Republicans vote against Bush tax cuts...

[Truthmatters]

There is no eveidence tax revenues go up because of tax cuts.

Its a myth

 

[The T]

There is no eveidence tax revenues go up because of tax cuts.

Its a myth

You have YET to prove it. Get to work. Onus is upon you.

 

[The T]

There is no eveidence tax revenues go up because of tax cuts.

Its a myth

The Reagan Tax Cuts: Lessons for Tax Reform<Read if you dare.

The criticism that the tax payments of the rich would fall under ERTA was based on a static conception of human behavior. As a 1982 JEC study pointed out,[1] similar across-the-board tax cuts had been implemented in the 1920s as the Mellon tax cuts, and in the 1960s as the Kennedy tax cuts. In both cases the reduction of high marginal tax rates actually increased tax payments by "the rich," also increasing their share of total individual income taxes paid. Unfortunately, estimates of ERTA by the Democrat-controlled CBO continued to show falling tax payment by upper income taxpayers, even after actual IRS data had become available showing a surge of income tax payments by affluent taxpayers.

Wanna try again?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There was bill to further lower taxes? Who knew.

 

[The T]

And the other thing ou Statist wannabes need to understand that it isn't government's money in the first place.

Get that correct, and you're on your way to understanding.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

And the other thing ou Statist wannabes need to understand that it isn't government's money in the first place.

Get that correct, and you're on your way to understanding.

Won't happen, you must understand the core of their beliefs revolve around the notion that money belongs to everybody.

That's why there is no place in arguing or working with them, just keep them marginalized and out of office.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Remember: These are the folks that think if your taxes don't go up, that they went down.

 

[JBeukema]

you didn't answer the question.

I do not speak the language the question was asked in.

Then English must be your second language. You're first is imbecile.

LIES! Look at all the jobs they've been creating thus far!

Everyone knows the rich hire people because they have money- not because there's a demand for goods and services created by tax cuts for the working class and unemployment assistance. It's not like the poor and working classes will actually spend the extra money they have, thereby creating demand for goods and services and stimulating the economy while giving business owners a reason to hire!

Any time they have money, they hire out of the goodnes of their hearts- it's all supply! Demand doesn't matter. It's all about the supply side!

Geez, you socialist fascist liberals just don't get it, do you?

 

[JBeukema]

you didn't answer the question.

I do not speak the language the question was asked in.

Then English must be your second language. You're first is imbecile.

 

[JBeukema]

The dirty little secret is that the Dems aren't telling us this is Gross income...not net.

If you're making over $250k but only have $50k in profit you're gonna get nailed with a huge increase in your taxes. Because of the weak economy many small businesses are in this state. This tax increase will force many of them to cut employees, shrink their business to fit the changing tax code, or just fold their business completely.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I know....but it's true.

I made $200k last year...but my taxable income was only $30k. If I had made $50.01k more I would have fallen within the level that tax-increases would take place.

You just said it wasn't taxable income

 

[JBeukema]

The tax cut would only apply to all income over $250k. Thus if you make $300,000 you would see a 3% increase on only the $50,000 over $300k.

The argument that this will kill job creation of small businesses is also untrue. As the majority of small business owners do not have personal incomes of over $250k. The average small business owner makes between $35-$100k. It is a small minority that make over $250k. If the sticking point is $250k. I know people are willing to move the limit higher (possible $500k).

Then there comes the cost. The cost of the extending the middle class tax cut is projected at $2.2 trillion over the next 10 years, ending them for incomes over $250k adds another $700 billion. Can we even afford to add that much more do the debt? Are extending the tax cuts to the top income earners more important than unemployment benefits?

I am for either letting them all expire or only renewing the middle class. The reason being is that the middle class who has the biggest buying power, historically pumps any extra income into the market, while top earners will either save or invest it. Thus the argument that extending the tax cuts for the wealthy will curb job growth is dumb.

If you want to spur job growth through tax cuts or rebates, all small businesses who add employee to their payroll to have a tax rebate of of $500-1000 per employee, which will offset any rise in taxes..

Let them all expire, take the money, hire people to repave the entire planet. If that ain't enough, hire a few million people to dig a giant ditch and a few million more to re-fill it. THAT'S how you get things rolling. Tax cuts don't do you much good when you can't find a f**kin job. And, when you yourself don't have a job, you can't do the spending that in turn creates more jobs.

You don't stimulate the economy by digging ditches and filling them in. Sure you put some people to work, but others have to pay for essentially nothing. Your ditch diggers and ditch fillers have produced nothing.
You create wealth buy producing tangible assets like cars, houses lumber etc. Sure, your ditch workers will be able to afford more tangible assets, but the general population that has to pay their wage is able to afford less. Zero sum gain.

What if the ditch was needed? What if the ditch is really a trench? What if that trench is part of an expansion or renovation of the sewer system (critical infrastructure)?

 

[Trajan]

very educational.....take the cap gains tax for instance,
from Charlie Rose, that Lion of the corporatist right......


Obama at his best, he cannot answer the question other than appeal to 'fairness'....listen to it all, he did exactly what he said was irresponsible.



Obama Admits Raising Taxes Hurts Economy But Does It Anyway &#8220;&#8230;out of fairness.&#8221; Angrywoodchuck&#039;s Blog

 

[Cuyo]

Let them all expire, take the money, hire people to repave the entire planet. If that ain't enough, hire a few million people to dig a giant ditch and a few million more to re-fill it. THAT'S how you get things rolling. Tax cuts don't do you much good when you can't find a f**kin job. And, when you yourself don't have a job, you can't do the spending that in turn creates more jobs.

You don't stimulate the economy by digging ditches and filling them in. Sure you put some people to work, but others have to pay for essentially nothing. Your ditch diggers and ditch fillers have produced nothing.
You create wealth buy producing tangible assets like cars, houses lumber etc. Sure, your ditch workers will be able to afford more tangible assets, but the general population that has to pay their wage is able to afford less. Zero sum gain.

What if the ditch was needed? What if the ditch is really a trench? What if that trench is part of an expansion or renovation of the sewer system (critical infrastructure)?

I uhh... I don't think he speaks satire. But then, I'm not always entirely sure you do either.

 

[JBeukema]

FactCheck.org: Supply-side Spin

Tax cuts DO NOT increase tax revenue no matter how many times youy lie about it.

Well this proves democrats have zero understanding of human nature. So now your argument has turned they would be higher.


Different then your other rethoric.

1) Human nature is more complex than the laughable 'curve'

Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage

2) Republicans have no understanding of human nature or the economy. They think the rich make money and then hire just because. They fail to grasp that the sole reason for hiring is because there is a demand to be met and potential to make profit by meeting it. 'Supply-side' does not work, has not worked, and will never work. The only way to stimulate the economy and give businesses a reason to hire is by increasing demand. You increase demand by ensuring that the working class has money to spend on things they want, thereby creating demand. There's a reason these companies sell their goods in the U.S. and not to the exploited poor in China and Indonesia. The latter do not have the money to spend- they create no demand, so there is no money to be made selling to them. That is why we are the consumers and they are not.

When the rich exploit the proletariat and the common man has no excess income to spend on things he desires, the bourgeoisie ultimately undoes itself, as there is no demand for the capitalists' goods and services. After all, the bourgeoisie already have plenty of money- a few extra grand will not encourage a millionaire to buy anything new or create any new demand for anyone else's goods or services.

Today's homework assignment:
1) Define:
-marginal utility
-surplus value
-demand

2) Explain the relationship between marginal utility, market demand, and the working man's discretionary income

3) Explore how this explains the rate of market return of tax cuts for the wealthy as compared to unemployment assistance and tax cuts for the working class. Explain the logical fallacy of the 'Laffer Curve', using Austrian behavioral economic theory.

4) Explore how these interactions explain the growth of the United States and its economy, including the rising standard of living and increased surplus value experienced by both worker and capitalist following the fairer-wage progress of the labour movement in the U.S.

 

[JBeukema]

There is no eveidence tax revenues go up because of tax cuts.

Its a myth

Tax rates are but one factor influencing investor behavior.


And yes, if they were high enough (say, for instance 99%), they would inhibit investment, thereby bringing the economy to a halt (or simply encouraging the capitalist to avoid the authority of the nation-state to evade taxation)- thereby reducing the taxable base and reducing tax revenues.

However, shy of such extremes, the effect of marginal tax rates is difficult to determine among the numerous other influences, including scientific discoveries, foreign affairs, and the personal whims and risk aversion or risk-seeking of the particular investor.

 

[JBeukema]

And the other thing ou Statist wannabes need to understand that it isn't government's money in the first place.

Get that correct, and you're on your way to understanding.

Won't happen, you must understand the core of their beliefs revolve around the notion that money belongs to everybody.

That's why there is no place in arguing or working with them, just keep them marginalized and out of office.

The money all belongs to the Fed.

So... do you want to discuss ownership of money or the wealth it represents?

 

[JBeukema]

And the other thing ou Statist wannabes need to understand that it isn't government's money in the first place.

Get that correct, and you're on your way to understanding.

Won't happen, you must understand the core of their beliefs

Men are not mere commodities and assets to be purchases, traded, used, and manipulated in the pursuit of capital.

No man should go hungry who is willing to work
​

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Democrats are going to let themselves be railroaded into extending all the tax cuts, which will continue to balloon the deficit, and what will the GOP'ers be running against Obama with in 2012?

The deficit. Which they will label OBAMA'S deficit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And the other thing ou Statist wannabes need to understand that it isn't government's money in the first place.

Get that correct, and you're on your way to understanding.

Won't happen, you must understand the core of their beliefs revolve around the notion that money belongs to everybody.

That's why there is no place in arguing or working with them, just keep them marginalized and out of office.

We owe 12 trillion or whatever, and rising. That is our debt, yours and mine.

If you don't owe any of it, who owes your share?

 

[Common Sense]

The tax cut would only apply to all income over $250k. Thus if you make $300,000 you would see a 3% increase on only the $50,000 over $300k.

The argument that this will kill job creation of small businesses is also untrue. As the majority of small business owners do not have personal incomes of over $250k. The average small business owner makes between $35-$100k. It is a small minority that make over $250k. If the sticking point is $250k. I know people are willing to move the limit higher (possible $500k).

Then there comes the cost. The cost of the extending the middle class tax cut is projected at $2.2 trillion over the next 10 years, ending them for incomes over $250k adds another $700 billion. Can we even afford to add that much more do the debt? Are extending the tax cuts to the top income earners more important than unemployment benefits?

I am for either letting them all expire or only renewing the middle class. The reason being is that the middle class who has the biggest buying power, historically pumps any extra income into the market, while top earners will either save or invest it. Thus the argument that extending the tax cuts for the wealthy will curb job growth is dumb.

If you want to spur job growth through tax cuts or rebates, all small businesses who add employee to their payroll to have a tax rebate of of $500-1000 per employee, which will offset any rise in taxes..

That's horseshit. Since when does the government tax the same return on two different scales???

They would tax all of it the same if your gross was above $250k.

You need to show me a link.....which I know you can't because the tax-code has yet to be written.

Do you even know what a tax bracket is?

How Expiration Of The Bush-Era Tax Cuts Could Affect You - Brian Wingfield - Business in The Beltway - Forbes

PayScale - Owner / Operator, Small Business Salary, Average Salaries

The Average Income of Small Business Owners | Small Business - Chron.com

If the Bush tax cuts expire, how much more will you have to pay? The Bone Architect