What's new
By:

Tax Cuts

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 365

Guest
should they be allowed to expire? Why or why not? How will our economy be effected?
 
I think spending reductions need to come before tax cuts. If we want to spend like we do we should pay as we go.
 
i think we need a paradigm shift


(not sure what that means exactly...)

I also think I need to read up on the issues a little more.
 
The rationalization for the top tier Bush Tax Cuts in summer of 2001 was to stimulate growth and create more private sector jobs. How many jobs have been created in the last 10 years?
 
Don't worry about it. Helicopter Ben Bernanke is going to give you the biggest tax of your lifetime in the form of inflation so the 3 or 4 percentage bump income tax is almost irrelevant right now. The Fed just announced QE 2 this week, and God knows what else they are doing that isn't being aired publicly. They don't know how do anything but print money. You're in good hands.
 
I can't remember the exact statistic, but if we let the cuts expire, the incoming revenue would erase something like 30% of the current deficit. With the problems we are in we have to let them expire, and if we were being realistic (which we won't be... especially in a mid-term election year) we'd probably have to raise taxes on people making between (approximately) $250,000 and $150,000 a year. These people need their vacation homes and their sports cars, though.... these things make the world go-round.
 
What do you see in this picture?

74614796.kKWCgEk1.jpg





Answer: a job-creating machine!


BTW: this kind of development is, I believe, illegal in New Zealand. You can't privately own property that meets the ocean; all of that is public land. I don't know anybody who has been to New Zealand's coasts that wouldn't immediately say they are more beautiful than the areas of northern and central California which are very comparable topographically and (originally) aesthetically.
 
Last edited:
candrew said:
The rationalization for the top tier Bush Tax Cuts in summer of 2001 was to stimulate growth and create more private sector jobs. How many jobs have been created in the last 10 years?
Click to expand...

careful, a momma grizzly might maul you for that kind of talk.
 
candrew said:
The rationalization for the top tier Bush Tax Cuts in summer of 2001 was to stimulate growth and create more private sector jobs. How many jobs have been created in the last 10 years?
Click to expand...

You mean here in the United States, or overseas? ;)

careful, a momma grizzly might maul you for that kind of talk.
 
New_Anonymity_Old_Sage said:
I can't remember the exact statistic, but if we let the cuts expire, the incoming revenue would erase something like 30% of the current deficit. With the problems we are in we have to let them expire, and if we were being realistic (which we won't be... especially in a mid-term election year) we'd probably have to raise taxes on people making between (approximately) $250,000 and $150,000 a year. These people need their vacation homes and their sports cars, though.... these things make the world go-round.
Click to expand...

I love the thinking here. It is okay to take things that belong to other people (their money in this case) because they will only use the fruits of their labor to enjoy life. All of us miserable wretches who have been victimized by their success deserve their property more than they do!

Taking things from people with more money than we have is awesome.

(This will be followed by NAOS saying he actually makes $200,000+ a year and would have no problem paying "his fair share.")
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top