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

Federal tax revenues are higher than they were, higher than at any point in history, higher than the CBO projected they would be with the tax cuts, and higher than the CBO projected they would be without the tax cuts. And the Fed has been restrictive, which means it's not the temporary effect of monetary policy - in fact monetary policy is working AGAINST growth of GDP and the tax base.

Yes we have a deficit and that's a problem but it results from INCREASED SPENDING, for which BOTH parties are to blame.

And given the increase in revenue, it's possible that a tax RATE hike would CUT revenue.

How can ANYONE be against making the tax cuts permanent now that they've proven to pay for themselves?

2006-11-03 11:35:34 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance Taxes United States

5 answers

It seems to me that this is wishful thinking. It's far more likely that the increased SPENDING has caused the rise in government collections, as the increased spending, of course, translates into more money pumped into the economy and thus higher incomes for corporations and individuals. Of course, the increase in spending doesn't cause sufficient increase in revenue to offset the total amount of deficit being created, thus the federal deficit is mushrooming.

It is also interesting to blame BOTH parties for the increase in spending when the Republicans have been in charge of both Congress and the Presidency for some time.

I'll be happy to vote to make the tax cuts permanent when it is shown that they can be sustained while we address the massive debt burden we are imposing on our children.

2006-11-04 00:00:45 · answer #1 · answered by NotEasilyFooled 5 · 0 0

a lot might want to be suggested about reducing taxes stimulating the business equipment and elevating revenues for the authorities. Examples) The Reagan tax cuts doubled the authorities revenues, and the Bush tax cuts gave us everywhere between 3-4% typical boom cost for throughout the time of his administration. the actual shown actuality that we are at a million% and reduce than of the GNP is because the manufacturers were placed down by technique of the Obama regime. no one is going to commence a organisation or boost it who's contained in the own sector. Obama larger taxes is to finish one component it really is to boost the traditional public sector and shrink the own sector. we could have a unfavourable boom cost till now too lengthy.

2016-12-05 12:34:08 · answer #2 · answered by rosenberger 4 · 0 0

The politicians keep saying tax cuts for the rich and not telling that the tax cuts are also helping the poor and middle class.There is class envy out there .I am not even close to being rich but if you earn it you shouldn't have to get it taken from you because others don't take risks in life.

2006-11-04 01:45:38 · answer #3 · answered by Fly Boy 4 · 1 0

Yes, cut spending cut taxes. The federal deficit will throw us back to the late 70's and no amount of tax incraese will fix it. Leave taxes alone and get rid of the dificit before our kids go bankrupt.

2006-11-03 23:36:12 · answer #4 · answered by waggy_33 6 · 0 0

John Kerry was only joking when he said that they would raise taxes. Check his web site I think that he apologized to day for that joke also.
By the way if you were not watching the same thing happened when Reagan cut taxes.

2006-11-03 11:43:31 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers