Say what you want about whoever you want, but there is no doubt that tax cuts work. They stimulate the economy and create larger tax revenues for the government.
And, for those who are tax challenged, there is no such thing as a tax cut for the rich. When taxes are cut, every taxpayer gets that cut. Not just the rich. And that includes me, so shut up about tax cuts being bad.
2006-07-09 09:30:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by Farly the Seer 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Note the New York Times front page article about this:
"Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Is Curbing Deficit"
What is so surprising about the fact that tax cuts work? Didn't we learn this over eighty years ago when Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon passed six tax cuts through Congress and tax revenues increased and become even more progressive? (see source image)
Tax cuts have no ill effects because they make it less profitable for the rich to seek loopholes and waste money on lawyer fees. They also grant an extra incentive to the middle class when they see the tax rate drop on their earned income. Would you work more or less if you saw your paycheck the week after a tax cut equal to an amount greater than that of the prior week with the same exact pre-tax income?
Liberals, quit lying to yourselves about the need for tax hikes. Start looking at ways to roll back the reach of governments and your precious tax hikes will become a thing of the past.
2006-07-09 09:40:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by brewcityconservative 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you saying the Bush administration made another miscalulation,nothing new there.
It sounds as if most who answered this are either still with mom and dad or have a job for now.
I am very glad about my work and business background.
I had the priveledge of having many,many,George Washingtons,Thomas Jeffersons as my friends that I worked very hard to get.
Now mr, copper head lincoln and I have to get along to live.
I had the homes,sports cars,Mg migets antique car,motorcycles,truck and could help my kids out if they needed it,even loaning my daughter $150.000.00 to buy first home.
I made alot of money as it turned out to much.
When I had a stroke in 1998 it took them three years but the federal,state and local governments got it all,Insurance don't last forever.
They already take from the poor,a fact is we are the first to be hit.
I get nothing but a disability check and because I made alot of money I don't qualify for anything.
If I would have went to prison,not worked to much,sold drugs on the side,I would be eligible for everything seems there is something wrong with that picture but thats the way our decision makers made it.
There is just to much to list that you don't know and I hope you'll find out but not because you have to but because you want to.
Please don't make any foolish statements that blanket all
I agree that there are people who know how to get things
but the more the government tries to close in on them the more real needy get hurt.
get the facts visit some elderly and disabled housing and ask the people who live there.
2006-07-09 10:22:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by writerfour 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
This only proves that this "booming economy" that republicans keep talking about is really the richest people in the country getting richer... and with oil prices sky high and a surplus of no-bid government contracts (iraq, new orleans, etc...) this is a good time to be a huge corporation.
too bad real wages have gone down, inflation is getting worse and worse, and the average american got a couple tanks of gas out of the bush tax cuts.
2006-07-09 09:42:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Brooks B 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Still a deficit, and other articles claim the Administration inflated the deficit figures so when they came in lower, it would appear as if progress was being made.
Fri Jul 7, 5:40 PM ET
WASHINGTON - U.S. employers added a DISAPPOINTING 121,000 jobs last month, wary of bulking up payrolls with the ECONOMY SLOWING and ENERGY PRICES RISING.
2006-07-09 09:35:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Truth 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
As it stands now, corporations have a stranglehold on power. They "buy" government officials with campaign contributions, lobbying, and media coverage (8 corporations own 90% of the mass media in the US and 80% in the world. Investigative reporting is disappearing and reporters rely on official sources), and high paying jobs in the private sector for former regulators.
In return they get jobs and influencial positions in regulatory and policy agencies, foreign policy that uses military to protect business interests overseas, tax cuts, deregulation on trade policies, selling arms to developing countries, environmental and worker abuse, and anti-trust (not to mention luctrative contract jobs).
We think that we live in a system of free enterprise where competition drives down prices, drives up quality and choice, and provides jobs. In reality, corporations have become so big, powerful, and vertically integrated (single company owning raw materials, manufacturing, AND distribution), that it is virtually impossible for competitors to enter the market and survive. We think we have choice and quality, but if you want to buy goods that are good for society the choices get fewer and more expensive. Try to find a T-shirt that wasn't made by slave labor for less than $20.
So how does this perpetuate the gap between rich and poor? Well, one thing that does have to compete is the work force. Everyone has to compete with cheap labor in developing countries, and that does drive down wages. And these develpoing countries stay poor and desperate becuase of trade policies via WTO, IMF and World Bank. They loan them money knowing they wont be able to pay it back and require the countries to privatize public services and drop their protective trade barriers so that the international conglomerates can exploit the cheap workforce and natural resources of the country.
The big corporations see the government as there to protect their right to unlimited profits and everyone else's expense. They rely on mass consumption, and 99% of people working spend most of their income consuming goods. Whether you earn $40K or $100K, you do not have any political power to change this system. You only get to vote on candidates preselected by giant corporate sponsorship and media coverage. You only hear news that doesn't threaten the corporate media's ability to maximize profits. We need to take back our democracy from the corporations.
Start by hosting a house party to show and discuss the documentary "The Corporation". Also, learn more by watching "Manufacturing Consent" and "Orwell Rolls in His Grave".
2006-07-09 09:31:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Aaron 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Fools like beach bum & moonshine are perfect examples of the infantilism of your average Bush basher. They would be applauding the news if it were released under a democratic administration, but because it happened during W's reign it must be BS.
Of course, they can't offer facts or ideas. All they have is scorn and pathetic out bursts of 'I hate Bush!'
These emotionally arrested girls should go back to playing with their barbies, seeing as playing with facts and ideas is presently beyond their skill set.
2006-07-09 10:23:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by caesar x 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
What this article says, is that although Bush PLANNED to spend way more than he collected in taxes, his tax cuts didn't have as big an effect as he planned, therefore "too much money"(from his point of view) was still taken in by the tax department.
I bet he'll try harder to cut more rich ppl and corporate taxes next year.
2006-07-09 09:35:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by mb5_ca 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I noticed your question say we are over what was projected.
Since the Republicans have taken office, they have robbed over a trillion dollars out of the Social Security trust fund. They have spent money pork barrel style. Bottom line is THEY GIVE THEMSELVES A RAISE. BUT DO NOT RAISE MIN.WAGE.
CAN YOU MAKE A LIVING ON MIN. WAGE?
2006-07-09 10:05:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by DAVID T 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
With respect alieneddiexxx, it is a deficit.. NOT A SURPLUS. If you ran your domestic budget the way these lot have done, your bank manager and your credit rating would be in decline, rather like the US have been under this man's leadership.
2006-07-09 09:29:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋