Poll Republican Debate

[yidnar]

We've already gutted government revenues with tax cuts, and it hasn't accomplished a damn thing other than to line the pockets of the super wealthy. When are you guys going to realize that? How much further do you think we can cut taxes?

we gutted revenues with trillions in wasteful spending!!!and you want more,more, more!!insanity!!

If you knew anything, you would know that I do support spending cuts, specifically to our most burdensome long term unfunded liability Medicare, as I support raising the age when benefits can first be taken. I have no problem with reasonable cuts in spending, because we are spending too much. At the same time, unlike so many of you here, I understand that we also need more revenue, just to pay for our current obligations. And the reason we need more revenue is that we cut taxes too much. It really is that simple.

lets cut Medicaid!!!

 

[yidnar]

How about some honesty about taxes? Taxes are at their lowest level in over 60 years; that is a fact. Statutory tax rates are not equal to the effective tax rates, so quit acting like they are and that we are overtaxed. It's pure BS.

Are Taxes in the U.S. High or Low?



Bruce Bartlett: Are Taxes in the U.S. High or Low? - NYTimes.com

hell spending and high taxes sure has helped the europeans!!

Just a reality check; our spending is well below that of European countries, even after including state and local government. And on the flipside, our taxes are substantially lower also. We are not like the European countries as much as you try to prove that we are.

so why do you want to increase tax and spend to move us toward the European socialist failure!!

 

[RDD_1210]

Yes, the current plan is working oh so well.

Exactly! Extending the Bush tax cuts and keeping corporate loop holes open is not working.

So you mean to say Obama has failed?

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

 

[Flopper]

Whats the problem????
The more money corporations have, the more people they can employ. And vice versa.

Corporate American is sitting on about 1.9 trillion in capital. Dividends are rising not employment. More money in the pockets of business is no guarantee of more jobs. Until there is concrete action to stop the growing deficits both at home and abroad, nothing is going to change. IMHO, any decrease taxes, would just be used to increase dividends and cash reserves. An increase in taxes would have no effect on jobs.

Do you mean to imply that the $1.9 trillion is liquid capital i.e. cash in the bank? I mean if that $1.9 trillion is in the form of plant and equipment (which honestly seems very low to me) then this line of discussion does not make a lot of sense to me. Do you want the corporate world to just liquidate their assets at a loss to solve this problem, and if so, what should they use to produce their goods and services afterwards?

Immie

I mean corporate American cash sits at 1.9 trillion, 7% of assets.

Corporate American doesn’t need a tax cut. They have plenty of cash to fund a major economic expansion. What is needed is assurance that another 2008 financial crisis is not in the making. Deficits need to go down via spending cuts or tax increases. Secondly, the IMF needs to resolve the debt crisis in Europe. Until we see progress, nothing much is going to improve.


Number of the Week: Companies’ Cash Hoard Grows - Real Time Economics - WSJ

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Newt wins it? Hmm? I thought he did well but i'm still surprised by this Poll result.

 

[rdean]

Bachmann's greatest achievement - The Lightbulb Bill.

10 dollars in cuts for one dollar in revenue - too much of a strain on billionaires.

Number of "Jobs Plans" presented? Zero

Corporations are people too.

I have no doubt this was the best and brightest Republicans have to offer.

Oh, but wait, in rides Rick Perry. A man who spent his college years on "academic probation". A man who "balanced" Texas budget with 20 billion dollars Obama gave him from the "failed stimulus". Thanks Obama, now I can trash you because I balanced the budget. Red State vs Blue State all over again. One always bails out the other.

Texas actually sends more money to Washington than it gets back... So Obama gave texans some of their own money. How nice of him.

Not sure why you didn't post anything proving that. Here let me help you:

See? 94 cents for every dollar paid out. Texas has oil and that's the best that it can do? Almost even? Worse, only one of four Red states that pay out more than they give back.

Is "barely passing" all Republicans have to "crow" about? Pretty pathetic, I must say.

And still Perry needed Obama's stimulus to balance his budget. Hmmm, considering where the state ranks on insuring it's workers, the number of children in poverty and the high dropout rate, what is it they spend all that oil money on? I wonder.

 

[Avorysuds]

Exactly! Extending the Bush tax cuts and keeping corporate loop holes open is not working.

So you mean to say Obama has failed?

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

 

[ShackledNation]

Once again, here is the spending problem.

Population of the United States 1965 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica]- 194,302,963[/FONT]

Population of the United States 2006 - 299,398,484

A 35% increase in population.

A 35% increase in median income

And a 334% increase in federal spending​

It's fun using only some of the stats that make your argument relevant. What about GDP moving from $3.7 trillion (2005 dollars) to $13 trillion? That is an increase of 352%, more than the increase in federal spending.

You do realize GDP includes government spending?

 

[Avorysuds]

Newt wins it? Hmm? I thought he did well but i'm still surprised by this Poll result.

I'm not, I almost voted for him over Paul. I say Paul won because he has a bigger chance to win and had something to lose. Newt at this point has only up and really no down because he is that bad off... Newt also sounds a lot like Ron Paul, he more or less said we should consider all the wars we are in and why and if we should even be in them.

My honest answer is that Newt as of last night could make a very good president, but I still don’t know a whole lot about him so I’m going off only what I have seen.

 

[Immanuel]

Corporate American is sitting on about 1.9 trillion in capital. Dividends are rising not employment. More money in the pockets of business is no guarantee of more jobs. Until there is concrete action to stop the growing deficits both at home and abroad, nothing is going to change. IMHO, any decrease taxes, would just be used to increase dividends and cash reserves. An increase in taxes would have no effect on jobs.

Do you mean to imply that the $1.9 trillion is liquid capital i.e. cash in the bank? I mean if that $1.9 trillion is in the form of plant and equipment (which honestly seems very low to me) then this line of discussion does not make a lot of sense to me. Do you want the corporate world to just liquidate their assets at a loss to solve this problem, and if so, what should they use to produce their goods and services afterwards?

Immie

I mean corporate American cash sits at 1.9 trillion, 7% of assets.

Corporate American doesn’t need a tax cut. They have plenty of cash to fund a major economic expansion. What is needed is assurance that another 2008 financial crisis is not in the making. Deficits need to go down via spending cuts or tax increases. Secondly, the IMF needs to resolve the debt crisis in Europe. Until we see progress, nothing much is going to improve.


Number of the Week: Companies’ Cash Hoard Grows - Real Time Economics - WSJ

Thank you for clarifying that.

Immie

 

[RDD_1210]

So you mean to say Obama has failed?

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Sort of like cutting taxes hasn't fixed shit?

 

[Immanuel]

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Sort of like cutting taxes hasn't fixed shit?

So? If raising taxes doesn't work and cutting taxes doesn't work, what does that tell us?

Maybe the problem is spending habits and not revenue?

Immie

 

[auditor0007]

So you mean to say Obama has failed?

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Obama cut taxes, but don't let facts get in the way of your thoughts.

 

[Full-Auto]

Failed to stick to his guns and behind his principles, yes.

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Obama cut taxes, but don't let facts get in the way of your thoughts.

How many fools in this thread will insist tax cuts or increases is the only factor involved in the economy.

Damn the stupidity runs deep.

 

[auditor0007]

we gutted revenues with trillions in wasteful spending!!!and you want more,more, more!!insanity!!

If you knew anything, you would know that I do support spending cuts, specifically to our most burdensome long term unfunded liability Medicare, as I support raising the age when benefits can first be taken. I have no problem with reasonable cuts in spending, because we are spending too much. At the same time, unlike so many of you here, I understand that we also need more revenue, just to pay for our current obligations. And the reason we need more revenue is that we cut taxes too much. It really is that simple.

lets cut Medicaid!!!

We could. It would just leave a lot of impoverished kids with less healthcare which would eventually lead to higher healthcare costs as they are treated later on in life without insurance coverage. It would translate into higher premiums for everyone that does pay. Just the way things work. You can pay a little now or a lot later.

 

[auditor0007]

Whats the problem????
The more money corporations have, the more people they can employ. And vice versa.

Corporate American is sitting on about 1.9 trillion in capital. Dividends are rising not employment. More money in the pockets of business is no guarantee of more jobs. Until there is concrete action to stop the growing deficits both at home and abroad, nothing is going to change. IMHO, any decrease taxes, would just be used to increase dividends and cash reserves. An increase in taxes would have no effect on jobs.

Do you mean to imply that the $1.9 trillion is liquid capital i.e. cash in the bank? I mean if that $1.9 trillion is in the form of plant and equipment (which honestly seems very low to me) then this line of discussion does not make a lot of sense to me. Do you want the corporate world to just liquidate their assets at a loss to solve this problem, and if so, what should they use to produce their goods and services afterwards?

Immie

Yes, cash on hand.

U.S. companies sitting on a record $1.9 trillion in cash, and shareholders want their share | masslive.com

 

[RDD_1210]

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Sort of like cutting taxes hasn't fixed shit?

So? If raising taxes doesn't work and cutting taxes doesn't work, what does that tell us?

Maybe the problem is spending habits and not revenue?

Immie

No one is disagreeing that spending needs to be cut. However, when was the last time we actually did raise taxes? You just agreed that cutting taxes doesn't do a thing, maybe it's time to try increasing revenue while decreasing spending.

 

[auditor0007]

hell spending and high taxes sure has helped the europeans!!

Just a reality check; our spending is well below that of European countries, even after including state and local government. And on the flipside, our taxes are substantially lower also. We are not like the European countries as much as you try to prove that we are.

so why do you want to increase tax and spend to move us toward the European socialist failure!!

Increase taxes to pay current obligations while cutting spending. I do not want more spending, and although both Republicans and Dems have a horrible record when it comes to cutting spending, I think this is one area that everyone pretty much now agrees on. We have to make some cuts. The real question is where. But the bottom line is that cuts will not be enough if revenue does not increase.

 

[RDD_1210]

News flash, Obama and Dems never meant to raise taxes... It's all just talk because they all know it won;t fix dick of the problem and that means at some point the only other option will be to cut spending. Keep the fight between "Republicans not wanting any taxes" rather than "Oh, I guess more taxes didn't fix shit...."

Obama cut taxes, but don't let facts get in the way of your thoughts.

How many fools in this thread will insist tax cuts or increases is the only factor involved in the economy.

Damn the stupidity runs deep.

Link to ANY post that claims that taxes are the only factor. We'll wait.

Damn, the stubbornness runs deep.

 

[mudwhistle]

Every one of those guys has complained that Obama has not created jobs and their only plan to create jobs is "cut taxes". That's it. Cut taxes.

the more money people have the more they invest and spend.when they spend someone has to produce the goods they are buying .companies have to hire people to keep up with the increase in consumer demand...lower corporate taxes helps companies to invest in production and labor.the new workers will be off the government dole and paying income taxes......less taxes more money...more money more spending and investing....more spending and investing more production....more production more workers .....more workers less entitlements and more tax revenue!!!

We've already gutted government revenues with tax cuts, and it hasn't accomplished a damn thing other than to line the pockets of the super wealthy. When are you guys going to realize that? How much further do you think we can cut taxes?

Name the cuts. Be specific.

Show us a link or two proving this.