English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

pugs must repeat over and over--------cut -n-run
tax & spend

lets ignore facts because pugs call those irrlevant

2006-10-06 05:33:22 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

7 answers

Every subsequent President has had the largest national debt in history. There has been NO president that had even one single year of lowering the debt. YES IT IS TRUE. Even Clinton, who the libs say had a surplus and had 'eliminated' the debt added to the national debt each and every year during his term.

Tax cuts do bolster the economy in the proper way. Continued taxation coupled with spending on stupid welfare and endowment programs (that have super high beauricratic red tape and red tape expenses) does not hep the economy at all. It only adds to greater burden on the consumer.

Now of course some uber-lib will try and be a smart **** and say 'then if you keep cutting taxes, they it would be great if you just did away with them. See how good that would be'.... but we all know taxation IS necessary to fund the things the government should spend on (defense, running of needed government business, etc).

You seem to be the one ignoring the facts.

2006-10-06 05:40:41 · answer #1 · answered by DiamondDave 5 · 0 1

There's nothing wrong with having a national debt. Our country has had one for almost it's entire history. Most of it is just rolled over.

There's even nothing wrong with running deficits, as long as they correspond to an overall growing economy. That too is true for most of our country's history.

Raising taxes only hurts people and slows the economy, which will result in future tax revenues being lower. Lowering taxes helps people and helps grow the economy, which results in more future tax revenues. Both raising and lowering taxes shows it's effects on future tax revenues about 2 - 3 years after being enacted.

That's why we've had recent stories about the budget deficit remarkably coming in lower than expected, even though Congress has not made any effort to cut them. Because the tax cuts worked and the economy grew, resulting in higher tax revenues.

2006-10-06 13:05:10 · answer #2 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 1 0

It's not really a threat. Nancy Pelosi outlined her first hundred hours. One of the first things she mentions is rolling back the Bush tax cuts. Sounds like the left is threatening higher taxes if elected.

2006-10-06 12:37:19 · answer #3 · answered by JB 6 · 1 0

Because the size of the debt is not directly related to the amount that you are taxed.

When the government cuts the tax rate, the economy is boosted, more people are employed, businesses profit more. and because they profit more, they pay more in taxes.

In other words, a lower tax RATE actually brings in more tax DOLLARS. Economics 101.

2006-10-06 12:38:42 · answer #4 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 1 1

If elected, democrats will raise taxes. You have proven it with your question, by the way.

The large debt dems keep referring to will be reduced how, pray tell...

2006-10-06 12:48:46 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 0 0

Clinton era gave gov. a surplus alright but it put the people into a recession.Could it mean the gov. took all our money? I would rather have a deficit than recession.

2006-10-06 13:28:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Democrats are probably going to end up lowering taxes for the mddle class actually (but raising them for the ultra-rich).

2006-10-06 12:58:14 · answer #7 · answered by Nick F 6 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers