After only 3 days the dims already talking rasing taxes.

Rico

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
38
Points
16
Just as it happened in 1992 after Billy Clinton won the presidency. 'Member before the election he was all for a tax cut but somehow along in December '92 he said "I have never workd so hard in my life but I can't cut taxes now".


Bwaahahhahaaaa A good laugh from a voting republican to those who voted for the dims... They are liars and ALWAYS RAISE TAXATION!!!!
So they trot our Rubin to break the news to us all.. Lawd how I loathe the dims and their unending LYING! LYING!!!!! LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...240Z_01_N09228185_RTRIDST_0_ECONOMY-RUBIN.XML

By Glenn Somerville

WASHINGTON, Nov 9 (Reuters) - Higher U.S. taxes are inevitable in order to reduce soaring budget deficits because foreigners will not finance U.S. shortfalls forever, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin said on Thursday.

"You cannot solve the nation's fiscal problems without increased revenues," Rubin told the Economic Club of Washington, adding that he did not believe U.S. economic activity would suffer if such action was taken.

"I think if you were to increase taxes right now, you would have probably about zero negative effect on the economy," Rubin told a questioner after a dinner address to about 200 people.

Rubin served as Treasury Secretary from 1995-99 during the Clinton administration, a period during which the government budget was brought into brief surplus before slipping back into deficits after President George W. Bush took office in 2001.

Rubin now chairs the executive committee of Citigroup Inc. in New York and left no doubt that he felt current fiscal direction in Washington was way off course, partly because of the Bush administrations's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

The federal budget deficit was close to $250 billion in the fiscal year to the end of September.

"We have large projected fiscal deficits from the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts instead of the surplus that we should have had during this period of growth," he said, especially with the United States soon facing higher social security spending for a wave of retiring "baby boomers" born after World War Two.

"Entitlements begin to increase rapidly as a percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) early in the next decade and our current account deficit is an almost unimaginable 7 percent of GDP with heavy over-weighting of dollar-denominated assets in many foreign portfolios and key central banks," he added. Continued..
THREAT LOOMING

Rubin said the combination of large U.S. indebtedness and swiftly approaching spending needs pose "a deep threat to our economy and to the entire global economy" and must be addressed by U.S. policy-makers.

"So far, vast flows of capital from abroad, largely motivated by a desire to support the dollar and thereby to support exports... have kept all this going," Rubin said.

"But these vast flows, built on top of imbalances I have already described, seems to me to be exceedingly unlikely to be indefinitely sustained," Rubin said, either because foreigners become worried or because the countries themselves hit an economic rough patch and are unable to invest as much abroad.

Earlier on Thursday, the dollar hit a two-month low against the euro after China's central bank chief, Zhou Xiaochuan, said the country had a clear plan to diversify its reserves, the highest in the world at $1 trillion.

China is the second-biggest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries with $339.0 billion as of August, according to U.S. Treasury Department data. Zhou did not specify that China had a plan to reduce dollar assets but the possibility sent shivers through U.S. and global markets.

Rubin, who now heads a research group called the Hamilton Project that generates policy ideas for Democratic leaders, was coy when asked what actions he recommended now that Democrats have taken control of both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate after Tuesday's congressional elections.

"This cannot go on fiscally. I'm not saying it can't go on for another five years but it cannot go on forever," Rubin said, adding that "a critical juncture" has been reached where long-term remedial policy must be brought into focus.

"What we need is for the leadership of both houses and the President of the United States... to get together and join hands and put everything on the table and agree to take the political risk jointly," Rubin said.
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,122
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Reid has been talking about investigations into the adminstrations.

Germans are calling for trying Rumsfeld for war crimes.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Reid has been talking about investigations into the adminstrations.

Germans are calling for trying Rumsfeld for war crimes.
Yep and the dems are not the majority until the end of January. Can't say there are surprises here, the surprises for the Europeans will come later. They damn well better get ready for subjugation, conversion, or death.
 

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2006
Messages
10,025
Reaction score
2,404
Points
290
Location
San Diego, CA
Higher U.S. taxes are inevitable in order to reduce soaring budget deficits because foreigners will not finance U.S. shortfalls forever, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin said
Rubin needs a reality check (then again, he's always needed one): Budget deficits have been FALLING for the last year as the Bush tax cuts take effect, at a speed faster than even the Republicans predicted.

They also fell even during his own administration, after Republicans cut the capital gains tax in 1994. Though government spending continued to increase, government tax receipts rose even faster as the CG tax cut (bitterly resisted by Democrats) freed up capital and enabled businesses to expand. Tax receipts similarly rose after the Kennedy tax rate cuts of 1963, and the Reagan tax rate cuts of 1981 and 1985. Look it up.

But then, Rubin never did need facts to make his pronouncements. Looks like some things haven't changed. :cool:
 

KarlMarx

Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
3,231
Reaction score
492
Points
48
Location
...
So, let me get this straight:

Rubin is the sole mouthpiece for the will of the entire Democratic party? Yea, uhuh.
Here is an equation for you to remember. Apologies to Albert Einstein, but it sounds like E=mc**2, and it sums up a truth like E=mc**2, it probably even reflects a natural law....

D = MT**2

Democrats = (More Taxes)**2
 
OP
R

Rico

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
223
Reaction score
38
Points
16
So, let me get this straight:

Rubin is the sole mouthpiece for the will of the entire Democratic party? Yea, uhuh.
No. He's the mouthpiece for the clintonistas who run the party. They trot him out first because.. A. He's in an unelected psition so insulated from immediate attack. and B. He's their former Sec. Treasury so an "expert" on the budget. Get used to it. This obfuscation and sleight of hand (More delicate terms for LYING OUT THEIR BACKSIDES!!) was a daily practice of the clintonistas and they still run the party. It's BACK TO THE FUTURE for Dims....
 

flaja

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
363
Reaction score
10
Points
16
Yep and the dems are not the majority until the end of January. Can't say there are surprises here, the surprises for the Europeans will come later. They damn well better get ready for subjugation, conversion, or death.

According to the Constitution, congressional terms begin on January 3. The Democrats will have control of Congress on that date next year.

BTW: The Democrats do not have to do anything to raise taxes. At least some of the tax cuts that the GOP enacted in 2001 have a built-in expiration date (next year I think). If the Democrats don't pass a law saying these tax cuts are permanent or at least extend them, they will cease and the tax rates will return to their 2001 levels.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
According to the Constitution, congressional terms begin on January 3. The Democrats will have control of Congress on that date next year.

BTW: The Democrats do not have to do anything to raise taxes. At least some of the tax cuts that the GOP enacted in 2001 have a built-in expiration date (next year I think). If the Democrats don't pass a law saying these tax cuts are permanent or at least extend them, they will cease and the tax rates will return to their 2001 levels.
Where do you find the 1/3 date?
 

flaja

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
363
Reaction score
10
Points
16
Where do you find the 1/3 date?
I had to look for it. It’s the 20th Amendment:

Section 1
The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2 is interesting:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Would it be possible for GWB to call the Congress into special session so the lame duck Republicans could enact a law that say the next Congress is not to convene until December 31, 2007?
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
I had to look for it. It’s the 20th Amendment:

Section 1
The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2 is interesting:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Would it be possible for GWB to call the Congress into special session so the lame duck Republicans could enact a law that say the next Congress is not to convene until December 31, 2007?
Well what do you know? Thanks for that. :thup:
 

BaronVonBigmeat

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
163
Points
48
He's actually telling the truth for the most part. China has a metric shit-ton of US dollars in it's central bank. They've been willing to fund the US warfare/welfare state for a while now, and now they've got us by the balls. I wish I could find an article I read recently, which put things into perspective by pointing out how much 1 trillion buys. They listed several US states in which you could buy all the real estate for sale, and not hit 1 trillion dollars.

And of course, China isn't the only country talking about getting away from dollars. Others are already talking about it (Germany, Russia), and once China starts dumping dollars, they will too--in order to get something of value before the dollar bottoms out.

We ended the final link to gold in 1971, and the money supply has skyrocketed ever since. Our ivory-tower eggheads think they've found a way to print massive amounts of money and not experience hyperinflation. But all we've really done is export our inflation, for a while, and postpone the inflation. Essentially, we've been on a binge, writing hot checks which others have been gracious enough to not cash. But it won't last forever. The dollar is dead, it just hasn't hit the ground yet.

 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top