"Unfunded Tax Cuts"... The New DemocRAT Idiocy.

[mal]

Just let that sink in... We'll Discuss it, but just let it roll around some...

Heard it yet AGAIN on 760 AM out of the (p)eople's (r)epublic of Boulder this Morning via Congressman Perlmutter (D)...

Give it some Thought, and then tell me what you Think of that Tactic.



peace...

 

[G.T.]

They are un-funded if no spending cuts accompany them to balance that aspect of the budget.

 

[mal]

They are un-funded if no spending cuts accompany them to balance that aspect of the budget.

Yet the DemocRATS are Suggesting, for OBVIOUSLY Political Reasons, to Extend SOME of (43)'s Cuts...

Aren't they Talking out of both Sides of their Mouths, at LEAST?...

And where are the DemocRATS Suggesting Cuts?... Iraq?

Fine... But Afghanistan has Expanded and Soldiers weren't Laid Off because Iraq was Scaled Back.

So where?



peace...

 

[G.T.]

They are un-funded if no spending cuts accompany them to balance that aspect of the budget.

Yet the DemocRATS are Suggesting, for OBVIOUSLY Political Reasons, to Extend SOME of (43)'s Cuts...

Aren't they Talking out of both Sides of their Mouths, at LEAST?...

And where are the DemocRATS Suggesting Cuts?... Iraq?

Fine... But Afghanistan has Expanded and Soldiers weren't Laid Off because Iraq was Scaled Back.

So where?



peace...

Sure, they're talking out both sides of their mouths. That's got nothing to do with calling the title of your thread idiocy, because it makes simple-certain sense in real accounting terms. If you cut off income that was used to pay for your services, the services then become unfunded.

 

[Londoner]

The Bush tax cuts are the largest single cause of the structural deficit.

2.3 trillion over 10 years.

Yes, we should offset the tax cuts with spending cuts, but look what the Republicans did when they controlled all 3 levers of power. They spent like drunken sailors. Problem is: unlike the Democrats, the GOP preaches fiscal restraint. Nothing could be further than the truth. Republican administrations always spend more than Democratic ones. They have fooled American voters in ways that boggle the mind.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Spending does not have to be supported by tax increases,
but all tax cuts have to be funded by imposible spending cuts.


It is what they do. It gets tiresome.

For Democrats, taxes are not a way of funding the government. They are only a way of sticking a thumb in the eye of those they dislike.

 

[mal]

They are un-funded if no spending cuts accompany them to balance that aspect of the budget.

Yet the DemocRATS are Suggesting, for OBVIOUSLY Political Reasons, to Extend SOME of (43)'s Cuts...

Aren't they Talking out of both Sides of their Mouths, at LEAST?...

And where are the DemocRATS Suggesting Cuts?... Iraq?

Fine... But Afghanistan has Expanded and Soldiers weren't Laid Off because Iraq was Scaled Back.

So where?



peace...

Sure, they're talking out both sides of their mouths. That's got nothing to do with calling the title of your thread idiocy, because it makes simple-certain sense in real accounting terms. If you cut off income that was used to pay for your services, the services then become unfunded.

Oh no, it's still Absurd as a Concept... You Fund Programs with Taxes from the Taxpayer... You don't Fund Tax Cuts Taxes...

The Money is Inherently NOT the Governments...

Me getting MORE of my Money is NOT Equal to someone else getting MY Money... Get it?



peace...

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you're paying 5000 a year in federal income tax, and you get a tax cut to 4500, that's 500 less in revenue the government is collecting. That means that whatever that 500 would have funded,

is now unfunded.

Why is that so difficult a concept to understand?

 

[G.T.]

If you're paying 5000 a year in federal income tax, and you get a tax cut to 4500, that's 500 less in revenue the government is collecting. That means that whatever that 500 would have funded,

is now unfunded.

Why is that so difficult a concept to understand?

Because it's a way to "boo-ya" the Dems, I guess? Corny. Inane.

 

[Flopper]

Spending cuts or tax increase should come when the economy is expanding in order to build a surplus, reduce inflation, and prevent over expansion. Tax cuts or increases in spending should come when the economy is contracting. This simulates job creation and business investment. Unfortunately, decisions are usually made based on political dogma and public opinion which is controlled by the media with little concern for the economy or the good of the country.

 

[mal]

The Bush tax...

^Seriously... Don't.

Let the Program do what it's Designed to do and show your text at a Resonable Size, mmmkay...



peace...

 

[mal]

If you're paying 5000 a year in federal income tax, and you get a tax cut to 4500, that's 500 less in revenue the government is collecting. That means that whatever that 500 would have funded,

is now unfunded.

Why is that so difficult a concept to understand?

NOBODY is Proposing Tax Cuts nor Spending Cuts...

What's being Debated is a Tax Increase for how many People by letting the Tax Cuts of (43)'s Expire.

Currently the DemocRATS are being Dishonest by saying , "Unfunded Tax Cuts" in regard to (43)'s being allowed to Continue, yet they are Considering letting SOME of them Continue...

You Know, the ones that would Buy them More Votes.



peace...

 

[Urkie]

This is why the defecit increases all the time. Because nobody wants to take responsibility for it. Rebublicans continue to say lowering taxes will mean more money so we can pay off the defecit. What I want to know is, how is that possible? Well, it's not possible. Not unless you cut out a bunch of things in the budget and that obviously hasn't happened nor will it in the forseeable future. The solution has to be higher taxes and listen, nobody likes taxes but we have it pretty good compared to other countries around the world.

 

[G.T.]

This is why the defecit increases all the time. Because nobody wants to take responsibility for it. Rebublicans continue to say lowering taxes will mean more money so we can pay off the defecit. What I want to know is, how is that possible? Well, it's not possible. Not unless you cut out a bunch of things in the budget and that obviously hasn't happened nor will it in the forseeable future. The solution has to be higher taxes and listen, nobody likes taxes but we have it pretty good compared to other countries around the world.

The solution is to gut out rampant waste, invest in things that yield bigger returns like infrastructure, etc. and then saving the budget surpluses this has created until we can begin cutting some taxes. Decreasing the debt exponentially wouldn't hurt, either, but I'm thinking that the debt is like a permenant staple impossible to eliminate.

 

[mal]

Nobody wants to make the Hard Choices...

Socialistic Insecurity will Collapse, Medi-whatever will also, as will anything that Ends up being Universal Healthcarish...

Social Programs have to be Cut along with EVERYTHING if we Intend in Turning this around...

But the DemocRATS aren't going to Cut ANYTHING and Obama Probably won't let the REPUBLICans do things like Clinton did with Welfare Reform...

We are going Bankrupt and the Politicians and their Friends, from BOTH Sides are Sustaining their Power and Wealth and the Wealth of their Friends.

Enjoy.



peace...

 

[mal]

This is why the defecit increases all the time. Because nobody wants to take responsibility for it. Rebublicans continue to say lowering taxes will mean more money so we can pay off the defecit. What I want to know is, how is that possible? Well, it's not possible. Not unless you cut out a bunch of things in the budget and that obviously hasn't happened nor will it in the forseeable future. The solution has to be higher taxes and listen, nobody likes taxes but we have it pretty good compared to other countries around the world.

The solution is to gut out rampant waste.

Like one of Obama's List of 100 $1 Million Dollar a Job Projects that did a Stretch of Highway at 3 TIMES what the State could have Contracted to have it done for?...

Yeah...

But hey, it sounds good to say Hundreds and Hundreds of Jobs are being Created by Obama's "Stimulus @ a Million Dollars a pop...

Actually, it doesn't sound good... And it isn't Good.



peace...

 

[Urkie]

This is why the defecit increases all the time. Because nobody wants to take responsibility for it. Rebublicans continue to say lowering taxes will mean more money so we can pay off the defecit. What I want to know is, how is that possible? Well, it's not possible. Not unless you cut out a bunch of things in the budget and that obviously hasn't happened nor will it in the forseeable future. The solution has to be higher taxes and listen, nobody likes taxes but we have it pretty good compared to other countries around the world.

The solution is to gut out rampant waste, invest in things that yield bigger returns like infrastructure, etc. and then saving the budget surpluses this has created until we can begin cutting some taxes. Decreasing the debt exponentially wouldn't hurt, either, but I'm thinking that the debt is like a permenant staple impossible to eliminate.

I agree with this but I do think somebody is going to have to pay more in the way of taxes. The debt may not be that big of a deal right now but if it continues to go up then it will start to bring this country down. Inflation will rise, the GDP will decrease and we will be left to fend for ourselves.

And yes. Economics 101...it is easy to go into debt, hard to get out of it. It will take a very long time to see the debt decrease. Interest is the killer.

 

[Flopper]

A Republican plan to extend tax cuts for the rich would add more than $36 billion to the federal deficit next year -- and transfer the bulk of that cash into the pockets of the nation's millionaires, according to a congressional analysis released Wednesday.

GOP plan to extend tax cuts for rich adds $36 billion to deficit, panel finds

It's interesting that the same people that are screaming that the deficit must be reduced are supporting a plan that will add 36 billion to the deficit and do nothing for economy.

 

[G.T.]

This is why the defecit increases all the time. Because nobody wants to take responsibility for it. Rebublicans continue to say lowering taxes will mean more money so we can pay off the defecit. What I want to know is, how is that possible? Well, it's not possible. Not unless you cut out a bunch of things in the budget and that obviously hasn't happened nor will it in the forseeable future. The solution has to be higher taxes and listen, nobody likes taxes but we have it pretty good compared to other countries around the world.

The solution is to gut out rampant waste, invest in things that yield bigger returns like infrastructure, etc. and then saving the budget surpluses this has created until we can begin cutting some taxes. Decreasing the debt exponentially wouldn't hurt, either, but I'm thinking that the debt is like a permenant staple impossible to eliminate.

I agree with this but I do think somebody is going to have to pay more in the way of taxes. The debt may not be that big of a deal right now but if it continues to go up then it will start to bring this country down. Inflation will rise, the GDP will decrease and we will be left to fend for ourselves.

And yes. Economics 101...it is easy to go into debt, hard to get out of it. It will take a very long time to see the debt decrease. Interest is the killer.

I have been "privy" to this so-called debt since my 1st grade teacher showed us the cool debt clock back in the 80's sometime. It was ginormous then, it's ginormous now.

So long as we're spending 20X on defense that the second-most Country spends, I feel like the Government in its entirety sort of shrugs at the debt as an impossibility. Think of how many dollars per family we'd have to shell out to pay it off..........then realize, we don't even have that money; collectively.......and still she rises. There's no "end game" plan for the debt except to ignore it. I'm thoroughly convinced.

We talk about the "deficit" more than the "debt." There's a reason for that.