Tax Cuts

[srellim234]

But the public doesn't. They can just spend themselves into debt, go bankrupt, and get the government to bail them out. Guess who pays for that? All those well off people who pay enough taxes to over budget the local police force for years and don't ever draw help from the government.

How do you know? When is the last time you read the national budget?

Last tme I checked, the very people you talk about who pay those taxes are part of the public, too.

You address it as if every American under a certain income level is a deadbeat. Sorry, but the deadbeats are a minority of the population. Exactly what percentage of the American population has filed for bankruptcy each year and what income levels are they at when they file?

I also know that the current tax code, tax regulations, and summaries of other federal tax pronouncements such as IRS letter rulings and technical advice memoranda as published by CCH Incorporated has grown from 400 pages in 1913 to 54,846 pages in 2003. Way too complicated and unwieldy.

The federal income tax should be

How much did you make?Your tax is XX% of that figure.How much was withheld?File for a refund of overpayment or send in the difference.

[AZhitman]

The federal income tax should be

How much did you make?Your tax is XX% of that figure.How much was withheld?File for a refund of overpayment or send in the difference.

Congratulations.

You're a Republican. And my new Secretary of the Treasury when I get elected.

[srellim234]

I was a Republican for over 30 years but the people in charge of the party now are Republican only in the name they call themselves. They've totally left what the party used to stand for.

I've mellowed and become more centrist on social issues over the years, too.

[rn79870]

Congratulations.

You're a Republican. And my new Secretary of the Treasury when I get elected.

First you have to get white hair, become senile, and be diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome and incontinence. Only then can you run (hobble)as a republican.

[HashiriyaS14]

And then explain to me what good it does to increase the effective rate on the wealthy? So they don't spend as much disposable income, thereby decreasing the need for goods and services provided by the lower to middle class? So they have less to invest, thereby driving stock prices lower? So they decide to hire less workers or outsource labor?

Well, the problem, it would seem, is that even when their taxes are low, they don't seem to be doing all of these things. They are outsourcing labor ANYWAY, and they are investing in Euros or Yen or other securities that are not dollar-denominated and thus killing the dollar and raising the relative price of gasoline, et cetera.

This should be quite apparent, as they've just enjoyed 8 years of the lowest tax levels they might ever have, and we still appear to be in this shxtter of a situation.

Part of this, as I mentioned in another thread, is that these decreases have come at too steep a penalty to the middle and lower class. This part of the population has had their inflation-adjusted real incomes squeezed too greatly and it is now pulling down the entire economy.

Decreasing taxes on the upper classes is a GREAT thing to do, when you can do it smartly. Unfortunately, it hasn't ever really been done smartly. If you're going to do it, you need to decrease government spending to make up for the shortfall, and no one's ever had the stones to do that. Not even Clinton, who rather than cut spending THAT deeply just slapped the wealthy with a 4% increase.

The dollars "freed up" by upper-class tax cuts DO NOT RETURN TO THE GOVERNMENT. This is the fundamental folly of the otherwise-solid philosophy of "Reaganomics". They DO stimulate the economy as a whole in certain ways, but they tend not to trickle down in such a way that provides for additional broad-based tax revenues. This is because they get outsourced, or they get invested into foreign nations, or whatever. Some of the dollars might return, but not enough of them to be able to make said cuts without also drastically cutting spending. No one's going to cut the spending, McCain isn't even claiming he will, and so how can we continue to cut the taxes?

[smockers83]

Good post Chris, but a couple of things. The wealthy investing in foreign currencies are opportunity investments right now and them investing in those currencies won't have a huge effect on the dollar. What will have a bigger effect on the dollar is the domestic situation and people investing in the dollar. The rise of the dollar will be, and currently is, based on our exports. Exports have risen dramatically since the fall the dollar. This increase in demand for US products will put upward pressure on the dollar and it is already being seen. You'll read the dollar is rising and exports are high but they may not tell you one causes the other unless its the WSJ or something.

And then explain to me what good it does to increase the effective rate on the wealthy? So they don't spend as much disposable income, thereby decreasing the need for goods and services provided by the lower to middle class? So they have less to invest, thereby driving stock prices lower? So they decide to hire less workers or outsource labor?

Tell me again how increasing the effective tax rate on the wealthy makes one bit of sense?

Raising the tax rate on the rich won't necessarily solve our government's budget problems, but, it will take care of this nation's out of control income gap. Our economy has grown pretty significantly over the past 8 years, believe it or not, but only the rich have really gotten to enjoy the benefits of prosperity. This is due to their low taxes right now. When the top tax brackets are lowered, those incomes will increase, where as if they were raised, their incomes would be diminished. I'm not saying they'll increase/decrease because of their tax liability, but they do physically increase/decrease, as in they are paid more/less. This is where my centrist view actually comes into play because I'd like to see the income gap narrowed (its approaching all-time highs seen before the Depression) and for me that's pretty liberal. I'm not talking about Robin Hood heroics (although I just watched Robin Hood Men in Tights last night) where wealth is being transfered through higher taxes and subsequent rebates, I'm just saying adjust the tax rates to effectively reduce the gap. Taxes are the biggest hindrance to personal financial growth and its seen today as only the rich have seen the benefits of growth with everyone else squandering. This is the first time in history this has occurred apparently and is the reason we have 70-80% of the people who say the economy sucks, when in reality, whether you're rich or poor, it is fundamentally sound, we just have this huge income gap in the way.

[AZhitman]

I was a Republican for over 30 years but the people in charge of the party now are Republican only in the name they call themselves. They've totally left what the party used to stand for.

I've mellowed and become more centrist on social issues over the years, too.

My experience as well. Except for the 30 years.

[szh]

First you have to get white hair, become senile, and be diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome and incontinence. Only then can you run (hobble)as a republican.

I will repeat this post (from another thread) for those of you who apparently missed this one:

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father.

He responded by asking how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew.

She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"

She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."

Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the Republican party."

Z

[szh]

It never amazes me that people, when they finally grow up, they better understand the Socialist spoutings of the Democrat party. As a result of which, they usually end up joining the Republican party. I have some recent examples!

That is why the party is around and will continue to be around for a long, long time. Because just like the Democrats dislike the Republican support provided by the Religious Right, we Republicans dislike the Democratic support provided by the Socialist Left.

Z