War and Tax cuts...Mutually exclusive?

[rtwngAvngr]

Is it patriotic to lower taxes while in the middle of a taxing war?

Yes. Quite. We need to stimulate the economy to finance the war. If anything we should cut spending on non defense related programs. And lower taxes, and fight the war. No NEA. A myriad of others cuts need to be made.

The country is being asked to go through some very difficult times and this requires belt sacrifice. If this is the case then why are the wealthiest Americans also receiving tax cuts?

The bulk of the tax burden is paid by the uppercrust, so naturally cuts affect them more, as they logically should. Plus, this is the investment class, they need to be incented to grow business and produce more jobs.

As a point of contrast the tax rate for the same group was about 92 percent during the Second World War. It seems a bit odd that the group that is asking Americans to sacrifice their lives and livelihoods are also asking that their tax burden be reduced.

It only seems odd through the eyes of a communist. Take off the Red colored glasses, buddy.

 

[Huckleburry]

Right Wing.
Here is a little known fact about your beloved investor class and their stimulation of the economy. The stock market accounts for as little as two percent of the total capital used by companies to expand. Also, while the wealthiest may pay the highest taxes they are also the smallest group, and when kept in their proper bracket come measuring time it becomes clear that the majority of the tax burden in this country is paid by the middle class, not the wealthiest five percent. Maybe it's time that the uppercrust put their money where their mouth, act like patriots, and pay thier taxes.
Cheers Huck.
PS. Have you ever read marx?

 

[manu1959]

Right Wing.
Here is a little known fact about your beloved investor class and their stimulation of the economy. The stock market accounts for as little as two percent of the total capital used by companies to expand. Also, while the wealthiest may pay the highest taxes they are also the smallest group, and when kept in their proper bracket come measuring time it becomes clear that the majority of the tax burden in this country is paid by the middle class, not the wealthiest five percent. Maybe it's time that the uppercrust put their money where their mouth, act like patriots, and pay thier taxes.
Cheers Huck.
PS. Have you ever read marx?

i pay almost 250,000 in taxes a year...top that smart ass

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Right Wing.
Here is a little known fact about your beloved investor class and their stimulation of the economy. The stock market accounts for as little as two percent of the total capital used by companies to expand. Also, while the wealthiest may pay the highest taxes they are also the smallest group, and when kept in their proper bracket come measuring time it becomes clear that the majority of the tax burden in this country is paid by the middle class, not the wealthiest five percent. Maybe it's time that the uppercrust put their money where their mouth, act like patriots, and pay thier taxes.
Cheers Huck.
PS. Have you ever read marx?

They MORE than pay their fair share. Also, most small business owners, a big part of the economy I'm sure you'd agree, are incented as well.

The rich pay MORE than their fair share. Come back to earth please.

Marx is a fairly bright guy. Yes. Society is class based. That is apparent to all. The problem is his proposed solution. Communism is not really a classless society, it's just a shift of power to agitators and toadies. Market needs still are there even though the government "philosophically denies" capitalism, all markets become black markets, however, and thus corrupt, and monopolistic, generally served in an inefficient fashion by the Party Members themselves. Marx's fatal flaw is his assumption that leftists are morally perfect. If he had read his bible instead of rebelling against it, he would know that we are all born in sin.

 

[manu1959]

They MORE than pay their fair share. Also, most small business owners, a big part of the economy I'm sure you'd agree, are incented as well.

The rich pay MORE than their fair share. Come back to earth please.

Marx is a fairly bright guy. Yes. Society is class based. That is apparent to all. The problem is his proposed solution. Communism is not really a classless society, it's just a shift of power to agitators and toadies. Market needs still are there even though the government "philosophically denies" capitalism, all markets become black markets, however, and thus corrupt, and monopolistic, generally served in an inefficient fashion by the Party Members themselves. Marx's fatal flaw is his assumption that leftists are morally perfect. If he had read his bible instead of rebelling against it, he would know that we are all born in sin.

excellent point....having lived in two marxist cities moscow and san francisco i will take the one that is kept in check by the capitalists

 

[Huckleburry]

I read my bible and rebelled against it but that is really not the point. The point that I am trying to make is that taxes are patriotic and paying your taxes should be viewd as an honor not a burden especially during war time. As for small buisness we have finnally found somthing that we can agree on. New ventures are, in my view, the most important part of our economy. Perhaps what we need is to develop levels of incorporation and different levels of taxation for each level.
Cheers
Huck.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I read my bible and rebelled against it but that is really not the point. The point that I am trying to make is that taxes are patriotic and paying your taxes should be viewd as an honor not a burden especially during war time.

Paying taxes is patriotic. Whatever. I suppose you believe submitting one's daugher to the rape rooms of Udai and Qusay was just good citizenship.

As for small buisness we have finnally found somthing that we can agree on. New ventures are, in my view, the most important part of our economy. Perhaps what we need is to develop levels of incorporation and different levels of taxation for each level.
Cheers
Huck.

Now THAT is a good idea.

 

[Huckleburry]

Paying taxes is patriotic. Whatever. I suppose you believe submitting one's daugher to the rape rooms of Udai and Qusay was just good citizenship.

Oh come on. That is a ridiculous statement. Do you believe we are fighting a just war? Do you think that we are fighting a necessary war? If the answer is yes then you should be willing to pay the taxes which support this war, and not look for government kick backs at the expense of the dollar, and the security of our posterity.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Oh come on. That is a ridiculous statement. Do you believe we are fighting a just war? Do you think that we are fighting a necessary war? If the answer is yes then you should be willing to pay the taxes which support this war, and not look for government kick backs at the expense of the dollar, and the security of our posterity.

The war is just AND the government is bloated. Deal.

 

[freeandfun1]

Do you believe we are fighting a just war? - YES
Do you think that we are fighting a necessary war? - YES
If the answer is yes then you should be willing to pay the taxes which support this war. - I AM and I AM.

....and not look for government kick backs at the expense of the dollar, and the security of our posterity. - WTF?

Tax cuts have nothing to do with the supposed weakness of the dollar (the dollar is still stronger today than it was in 1996) and I have no idea how you figure that this JUST war is threatening the security of our posterity. If anything, this JUST war is ensuring the security of our posterity.

It might take time, but if you really care about our future generations and not just yourself, you will see that. We all must suffer today for a better tomorrow but we cannot do it by taxing our businesses into non-existence.

 

[Huckleburry]

I am not arguing that the war is jeprodizing our posterity. I am arguing that the tax cuts are. Tax cuts have lots to do with the weakness of the dollar because these tax cuts require the issuing of debt. We can not be the largest debtor nation and also the worlds reserve currency that is a reality of the global finnancial system.

 

[freeandfun1]

I am not arguing that the war is jeprodizing our posterity. I am arguing that the tax cuts are. Tax cuts have lots to do with the weakness of the dollar because these tax cuts require the issuing of debt. We can not be the largest debtor nation and also the worlds reserve currency that is a reality of the global finnancial system.

Why is our dollar still stronger now than in 1997 under Clinton if things are sooooo bad?

 

[Huckleburry]

It's not. In 97 Under Clinton the dollar traded at an average of 121 against the Yen compared to 103 today. The Euro was not used in 97 so I used the 2000 instead. In 2000 the dollar traded for 1.02 against the Euro Compared to .76 today. If you had done your homework than you would have known that the dollar is significantly weaker today than it was in 97 under Clinton. You would also know that Japan, China, and some European countries are starting to revalue their currencies into non dollar denominated assets. Whatever you think of Clinton personally it is pretty hard to argue against his economic savvy. He, unlike W, successfully maintained our position has the economic hegemon. Things are bad and that is reflected in the numbers and no amount of rhetoric is going to change that.
Cheers
Huck.

 

[freeandfun1]

It's not. In 97 Under Clinton the dollar traded at an average of 121 against the Yen compared to 103 today. The Euro was not used in 97 so I used the 2000 instead. In 2000 the dollar traded for 1.02 against the Euro Compared to .76 today. If you had done your homework than you would have known that the dollar is significantly weaker today than it was in 97 under Clinton. You would also know that Japan, China, and some European countries are starting to revalue their currencies into non dollar denominated assets. Whatever you think of Clinton personally it is pretty hard to argue against his economic savvy. He, unlike W, successfully maintained our position has the economic hegemon. Things are bad and that is reflected in the numbers and no amount of rhetoric is going to change that.
Cheers
Huck.

Unlike you, I do know my FX history as I do a lot of business in foreign currencies.

I use Oanda.com.

Jan 1 1992, the USD was worth 124 Yen

by December 31, 1996, it was worth 106 Yen.

Its low point against the Yen was 79.75 Yen to the dollar and its high was 135 Yen to the dollar.

On Jan 1, 1997, the Yen traded at 116.05 to the dollar and on 31 December 2000, it traded at 114.47 to the dollar. During that period, the high was 147.63 and the low was 101.22.

Jan 1, 2000, it traded at 101.31 and on Dec 31, 2004, it traded at 103.10 with the high during that period being 135.18 and the low being 101.31.

Also, if you knew what you were talking about, you would know that you cannot compare the dollar to the Euro accurately, as the Euro has not been traded long enough for a fair historical comparison. You would also know that the Renminbi has been pegged to the USD at 8.28 CYN to the Dollar for, well, a long frigg'n time.

I compared the dollar to the Yen, as until recently, it was the standard that we compared the dollar to determine its value. It and sometimes the German Mark.

So to summarize, when Clinton assumed office on 21 January 1992, 1 USD would get you 123.45 JPY. At the end of his first term, it would get you 105.5 JPY. At the start of his second term, you would get 105.5 and at the end, you would get 105.39.

Today you get 105.53.

What is the big deal?

The Yen devalued against the dollar 15% under Clinton. Zero % under Bush.

 

[Huckleburry]

And what about the Euro? My point is that being both the worlds largest debtor while simoultainously trying to be the worlds reserve currency is not a sustainable position. Especially when an alternative now exists.
Cheers Huck

 

[freeandfun1]

And what about the Euro? My point is that being both the worlds largest debtor while simoultainously trying to be the worlds reserve currency is not a sustainable position. Especially when an alternative now exists.
Cheers Huck

The Euro has not been around long enough to be accurately used as a benchmark. My point is that if the world is as worried about our debt as you and others claim, the dollar would be much weaker now against the Yen, Mark and other currencies of nations that we trade with than it was in 1992, 1996 or 2000. It is NOT.

 

[Huckleburry]

Except that those other countries have much smaller economies. This allows the dollar to remain realitivly high because it can rely on its size. The Euro rests on an equally large (actually slightly larger) economy that is arguably just as stable. True the Euro has not been around very long, however, its gain on the dollar in such a short time does warrent concern. The American economy is very strong but we are no longer the only powerhouse in the world. This requires us to be slightly more conservative with our fiscal policy.
Cheers
Huck

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Except that those other countries have much smaller economies. This allows the dollar to remain realitivly high because it can rely on its size. The Euro rests on an equally large (actually slightly larger) economy that is arguably just as stable. True the Euro has not been around very long, however, its gain on the dollar in such a short time does warrent concern. The American economy is very strong but we are no longer the only powerhouse in the world. This requires us to be slightly more conservative with our fiscal policy.
Cheers
Huck

What should we do huck?

 

[sagegirl]

Hey sagegirl instead of bending over and taking it like this right-wing board expects you to, as soon as one poster says, "you are assuming blah blah taxes revenues increase blah blah." You may consider a slightly tougher strategy - call their bluff. The numbers are available for your perusal.

You may be pleasantly suprised.

I only offer my opinion here, I am not trying to convince or persuade anybody to accept my viewpoint. The information is out there, anybody that is open minded enough to gather information from a variety of sources is going to get exposure to it. Thats why I belong to this forum....I find all the differing opinions to be sincere, some are well thought out and documented and others are random but may also contain an element of common sense or stupidity depending on your point of view. Your advice in this is thoughtfully received however my posts will continue to be "IMO". When someone disagrees with me thats fine....if I feel a real need I try to defend or backup my opinion with sources.

 

[MoltenLava]

I find it amusing that one poster here referred to Clinton's strong economic position in 1997 to be because it was his FIRST term, and inherited it from Bush.

It was his second term, having been reelected overwhelmingly in 1996. Sometimes facts just have a nasty habit of getting forgotten.

Also, if that poster thinks it humorous to mangle Huckleberry's name, I can't WAIT to see what he's going to do with mine.