I'd let it expire when we have a full calendar year of 2.5% GDP growth and a full calendar year where at least 2 million jobs are created.
Why? The tax is doing nothing other than costing money.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I'd let it expire when we have a full calendar year of 2.5% GDP growth and a full calendar year where at least 2 million jobs are created.
I'm in agreement... let the payroll tax cut AND the Bush tax cuts(all of them) expire... right now.
Along with the Clinton tax increases. I'm fine with that. Go back to the Reagan era.
funny... the Clinton Tax increase brought more prosperity and ran an actual budget surplus... but we don't want to talk about that.
I'd let it expire when we have a full calendar year of 2.5% GDP growth and a full calendar year where at least 2 million jobs are created.
Why?
I'd let it expire when we have a full calendar year of 2.5% GDP growth and a full calendar year where at least 2 million jobs are created.
Why?
Because a payroll tax cut is the most efficient way to increase aggregate demand via the private sector.
First of all, why should the policy effectiveness of a tax cut need to be justified? "Lower taxes are better than higher taxes because it allows people to keep their money." Watching a so-called conservative argue in favor of a tax hike is hilarious.Why?
Because a payroll tax cut is the most efficient way to increase aggregate demand via the private sector.
Except it hasn't done that. We've had this policy for over a year or something and all it has done is cost the treasury money. There is no proof this has been effective. So why keep it?
First of all, why should the policy effectiveness of a tax cut need to be justified? "Lower taxes are better than higher taxes because it allows people to keep their money." Watching a so-called conservative argue in favor of a tax hike is hilarious.Because a payroll tax cut is the most efficient way to increase aggregate demand via the private sector.
Except it hasn't done that. We've had this policy for over a year or something and all it has done is cost the treasury money. There is no proof this has been effective. So why keep it?
Second, it has worked. It has helped people pay off debts and it has increased consumer spending.
First of all, why should the policy effectiveness of a tax cut need to be justified? "Lower taxes are better than higher taxes because it allows people to keep their money." Watching a so-called conservative argue in favor of a tax hike is hilarious.Except it hasn't done that. We've had this policy for over a year or something and all it has done is cost the treasury money. There is no proof this has been effective. So why keep it?
Second, it has worked. It has helped people pay off debts and it has increased consumer spending.
So you don't think government policies should be judged by whether they are effective or not? : What criteria would you prefer? Sounds good?
Yes. According the CES, consumer expenditures have increased from about $9,008 per capita when the first payroll tax change (the Making Work Pay tax credit) was passed, to about $9,490 now.Do you have evidence it has worked?
Why?
Because a payroll tax cut is the most efficient way to increase aggregate demand via the private sector.
Except it hasn't done that. We've had this policy for over a year or something and all it has done is cost the treasury money. There is no proof this has been effective. So why keep it?
This is not Socratic dialogue, so knock off the nonsense question. You can offer some facts that demonstrate the two are unrelated if you can find them, with good sources. That would be interesting.Huh? You think the Clinton tax hike did cause the dot com bubble?Amelia, you are entitled to your opinion, not your own set of facts.
This is not Socratic dialogue, so knock off the nonsense question. You can offer some facts that demonstrate the two are unrelated if you can find them, with good sources. That would be interesting.Huh? You think the Clinton tax hike did cause the dot com bubble?Amelia, you are entitled to your opinion, not your own set of facts.
This is not Socratic dialogue, so knock off the nonsense question. You can offer some facts that demonstrate the two are unrelated if you can find them, with good sources. That would be interesting.Huh? You think the Clinton tax hike did cause the dot com bubble?
No. It is such a preposterous idea that Clinton tax hikes caused the dot com bubble that the burden of proof is definitely on you.
Seriously.
People are used to this tax break now. How hard will it be to let it expire?
One of the hallmarks of the Social Security program has been that it is not welfare. People pay into it and thus earn the payouts when their time comes. A permanent payroll tax holiday would make it at least partially welfare.
So, is it going to be permanent? Which president is going to be willing to increase middle class Americans' taxes by $1000 a year? Ever.
This is not Socratic dialogue, so knock off the nonsense question. You can offer some facts that demonstrate the two are unrelated if you can find them, with good sources. That would be interesting.
No. It is such a preposterous idea that Clinton tax hikes caused the dot com bubble that the burden of proof is definitely on you.
Seriously.
You made the affirmation, so defend it or fail. That's how it works with grown ups in the military, academia, and private and public sectors.
Amelia fails on the OP.
Her opinion is not proof.
Amelia, you are entitled to your opinion, not your own set of facts.
Along with the Clinton tax increases. I'm fine with that. Go back to the Reagan era.
funny... the Clinton Tax increase brought more prosperity and ran an actual budget surplus... but we don't want to talk about that.
We don't talk about it because it's not true. The Clinton tax increase coincided with the dot com bubble so people were able to afford the extra taxes better, until the bubble burst.
The Clinton tax increase did not cause the dot com bubble.
People are used to this tax break now. How hard will it be to let it expire?
One of the hallmarks of the Social Security program has been that it is not welfare. People pay into it and thus earn the payouts when their time comes. A permanent payroll tax holiday would make it at least partially welfare.
So, is it going to be permanent? Which president is going to be willing to increase middle class Americans' taxes by $1000 a year? Ever.