have money to start it.
Radical Reich Wing Extremist should know that by now.

Worst economic mistake Obama made was extending the tax cuts.Working consumers create jobs when the pay taxes. Small busineses cannot create jobs without consumers even if they paid NO taxes at all. ONLY Federal Government can afford to stimulate the economy and best by infrastructure work. Cutting government programs cut workers and cuts revenue.
Feingold is right; it's past time to let these tax cuts expire.

If you don't like paying taxes . . .
If you don't like paying taxes . . .

All of these services are jobs and when taxes are cut it creates lay offs of people who provide these services and loss of consumers’ spending, thus loss of revenue.

I tried to read all the way through it. I couldn't. Sorry you are not going to convince ANYONE of that. This mess wasn't started because of low taxes or because the deficit. It was started by a housing bust, followed by a financial bust.

Raising taxes wont stimulate the economy. Especially if you raise it a lot. If you tax the piss out of the rich, they will spend less. A small increase, they might not notice. A big increase, they will notice and they will slow down their spending accordingly.

 

[Middleoftheroad]

Z Taxes create revenue that create jobs. .

if this was true no one would ever have to suffer through unemployment ever again. What really happens is that one job created with tax revenue is one job less that the private sector can not afford to pay for.

This is simple common sense.

I don't follow your "common sense". Are you suggesting that the government is somehow taking money out of the economy by taxing? Because I was under the impression that every single penny the government takes, it immediately spends back into the economy.

The OP is arguing to use the taxes for more infrastructure spending. Which would put the money right back into the hands of construction companies, architectural firms, their suppliers and their employees, not somehow magically leaving the economy.

 

[whitehall]

The sad flat truth is that if the left had their way and punished the rich with confiscatory taxes the revenue gleaned would be merely symbolic and wouldn't fund the gigantic federal government more than a week. Once again lefties, government jobs do not stimulate the economy.

 

[ShackledNation]

Z Taxes create revenue that create jobs. .

if this was true no one would ever have to suffer through unemployment ever again. What really happens is that one job created with tax revenue is one job less that the private sector can not afford to pay for.

This is simple common sense.

I don't follow your "common sense". Are you suggesting that the government is somehow taking money out of the economy by taxing? Because I was under the impression that every single penny the government takes, it immediately spends back into the economy.

The OP is arguing to use the taxes for more infrastructure spending. Which would put the money right back into the hands of construction companies, architectural firms, their suppliers and their employees, not somehow magically leaving the economy.

Not all spending is equal. And government tends to spend money in a very inefficient way, producing less wealth than otherwise would have existed. Furthermore, bureacrats have to be paid to adminster the law. Plus, our government spends more money fighting wars overseas than boosting our economy.

 

[Middleoftheroad]

if this was true no one would ever have to suffer through unemployment ever again. What really happens is that one job created with tax revenue is one job less that the private sector can not afford to pay for.

This is simple common sense.

I don't follow your "common sense". Are you suggesting that the government is somehow taking money out of the economy by taxing? Because I was under the impression that every single penny the government takes, it immediately spends back into the economy.

The OP is arguing to use the taxes for more infrastructure spending. Which would put the money right back into the hands of construction companies, architectural firms, their suppliers and their employees, not somehow magically leaving the economy.

Not all spending is equal. And government tends to spend money in a very inefficient way, producing less wealth than otherwise would have existed. Furthermore, bureacrats have to be paid to adminster the law. Plus, our government spends more money fighting wars overseas than boosting our economy.

First let me say that I'm not disagreeing that it is inefficient. It is. I've done work for the government before. We would laugh at their specs because it was unnecesary and charge them for the extra time that was needed.

But the wasted money doesn't really go anywhere. It stays in the economy. All the extra money they spent on these wasted extras went to our company. To our employees and to our owner. My point was, this wasted money doesn't dissapear out of the economy. You can argue that its not fair for the government to take money from one area and put it into another at their discression. But the idea that this wasted money somehow dissappears from the economy is bogus.