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

Data after data shows that when taxes are cut in moderate levels then increased economic activity will stimulate new revenue growth. Now, it takes a little while for the change to take hold but i havent seen data to dispute my claim...Moderate tax CUTS stimulate revenue growth over time!

Im concerned that when Democrats take over Congress in January that they will allow many of the BUSH taxcuts to expire....ARE THEY CRAZY? if they raise the tax rates again this country will go into a recession as companies and the rich make up for the bigger tax bite by shedding jobs... I just dont understand why they like high taxes so much! i can do a WAY better job with my money than THEY can do with it...Why not make more of our goverment programs, that suck INEFFICIENT tax dollars, private! The waist involved in congress, especially democrats, is APALLING!

2006-11-27 02:37:38 · 5 answers · asked by bhicks4556 1 in Business & Finance Taxes United States

5 answers

Some really do think higher taxes will raise revenue. Others are merely pandering to gain the political benefit, which they believe will bring them votes by "taxing the rich".

Government is inherently inefficient. But that fact does not influence any politician, Republican or Democrat. They are all after their own reelection. The Republicans have had presided over massive increases in federal spending during the term of George W. Bush, even though there were tax cuts, which did benefit the economy.

Stay tuned. Bush may be a lame duck, but he does still have a veto power -- he has been most reluctant to use it thus far, but time will tell. He could veto a tax increase from Congress.

Besides, you may be surprised -- John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, cut taxes in the early 60's and the country benefitted.

2006-11-27 17:47:26 · answer #1 · answered by Khemosabi's Ranger 2 · 0 0

The democrats know what's best for us,just ask them.
Tax increases,especially on personal income and property taxes,will force people to spend less in order to have the money to pay their taxes. Less spending,the economy goes down,govt. at all levels loses tax revenue and then has to raise taxes to make up the short fall. If taxes go down,then the people don't have to cut spending in order to pay taxes and therefore have more money to spend thereby the economy grows because increased spending means more sales tax money.
The problem is that the democrats tend to spend more money than is taken in. The last I heard in a news report was $1.50 spent for every $1.00 taken in,but that was years ago.
Even if you proved that a program didn't work,you would be hard pressed to get any congressperson to sponsor a bill to kill the program.

2006-11-30 15:00:55 · answer #2 · answered by Ralph T 7 · 0 0

Well, we all know about the Laffer curve, and we know that it exists -- Reagan proved that in the 80s when his tax cuts actually increased revenues.

But what people don't agree on is what side of the curve we're on. If we're on the downward slope, then yes, cutting taxes will increase revenues -- but if we're on the upward slope, then a tax cut will decrease revenues, and only a tax increase will produce more money in the government coffers.

So, it really boils down to a disagreement on the state of the economy -- not a failure to recognize economic theory.

2006-11-27 02:43:19 · answer #3 · answered by Teekno 7 · 0 0

Tax the wealthy till we are each and all the comparable. the belief is short lived on your ideas yet, the wealthy are like cream they arrive to the suitable and so which you would be able to not shop them down. this is the yank spirit. once you bomb us we upward push up and weigh down you? as quickly as we've voters in choose we come to their help? it somewhat is barely a thank you to maintain the detrimental in our society with out money they won't understand a thank you to apply anyhow. human beings would desire to realize that we choose government and infrastructure and it fee so, the those that stand to income the main could pay the main and in case you earn a butt load of money pay the greater 12% above to conceal the money the detrimental could be paying if we gave them any. bear in ideas they won't take care of money so the wealthy would desire to do it it somewhat is how they have been given wealthy.

2016-10-13 05:06:01 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Please post this idiotic political rant in the politics section where it belongs.

2006-11-27 02:42:35 · answer #5 · answered by Wayne Z 7 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers