Tax cuts do not cost anything. Nor do they need to be "paid for"

[bripat9643]

Bullshit. I hope we do just keep on digging this hole we can never come up out of. May the deficit grow until this soceity has to come to terms with its own perceptual reality and empire.

This new found concern for spending after 8 years & 9 trillion in frivolous handouts is laughable.

Nothing new found about it son. It's just more partisanshit for you.

When did you complain about Obama's spending?

 

[bripat9643]

When your income fluctuates you are supposed to compensate by adjusting your spending accordingly.

The government receives money from working Americans. The government then spends that money on various shit. When the government decides to STEAL LESS FROM YOU it is supposed to adjust it's budget accordingly but it never does. The spending continues because they know they can STEAL more from you latter to compensate for their irresponsible behavior.

Ultimately they are giving you back what was yours all along so it is NOT spending that has to be accounted for but rather an opportunity for them to prove they can live within their means.

So when the government 'steals' from you- and pays for police and fire departments- that pisses you off.

Yes, that does piss me off.

 

[danielpalos]

When your income fluctuates you are supposed to compensate by adjusting your spending accordingly.

The government receives money from working Americans. The government then spends that money on various shit. When the government decides to STEAL LESS FROM YOU it is supposed to adjust it's budget accordingly but it never does. The spending continues because they know they can STEAL more from you latter to compensate for their irresponsible behavior.

Ultimately they are giving you back what was yours all along so it is NOT spending that has to be accounted for but rather an opportunity for them to prove they can live within their means.

let's end the drug war to spend less.

 

[danielpalos]

You know, I find it really interesting that Trump supporters are happy about his tax plan, yet are still thinking he's gonna fulfill his campaign promises.

If you cut taxes, there is less money for the government to use on things like infrastructure, the military, etc.

Trump has said that he's going to "rebuild the military" meaning a large increase in military spending. He's also said that he would build a border wall, of which just the initial cost is around 1 BILLION dollars. He also promised to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, meaning roads, bridges and power grid.

How can he do all that spending if he's going to cut the revenue that the government gets (taxes)?

It's not true that if you cut taxes, then government has less money. That's false primary thinking. Cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts (of course it depends on how you do it). In the 3 most drastic tax cuts in the past century, tax revenue increased by no less than 40%, upwards to 64%. It's called the laffer curve.

And I find it interesting that the left suddenly cares about the debt again. If y'all care about the debt, let's balance the freaking budget please. Let's take all spending down to zero, then see where spending is doing good for the citizens, and cut what's not helping citizens. Does that not sound reasonable??

Our debt is growing and a one percenter is advocating for a tax break. Does that sound reasonable to you?

 

[Zander]

Two scary, scary words that are never uttered in DC: Cut Spending.

Personally, I'd settle for "Freeze Spending". Real spending not baseline. Freeze real spending for 4 years and you'd have a balanced budget in year 4 . In year 5 you'd have a surplus. CBO Releases Forecast: The US Budget Can Be Balanced Without Tax Increases

This ain't rocket science.......unless you're a politician.

 

[danielpalos]

You know, I find it really interesting that Trump supporters are happy about his tax plan, yet are still thinking he's gonna fulfill his campaign promises.

If you cut taxes, there is less money for the government to use on things like infrastructure, the military, etc.

Trump has said that he's going to "rebuild the military" meaning a large increase in military spending. He's also said that he would build a border wall, of which just the initial cost is around 1 BILLION dollars. He also promised to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, meaning roads, bridges and power grid.

How can he do all that spending if he's going to cut the revenue that the government gets (taxes)?

It's not true that if you cut taxes, then government has less money. That's false primary thinking. Cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts (of course it depends on how you do it). In the 3 most drastic tax cuts in the past century, tax revenue increased by no less than 40%, upwards to 64%. It's called the laffer curve.

And I find it interesting that the left suddenly cares about the debt again. If y'all care about the debt, let's balance the freaking budget please. Let's take all spending down to zero, then see where spending is doing good for the citizens, and cut what's not helping citizens. Does that not sound reasonable??

Got a link to back up your claims that cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts?

It only works up to a certain point; increasing debt means we are beyond, that certain point. spend and finance, is all the right wing knows how to do.

 

[Montrovant]

He said that cutting taxes is supposed to lead to less spending.

That NEVER happens. Debt ALWAYS goes up.

Innumeracy is fun!

Did you learn a new word today?

I didn't say the OP claimed that spending does go down when taxes are cut, but that it should. In fact, he quite clearly said that the government "is supposed to adjust it's budget accordingly but it never does." That isn't a mathematics issue, but rather an ideological one; there is both the question of whether decreasing taxes leads to economic growth and whether continued and increasing debt spending is a good policy.

 

[danielpalos]

For those who have said, "Why not cut taxes to zero," did you actually read the OP? He said that cutting taxes is supposed to lead to less spending. In other words, cutting taxes to zero would mean cutting spending to zero. I assume that the point is that when taxes are cut, spending the same amount (or more, which is more realistic) is not a necessity. There is not a cost, but rather an unreasonable continuation of spending policies in the face of lowered income.

Perhaps saying tax cuts don't cost anything was a poor way to put it, but the point seems to be that tax cuts should be accompanied by spending cuts, which sounds like a perfectly reasonable argument. It also seems to be an argument to which neither political party adheres.

The right wing prefers to, "hate on the poor" (but blame the left), and advocate for reducing social spending for the poor, instead of ending the drug war.

 

[whitehall]

When the government decides to "steal MORE from you" it is supposed to adjust it's budget accordingly but it never does and it spends the surplus like it did the Social Security locked box. The point is that you could hand crazy angry lefties a freaking gift of more money in their pockets and they would still be unhappy if the administration was republican..

 

[danielpalos]

You know, I find it really interesting that Trump supporters are happy about his tax plan, yet are still thinking he's gonna fulfill his campaign promises.

If you cut taxes, there is less money for the government to use on things like infrastructure, the military, etc.

Trump has said that he's going to "rebuild the military" meaning a large increase in military spending. He's also said that he would build a border wall, of which just the initial cost is around 1 BILLION dollars. He also promised to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, meaning roads, bridges and power grid.

How can he do all that spending if he's going to cut the revenue that the government gets (taxes)?

It's not true that if you cut taxes, then government has less money. That's false primary thinking. Cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts (of course it depends on how you do it). In the 3 most drastic tax cuts in the past century, tax revenue increased by no less than 40%, upwards to 64%. It's called the laffer curve.

And I find it interesting that the left suddenly cares about the debt again. If y'all care about the debt, let's balance the freaking budget please. Let's take all spending down to zero, then see where spending is doing good for the citizens, and cut what's not helping citizens. Does that not sound reasonable??

Got a link to back up your claims that cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts?

Three times revenue increased after tax cuts

The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

A Little Laffer Curve Reality Should Guide Republican Tax Reform

Do Tax Cuts Increase Government Revenue?

North Carolina Tax Revenues Increase After Tax Cuts

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1981/5/cj1n1-3.pdf

The proof of the Laffer Curve pudding

There are all the links. Now if you want to talk deficit, that's a different story from tax revenue. A lot of people claim the laffer curve doesn't pan out because there are still deficits (still after increased revenues, which is why it's a dumb claim), but that just means the government is still spending more. They get the raise and think they can buy classy things. A lot of people compare government spending vs GDP, WHICH WE ARE SPENDING 61% of GDP. This is wrong since the government does not take in the full amount of GDP, they take in the amount of revenue from that GDP. And if they're spending 61% of the GDP they're skimming around 18% of, that's going to be quite a big problem. Yes tax revenues do increase with tax cuts, especially when tax cuts are done properly (we've needed a demand side cut forever), but it needs to be a 2 part solution. Cut spending, then cut taxes, then watch that surplus happen.

Why do we have so much debt, if tax cuts generate so much revenue?

 

[danielpalos]

No more tax cuts for the one percent, until the Debt is paid for.

 

[Dragonlady]

Bullshit. I hope we do just keep on digging this hole we can never come up out of. May the deficit grow until this soceity has to come to terms with its own perceptual reality and empire.

This new found concern for spending after 8 years & 9 trillion in frivolous handouts is laughable.

Don't you mean frivolous wars and military spending, corporate tax breaks, and wage subsidies to America's richest corporations.

You want the government to protect you from terrorists - you need to pay for it.

Taxes are not theft of what is yours. Taxes are the cost you pay for infrastructure, safety and security of living in a first world country, where you have educated workers you can hire and make money from, where you don't have to barricade yourself against those who really would steal everything you have. You could move to Mynamar where there are no taxes. Or maybe Lebanon, where they pay no income tax. There are lots of countries in the world where you pay no income tax, but they're all dangerous shit holes, where you need bodyguards to protect you from criminals and thieves.

But at least the government wouldn't be stealing what is "yours".

 

[Zander]

3 steps to a balanced budget in 4 short years and a surplus in year 5.

1) Freeze Spending.
2) Freeze Spending
3) Freeze Spending.

 

[sakinago]

You know, I find it really interesting that Trump supporters are happy about his tax plan, yet are still thinking he's gonna fulfill his campaign promises.

If you cut taxes, there is less money for the government to use on things like infrastructure, the military, etc.

Trump has said that he's going to "rebuild the military" meaning a large increase in military spending. He's also said that he would build a border wall, of which just the initial cost is around 1 BILLION dollars. He also promised to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, meaning roads, bridges and power grid.

How can he do all that spending if he's going to cut the revenue that the government gets (taxes)?

It's not true that if you cut taxes, then government has less money. That's false primary thinking. Cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts (of course it depends on how you do it). In the 3 most drastic tax cuts in the past century, tax revenue increased by no less than 40%, upwards to 64%. It's called the laffer curve.

And I find it interesting that the left suddenly cares about the debt again. If y'all care about the debt, let's balance the freaking budget please. Let's take all spending down to zero, then see where spending is doing good for the citizens, and cut what's not helping citizens. Does that not sound reasonable??

Got a link to back up your claims that cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts?

It only works up to a certain point; increasing debt means we are beyond, that certain point. spend and finance, is all the right wing knows how to do.

And cutting spending is the other half. Zero the budget, give more to what is effective, cut what's ineffective.

 

[danielpalos]

You know, I find it really interesting that Trump supporters are happy about his tax plan, yet are still thinking he's gonna fulfill his campaign promises.

If you cut taxes, there is less money for the government to use on things like infrastructure, the military, etc.

Trump has said that he's going to "rebuild the military" meaning a large increase in military spending. He's also said that he would build a border wall, of which just the initial cost is around 1 BILLION dollars. He also promised to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, meaning roads, bridges and power grid.

How can he do all that spending if he's going to cut the revenue that the government gets (taxes)?

It's not true that if you cut taxes, then government has less money. That's false primary thinking. Cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts (of course it depends on how you do it). In the 3 most drastic tax cuts in the past century, tax revenue increased by no less than 40%, upwards to 64%. It's called the laffer curve.

And I find it interesting that the left suddenly cares about the debt again. If y'all care about the debt, let's balance the freaking budget please. Let's take all spending down to zero, then see where spending is doing good for the citizens, and cut what's not helping citizens. Does that not sound reasonable??

Got a link to back up your claims that cutting taxes actually increases tax receipts?

It only works up to a certain point; increasing debt means we are beyond, that certain point. spend and finance, is all the right wing knows how to do.

And cutting spending is the other half. Zero the budget, give more to what is effective, cut what's ineffective.

Yet, we can never seem to get a "second wave" from the right wing, regarding ending our exorbitantly expensive and useless and alleged, War on Drugs.

 

[Dschrute3]

It's a valid point, but is it really wise to cut tax revenue while we're $20 Trillion in Debt and proposing spending another $Trillion on 'Infrastructure?' Seems like the Government would need that tax revenue to pay for such massive expenditures. Where is it gonna get all the money to pay for the $Trillion in 'Infrastructure' spending? We should actually be focusing only on cutting spending. No tax cuts, or spending another $Trillion. Just cut spending.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Hilarious, those on the far right wing here believe "someone else spent money so now we get to, who cares about the national debt, we have the unlimited credit card!"

Unfortunately for you RW sheep YOU don't get to spend the money on anything. Drumpf and his cronies will be too busy stuffing it in their pockets while the poor and middle class are losing their break on city and state taxes on their federal tax form. Yes, the poor and middle class will not only have to pay their city and state taxes, but now the federal government will be taxing any city and state taxes which used to be deductible on your federal taxes.

Rubes, the billionaires that you voted into office are cutting their own taxes but raising yours. And again, for the 12th time, you were fooled into believing they wouldn't do this.

Ignorance is the bane of the human race but willful ignorance is human beings that crave misery bringing it on themselves.

 

[Darkwind]

When your income fluctuates you are supposed to compensate by adjusting your spending accordingly.

The government receives money from working Americans. The government then spends that money on various shit. When the government decides to STEAL LESS FROM YOU it is supposed to adjust it's budget accordingly but it never does. The spending continues because they know they can STEAL more from you latter to compensate for their irresponsible behavior.

Ultimately they are giving you back what was yours all along so it is NOT spending that has to be accounted for but rather an opportunity for them to prove they can live within their means.

So when the government 'steals' from you- and pays for police and fire departments- that pisses you off.

The stupidest reply for April is found here.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Hilarious, those on the far right wing here believe "someone else spent money so now we get to, who cares about the national debt, we have the unlimited credit card!"

Unfortunately for you RW sheep YOU don't get to spend the money on anything. Drumpf and his cronies will be too busy stuffing it in their pockets while the poor and middle class are losing their break on city and state taxes on their federal tax form. Yes, the poor and middle class will not only have to pay their city and state taxes, but now the federal government will be taxing any city and state taxes which used to be deductible on your federal taxes.

Rubes, the billionaires that you voted into office are cutting their own taxes but raising yours. And again, for the 12th time, you were fooled into believing they wouldn't do this.

Ignorance is the bane of the human race but willful ignorance is human beings that crave misery bringing it on themselves.

Your post ensures that your record of being one of the dumbest posters here remains intact.

Congrats

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Bullshit. I hope we do just keep on digging this hole we can never come up out of. May the deficit grow until this soceity has to come to terms with its own perceptual reality and empire.

This new found concern for spending after 8 years & 9 trillion in frivolous handouts is laughable.

Don't you mean frivolous wars and military spending, corporate tax breaks, and wage subsidies to America's richest corporations.

You want the government to protect you from terrorists - you need to pay for it.

Taxes are not theft of what is yours. Taxes are the cost you pay for infrastructure, safety and security of living in a first world country, where you have educated workers you can hire and make money from, where you don't have to barricade yourself against those who really would steal everything you have. You could move to Mynamar where there are no taxes. Or maybe Lebanon, where they pay no income tax. There are lots of countries in the world where you pay no income tax, but they're all dangerous shit holes, where you need bodyguards to protect you from criminals and thieves.

But at least the government wouldn't be stealing what is "yours".

You start off whining about wars.... EVERY SINGLE nation Trump is involved in is a nation war Obama or Bush started, not Trump, you stupid old woman.
The rest of your nonsensical bullshit response is not worth commenting on as it's the usual leftist drivel