Republicans Struggle To Say How They Would Pay For Tax Cuts

[uscitizen]

Yep pure flat tax, no deductions.

So someone with 4 kids making what I make pays the same exact tax I pay (with no kids)??

lolol, try getting that passed...

why should I pay more taxes to support your children?
You hjad em you take responsibility for supporting them.
Children create more burden on tax expendatures, thus parents pay less taxes???

 

[uscitizen]

Revenue has increased every time taxes have been cut.

Sure it has

How did Ron Reagan triple the deficit with his tax cuts?
How did Bush add $5 trillion to the deficit with his tax cuts?

Daddy Bush had it right...Voodoo Economics

Cut taxes and pray

Nice try. Reagan did not add to the deficit. In fact while his admion did reduce the top marginal rate, Carter's policies of wage and price controls had only begun to effect economic activity during the first Reagan admin..The recession of the late 70's started when Nixon was in office did not end until the early 80's.
Reagan had faults. What president does not. Reagan got this country believe in itself again. He told the nation that government was not the answer. People are the greatest asset we had. We took that message and ran with it.
Now you're going to point out the crash of '87...Ok why did that happen? You will say "Reagan did it"..Wrong. Tell me, what happens when the economy overheats and growth skyrockets?....Does the word inflation come to mind?
The Fed had to raise interest rates to slow economic growth and simmer down the value oif a skyrocketing US Dollar.
Investors panicked and sold off securities and other investments. BOOM! The stock market had it's largest one day selloff in the history of the NYSE
A month later when the dust settled, everything was back to normal. Why? Because the government stayed out of the way.
Clinton enjoyed his 8 years in office watching the economy hum along for two reasons. One small investors were able to get into the stock market vis their 401k's and mutual fund investments. Second, Clinton's economic advisors were wise. They told the Clinton Admin to not interefere with the marketplace. Success.

Umm the national debt was around 700 billion when Reagan took office, what was it when he left?

 

[Mr Natural]

Revenue has increased every time taxes have been cut.

Sure it has

How did Ron Reagan triple the deficit with his tax cuts?
How did Bush add $5 trillion to the deficit with his tax cuts?

Daddy Bush had it right...Voodoo Economics

Cut taxes and pray

Nice try. Reagan did not add to the deficit. In fact while his admion did reduce the top marginal rate, Carter's policies of wage and price controls had only begun to effect economic activity during the first Reagan admin..The recession of the late 70's started when Nixon was in office did not end until the early 80's.
Reagan had faults. What president does not. Reagan got this country believe in itself again. He told the nation that government was not the answer. People are the greatest asset we had. We took that message and ran with it.
Now you're going to point out the crash of '87...Ok why did that happen? You will say "Reagan did it"..Wrong. Tell me, what happens when the economy overheats and growth skyrockets?....Does the word inflation come to mind?
The Fed had to raise interest rates to slow economic growth and simmer down the value oif a skyrocketing US Dollar.
Investors panicked and sold off securities and other investments. BOOM! The stock market had it's largest one day selloff in the history of the NYSE
A month later when the dust settled, everything was back to normal. Why? Because the government stayed out of the way.
Clinton enjoyed his 8 years in office watching the economy hum along for two reasons. One small investors were able to get into the stock market vis their 401k's and mutual fund investments. Second, Clinton's economic advisors were wise. They told the Clinton Admin to not interefere with the marketplace. Success.

It was Nixon who imposed wage and price controls.

Nixon Imposes Wage and Price Controls

 

[uscitizen]

Yep I was there and remember Trickey dick.
The year that only congress got a raise.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

You monkeys are retarded, if tax cuts are not paid for the government accumulates a debt, when the tax cuts are given for job creation and no jobs are created the government accumulates debt, what part of that do you rightwing monkeys not understand? The government operates from a certain amount of money which usually comes from taxes, when cut the taxes and have no money to replaced that which has been cut away you will have debt, you Republitards get it wrong every damn time, thats why Reagan, Bush Jr and Sr failed and created huge deficits and recessions and government shutdowns.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You monkeys are retarded, if tax cuts are not paid for the government accumulates a debt, when the tax cuts are given for job creation and no jobs are created the government accumulates debt, what part of that do you rightwing monkeys not understand? The government operates from a certain amount of money which usually comes from taxes, when cut the taxes and have no money to replaced that which has been cut away you will have debt, you Republitards get it wrong every damn time, thats why Reagan, Bush Jr and Sr failed and created huge deficits and recessions and government shutdowns.

ok you can believe that if it makes you feel better.
Look, mr greedy, a I have a question for you. Why do you people on the Left support high taxes?. What's in it for you? IS it because you believe government should subsidize your lifestyle? Buy you clothes? Your home?
What is it about the confiscation of wealth that makes you people have spontaneous orgasms?

 

[thereisnospoon]

You monkeys are retarded, if tax cuts are not paid for the government accumulates a debt, when the tax cuts are given for job creation and no jobs are created the government accumulates debt, what part of that do you rightwing monkeys not understand? The government operates from a certain amount of money which usually comes from taxes, when cut the taxes and have no money to replaced that which has been cut away you will have debt, you Republitards get it wrong every damn time, thats why Reagan, Bush Jr and Sr failed and created huge deficits and recessions and government shutdowns.

Oh that's right tpyical Lefty. Because we disapprove of confiscatory taxes and government waste that makes us retarded....Brilliant deduction there, sunshine..

 

[The T]

You monkeys are retarded, if tax cuts are not paid for the government accumulates a debt, when the tax cuts are given for job creation and no jobs are created the government accumulates debt, what part of that do you rightwing monkeys not understand? The government operates from a certain amount of money which usually comes from taxes, when cut the taxes and have no money to replaced that which has been cut away you will have debt, you Republitards get it wrong every damn time, thats why Reagan, Bush Jr and Sr failed and created huge deficits and recessions and government shutdowns.

Oh that's right tpyical Lefty. Because we disapprove of confiscatory taxes and government waste that makes us retarded....Brilliant deduction there, sunshine..

Worry NOT of BassHole...He's a typical Statist Rascist.

 

[rightwinger]

First and foremost. Tax cuts do not require payment. They are not debt.

Spending is what creates debt. They have said repeatedly they will cut spending.

Is that too difficult for you to grasp?

Tax cuts are a decrease in revenue. Unless you make up for them with a comparable cut in spending you run a deficit

In the short run, your statement is correct. However in the long term reduced tax rates ALWAYS result in an increase in revenues. There are reems of facts to support this.
It's very simple. When wealth is confiscated from the private sector, production, investment and employment falls. The result is less cosnumer spending, fewer businesses opening or expanding which leads to higher unemployment. Fewer people with incomes means fewer people paying taxes.
Government cannot increase revenues by curtailing economic activity. Increasing taxes curtails economic activity. Period. Done. End of story.

Afraid not......Reagans tax cuts brought huge deficits. It was the spending that caused the economic upturn. We never paid back the money Reagan borrowed.

Trickle down does not work...never has

 

[rightwinger]

Revenue has increased every time taxes have been cut.

Sure it has

How did Ron Reagan triple the deficit with his tax cuts?
How did Bush add $5 trillion to the deficit with his tax cuts?

Daddy Bush had it right...Voodoo Economics

Cut taxes and pray

Nice try. Reagan did not add to the deficit. In fact while his admion did reduce the top marginal rate, Carter's policies of wage and price controls had only begun to effect economic activity during the first Reagan admin..The recession of the late 70's started when Nixon was in office did not end until the early 80's.
Reagan had faults. What president does not. Reagan got this country believe in itself again. He told the nation that government was not the answer. People are the greatest asset we had. We took that message and ran with it.
Now you're going to point out the crash of '87...Ok why did that happen? You will say "Reagan did it"..Wrong. Tell me, what happens when the economy overheats and growth skyrockets?....Does the word inflation come to mind?
The Fed had to raise interest rates to slow economic growth and simmer down the value oif a skyrocketing US Dollar.
Investors panicked and sold off securities and other investments. BOOM! The stock market had it's largest one day selloff in the history of the NYSE
A month later when the dust settled, everything was back to normal. Why? Because the government stayed out of the way.
Clinton enjoyed his 8 years in office watching the economy hum along for two reasons. One small investors were able to get into the stock market vis their 401k's and mutual fund investments. Second, Clinton's economic advisors were wise. They told the Clinton Admin to not interefere with the marketplace. Success.

Reagan did not add to the deficit?

Reaganomics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the very wealthy, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.[15] As a result of all this, the budget deficit and federal debt increased considerably: debt grew from 33.3% of GDP in 1980 to 51.9% at the end of 1988 [16] and the deficit increased from 2.7% in 1980 to more than double in 1983, when it reached 6%; in 1984, 1985 and 1986 it was around 5%.[17] In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion,[18] and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation.[

 

[rdean]

You right wingers are hilarious. Cut spending. That's your mantra. What does that even mean in a capitalistic society?

The reason Bush and the Republicans drove the economy into a ditch wasn't because they spent, but what they spent money on.

Tax breaks and subsidies to companies moving jobs to China? 2.4 million jobs from 2001 to 2008.

Throwing away money hand over fist on Iraq. And who were they throwing it to? Haliburton and Blackwater and other companies cleaning up tens of billions in no bid contracts.

Back to the basics is what made this country great. Our railroads, our electrical grid, our educational institutions, our science and technology and our manufacturing base. These things cost money. They ARE the American investment. That's the only way to dig our way out. Develop jobs, which develop revenue, which develop taxes, which is the only thing that will bring down deficits.

And the Republican solution? Stop everything. Well, that just doesn't work.

 

[Vanbasten]

A better question would be, how in the hell does a TAX CUT cost anyone anything.

The liberal mind works in mysterious ways. Putting millions of americans on health care reduces the deficit, but letting folks keep THEIR money costs something. ROFLMAO!

 

[uscitizen]

Umm on retirement.

You people might want to check past legislative actions regarding pensions and pension funding regulations.

just sayin... Might suprise ya.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Tax cuts are a decrease in revenue. Unless you make up for them with a comparable cut in spending you run a deficit

In the short run, your statement is correct. However in the long term reduced tax rates ALWAYS result in an increase in revenues. There are reems of facts to support this.
It's very simple. When wealth is confiscated from the private sector, production, investment and employment falls. The result is less cosnumer spending, fewer businesses opening or expanding which leads to higher unemployment. Fewer people with incomes means fewer people paying taxes.
Government cannot increase revenues by curtailing economic activity. Increasing taxes curtails economic activity. Period. Done. End of story.

Afraid not......Reagans tax cuts brought huge deficits. It was the spending that caused the economic upturn. We never paid back the money Reagan borrowed.

Trickle down does not work...never has

Really? Then how do you explain the economic recovery on Reagan's watch during the mid to late 80's?
You can be afraid all you like.
Reagan was willing to short change the goverment ( they should have reduced spending) in order to give back the people THEIR money so they could spend and invest.
The result was a long period of recovery from the Carter and Nixon years and of course growth in the 80's. And that spending that you mentioned above was CONSUMER spending. Government spending slows economic activity. Because in order for government to spend more, it must take from the producers to have it to spend.

Ok genius, if trickle down doesn't work, what does? See you don't get to post a statement and then not get called on it.
The fastest and best way to grow an economy is to have the earners keep as much of their earnings as possible while taxing them enough to maintain a stable government that is funded for essential services only.
Taxes are never too low. Neither are revenues. Politicians always have the choice to spend less.
I will ask you .....Why is it you support high taxes?

 

[Vanbasten]

Someone needs to explain to Hong Kong that trickle down economics doesn't work.

 

[uscitizen]

In the short run, your statement is correct. However in the long term reduced tax rates ALWAYS result in an increase in revenues. There are reems of facts to support this.
It's very simple. When wealth is confiscated from the private sector, production, investment and employment falls. The result is less cosnumer spending, fewer businesses opening or expanding which leads to higher unemployment. Fewer people with incomes means fewer people paying taxes.
Government cannot increase revenues by curtailing economic activity. Increasing taxes curtails economic activity. Period. Done. End of story.

Afraid not......Reagans tax cuts brought huge deficits. It was the spending that caused the economic upturn. We never paid back the money Reagan borrowed.

Trickle down does not work...never has

Really? Then how do you explain the economic recovery on Reagan's watch during the mid to late 80's?
You can be afraid all you like.
Reagan was willing to short change the goverment ( they should have reduced spending) in order to give back the people THEIR money so they could spend and invest.
The result was a long period of recovery from the Carter and Nixon years and of course growth in the 80's. And that spending that you mentioned above was CONSUMER spending. Government spending slows economic activity. Because in order for government to spend more, it must take from the producers to have it to spend.

Ok genius, if trickle down doesn't work, what does? See you don't get to post a statement and then not get called on it.
The fastest and best way to grow an economy is to have the earners keep as much of their earnings as possible while taxing them enough to maintain a stable government that is funded for essential services only.
Taxes are never too low. Neither are revenues. Politicians always have the choice to spend less.
I will ask you .....Why is it you support high taxes?

the fastest way to grow an economy is to have people spend as much as they can beg borrow or steal.
But we did that and the decade? long hangover will not be fun.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You right wingers are hilarious. Cut spending. That's your mantra. What does that even mean in a capitalistic society?

The reason Bush and the Republicans drove the economy into a ditch wasn't because they spent, but what they spent money on.

Tax breaks and subsidies to companies moving jobs to China? 2.4 million jobs from 2001 to 2008.

Throwing away money hand over fist on Iraq. And who were they throwing it to? Haliburton and Blackwater and other companies cleaning up tens of billions in no bid contracts.

Back to the basics is what made this country great. Our railroads, our electrical grid, our educational institutions, our science and technology and our manufacturing base. These things cost money. They ARE the American investment. That's the only way to dig our way out. Develop jobs, which develop revenue, which develop taxes, which is the only thing that will bring down deficits.

And the Republican solution? Stop everything. Well, that just doesn't work.

What a clueless post.
"Our railroads, our electrical grid, our educational institutions, our science and technology and our manufacturing base. "....Save for education which the federal government has no business being in, all the things you mentioned are PRIVATE SECTOR entities!!! Yeah they cost money. But the private sector pays for them.
Jeez!
Oh please spare me the "government grants for scientists"...That repersents a miniscule portion of the budget . Quite frankly most government funded research ( such as the Japanaese Quail cocoaine thing) shouldn't exist. Neither should public funding for the arts.
Arts like any other industry should be self supporting.
High taxes prevent investment and expansion of business.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Afraid not......Reagans tax cuts brought huge deficits. It was the spending that caused the economic upturn. We never paid back the money Reagan borrowed.

Trickle down does not work...never has

Really? Then how do you explain the economic recovery on Reagan's watch during the mid to late 80's?
You can be afraid all you like.
Reagan was willing to short change the goverment ( they should have reduced spending) in order to give back the people THEIR money so they could spend and invest.
The result was a long period of recovery from the Carter and Nixon years and of course growth in the 80's. And that spending that you mentioned above was CONSUMER spending. Government spending slows economic activity. Because in order for government to spend more, it must take from the producers to have it to spend.

Ok genius, if trickle down doesn't work, what does? See you don't get to post a statement and then not get called on it.
The fastest and best way to grow an economy is to have the earners keep as much of their earnings as possible while taxing them enough to maintain a stable government that is funded for essential services only.
Taxes are never too low. Neither are revenues. Politicians always have the choice to spend less.
I will ask you .....Why is it you support high taxes?

the fastest way to grow an economy is to have people spend as much as they can beg borrow or steal.
But we did that and the decade? long hangover will not be fun.

What is YOUR solution?

 

[rightwinger]

In the short run, your statement is correct. However in the long term reduced tax rates ALWAYS result in an increase in revenues. There are reems of facts to support this.
It's very simple. When wealth is confiscated from the private sector, production, investment and employment falls. The result is less cosnumer spending, fewer businesses opening or expanding which leads to higher unemployment. Fewer people with incomes means fewer people paying taxes.
Government cannot increase revenues by curtailing economic activity. Increasing taxes curtails economic activity. Period. Done. End of story.

Afraid not......Reagans tax cuts brought huge deficits. It was the spending that caused the economic upturn. We never paid back the money Reagan borrowed.

Trickle down does not work...never has

Really? Then how do you explain the economic recovery on Reagan's watch during the mid to late 80's?
You can be afraid all you like.
Reagan was willing to short change the goverment ( they should have reduced spending) in order to give back the people THEIR money so they could spend and invest.
The result was a long period of recovery from the Carter and Nixon years and of course growth in the 80's. And that spending that you mentioned above was CONSUMER spending. Government spending slows economic activity. Because in order for government to spend more, it must take from the producers to have it to spend.

Ok genius, if trickle down doesn't work, what does? See you don't get to post a statement and then not get called on it.
The fastest and best way to grow an economy is to have the earners keep as much of their earnings as possible while taxing them enough to maintain a stable government that is funded for essential services only.
Taxes are never too low. Neither are revenues. Politicians always have the choice to spend less.
I will ask you .....Why is it you support high taxes?

Mega Defense spending. He did not reduce the size of the Federal Government, he expanded it significantly...especially the DoD

Reagan quadrupled the deficit to pay for his tax cuts and defense spending

 

[Sallow]

Someone needs to explain to Hong Kong that trickle down economics doesn't work.

Damn Commies and their trickle down economics.