When Does Obama's Plan Balance the Budget? Hoyer: 'I Don't Know'

[Claudette]

Hoyer actually DOES know the answer to that question...he just won't give it.

In a nutshell, President Obama does not HAVE a plan to lower the deficit...nor has he EVER had a plan to do that. His stated goal to raise taxes on the wealthy had only one real goal and that was his reelection for another four years by conning the electorate into thinking that raising taxes on SOMEONE ELSE would fix our fiscal problems. Hoyer knows that...hence the major league "waffle".

Yup. He will raise taxes on the rich if the Reps cave and when it doesn't make everything all better he will of course blame the Reps.

Barry could care less because he got his four more years. Hell He's taken care of for life at our expense along with those Clowns in Congress.

He obviosly doesn't know how to fix the economy. Should be interesting when his tax hike on the Rich doesn't do jack shit. Wonder how he will explain away another of his polices that didn't work??

Obviously loads of Americans voted for this idiot. Hope they enjoy whats coming because I sure won't.

He could give a rats ass.

 

[Oldstyle]

"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." Dwight D. Eisenhower

"What all this shows is that growth is not absolutely correlated with taxes, and both liberals and conservatives have problems in trying to make a case. Far more serious factors affect growth, although, in truth, economists do [not] know exactly what they are. Nobel laureate Robert Lucas, one of the world's most famous conservative economists, has spent over a decade looking for the secret to economic growth, and has not found it. Nobel-bound Paul Krugman, one of the world's most famous liberal economists, admits that the mystery of growth is "deep and poorly understood."People who claim that tax rates affect growth are not serious economists; more often they are journalists, radio-talk show hosts, politicians and other types of snake oil salesmen with easy solutions to complex problems. You can dismiss their bumper sticker slogans with perfect confidence.

Fortunately, there is a policy implication in all this. If taxes have such a weak effect on growth, then we should consider tax cuts or hikes for their other effects, like income distribution or alleviation of poverty. Conservatives can no longer decry these programs on the basis that they will harm economic growth, since these assertions are completely unfounded. "

Tax cuts spur economic growth


Contrary To GOP Claims, Small Businesses Say Taxes And Regulation Aren't Holding Back Hiring | ThinkProgress


REPORT: 25 Corporations Paid More To Their CEO Last Year Than They Paid In Taxes | ThinkProgress


"Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and once more in 1984, this time by $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Despite the fact that such increases were anathema to conservatives–and probably cost Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, reelection–Reagan raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84."

Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots) | Firedoglake

Gee, Think Progress and Paul Krugman don't think taxes slow growth? What a shock.

Paul Krugman is the "liberals economist"...if it were up to him the government would get all of our income and we'd get a living allowance. Think Progress is simply a joke. If you're citing THEM you might as well save yourself the trouble because nobody except a flaming progressive is going to take much of anything they say seriously.

If you're a follower of Keynesian economic theory...which Krugman supposedly is...then you should know that Keynes advocated tax increases in boom times to cool down economies that were growing too fast and advised against tax increases in a down economy because doing so would slow growth. The reason that Barack Obama didn't get rid of the Bush tax cuts back in 2009 was quite simple...doing so would have slowed an already tepid economic recovery. So what's changed? Are you now making the case that our economy is "over heated" and we need taxes to slow it down? Reagan and Clinton were able to raise taxes because both of their economies were growing strongly. Two years ago both Christina Romer and Bill Clinton made statements that it was a bad idea to raise taxes on ANYONE because of the effect that would have on the economy. They did so because both of them understand economics.

The fact that you're now advocating tax raises and expecting growth to occur shows me that you understand about as much about the subject as Barry and the rest of his "merry men". This is a tax raise that will do nothing to address the deficit because when it slows the economy, it will decrease revenues as much if not more than it is projected to bring in...all the while putting more Americans out of work. If THAT is what you're looking for then fine...push for taxes. But if you're looking for something that will grow the economy and put people back to work then raising taxes is just plain stupid fiscal policy.

 

[bripat9643]

"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." Dwight D. Eisenhower

"What all this shows is that growth is not absolutely correlated with taxes, and both liberals and conservatives have problems in trying to make a case. Far more serious factors affect growth, although, in truth, economists do [not] know exactly what they are. Nobel laureate Robert Lucas, one of the world's most famous conservative economists, has spent over a decade looking for the secret to economic growth, and has not found it. Nobel-bound Paul Krugman, one of the world's most famous liberal economists, admits that the mystery of growth is "deep and poorly understood."People who claim that tax rates affect growth are not serious economists; more often they are journalists, radio-talk show hosts, politicians and other types of snake oil salesmen with easy solutions to complex problems. You can dismiss their bumper sticker slogans with perfect confidence.

The claim that tax rates don't affect growth is too stupid for words to describe. Your two Nobel prize winning economists can't find what causes for growth because they aren't looking in the right place. They're like the alcoholic who is looking for his keys under the lamp post. When someone asks him if he lost his keys there he says "no, but the light is better here."

Both your economists are a couple of statist propagandists, not real economists. Growth comes from freedom, not government bureaucracies. that's why they can't find the cause. They are both a couple of toadies who are wed to the government. They will never find any reason for growth that says "get government out of the way" or "cut taxes."

 

[DiamondDave]

How do we balance he budget?

Get our troops out of Afghanistan and use the money to bay down debt
Raise taxes and use an improving economy to increase revenue
Slash spending 10%

As debt decreases our interest payments decrease correspondingly

1) Ramp down in Afghanistan to get them to take care of themselves AND audit the DoD to eliminate waste, contractor abuse, etc
2) The economy is not improving.. and by raising taxes, you best ensure those ~47% that are not paying federal income taxes start paying the same rate on every dollar earned as everyone else...
3) Slash spending about 30% or more

 

[DiamondDave]

"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." Dwight D. Eisenhower

"What all this shows is that growth is not absolutely correlated with taxes, and both liberals and conservatives have problems in trying to make a case. Far more serious factors affect growth, although, in truth, economists do [not] know exactly what they are. Nobel laureate Robert Lucas, one of the world's most famous conservative economists, has spent over a decade looking for the secret to economic growth, and has not found it. Nobel-bound Paul Krugman, one of the world's most famous liberal economists, admits that the mystery of growth is "deep and poorly understood."People who claim that tax rates affect growth are not serious economists; more often they are journalists, radio-talk show hosts, politicians and other types of snake oil salesmen with easy solutions to complex problems. You can dismiss their bumper sticker slogans with perfect confidence.

Fortunately, there is a policy implication in all this. If taxes have such a weak effect on growth, then we should consider tax cuts or hikes for their other effects, like income distribution or alleviation of poverty. Conservatives can no longer decry these programs on the basis that they will harm economic growth, since these assertions are completely unfounded. "

Tax cuts spur economic growth


Contrary To GOP Claims, Small Businesses Say Taxes And Regulation Aren't Holding Back Hiring | ThinkProgress


REPORT: 25 Corporations Paid More To Their CEO Last Year Than They Paid In Taxes | ThinkProgress


"Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and once more in 1984, this time by $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Despite the fact that such increases were anathema to conservatives–and probably cost Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, reelection–Reagan raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84."

Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots) | Firedoglake

Yawn....

More winger links by the Obamabot

 

[Claudette]

"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." Dwight D. Eisenhower

"What all this shows is that growth is not absolutely correlated with taxes, and both liberals and conservatives have problems in trying to make a case. Far more serious factors affect growth, although, in truth, economists do [not] know exactly what they are. Nobel laureate Robert Lucas, one of the world's most famous conservative economists, has spent over a decade looking for the secret to economic growth, and has not found it. Nobel-bound Paul Krugman, one of the world's most famous liberal economists, admits that the mystery of growth is "deep and poorly understood."People who claim that tax rates affect growth are not serious economists; more often they are journalists, radio-talk show hosts, politicians and other types of snake oil salesmen with easy solutions to complex problems. You can dismiss their bumper sticker slogans with perfect confidence.

Fortunately, there is a policy implication in all this. If taxes have such a weak effect on growth, then we should consider tax cuts or hikes for their other effects, like income distribution or alleviation of poverty. Conservatives can no longer decry these programs on the basis that they will harm economic growth, since these assertions are completely unfounded. "

Tax cuts spur economic growth


Contrary To GOP Claims, Small Businesses Say Taxes And Regulation Aren't Holding Back Hiring | ThinkProgress


REPORT: 25 Corporations Paid More To Their CEO Last Year Than They Paid In Taxes | ThinkProgress


"Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and once more in 1984, this time by $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Despite the fact that such increases were anathema to conservatives–and probably cost Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, reelection–Reagan raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84."

Newsflash: Ronald Reagan Raised Taxes (You Idiots) | Firedoglake

Gee, Think Progress and Paul Krugman don't think taxes slow growth? What a shock.

Paul Krugman is the "liberals economist"...if it were up to him the government would get all of our income and we'd get a living allowance. Think Progress is simply a joke. If you're citing THEM you might as well save yourself the trouble because nobody except a flaming progressive is going to take much of anything they say seriously.

If you're a follower of Keynesian economic theory...which Krugman supposedly is...then you should know that Keynes advocated tax increases in boom times to cool down economies that were growing too fast and advised against tax increases in a down economy because doing so would slow growth. The reason that Barack Obama didn't get rid of the Bush tax cuts back in 2009 was quite simple...doing so would have slowed an already tepid economic recovery. So what's changed? Are you now making the case that our economy is "over heated" and we need taxes to slow it down? Reagan and Clinton were able to raise taxes because both of their economies were growing strongly. Two years ago both Christina Romer and Bill Clinton made statements that it was a bad idea to raise taxes on ANYONE because of the effect that would have on the economy. They did so because both of them understand economics.

The fact that you're now advocating tax raises and expecting growth to occur shows me that you understand about as much about the subject as Barry and the rest of his "merry men". This is a tax raise that will do nothing to address the deficit because when it slows the economy, it will decrease revenues as much if not more than it is projected to bring in...all the while putting more Americans out of work. If THAT is what you're looking for then fine...push for taxes. But if you're looking for something that will grow the economy and put people back to work then raising taxes is just plain stupid fiscal policy.

Good post and right on the money.

I'm sure canman doesn't agree. I'm so surprised.