Please do correct me if I'm wrong, but it hardly seems to be a tax 'cut' when the 'cut' has existed for 9 years. If a boom AND a recession has happened since that time, then I fail to see how basically keeping tax rates the SAME would somehow stimulate the economy. Perhaps keep it chugging along at the same pace, but definitely not stimulating.
I've looked through most of those. I still have the last two to look through. Those are hardly well researched studies by economists. Also some of those rely on the premise that spending money on goods and services somehow isn't stimulating the economy. Not to mention some of the articles are based on the stupid idea that businesses and business people with more money will hire more workers. That ignores the fact that no business owner no matter how little taxes they pay will hire people if the economy won't support the move. Not one of the articles addresses this. Most of them seem to be articles by the investors who are in the top 2% by the way want taxes lowered for everyone and predict it will be good. edit: OK I finished all of the articles you listed. The problems I mentioned above are all valid, but also they argue against permanent increases in UI like in certain European nations. Nobody has even proposed that. The idea is that it will be a temporary stimulus not permanent. The articles and George Will seem to be arguing against something nobody has ever proposed here in the U.S. The one article that tried to examine history did a horrible job of it. The mention of the Great depression omitted the fact that the stimulus did have positive effects on the economy during the depression but once they reduced the govt. stimulus the economy back slid. The same can basically be said of Japan. Not acting fast enough, targeted enough, and big enough with the stimulus messed up Japan. George W. Buhsh's tax cuts didn't bring about great growth. Our economy tanked after his tax cuts. Sorry theoretical ideas and opinion pieces which is what those articles were isn't the same researched economic studies. But I do thank you for providing the links. It helps me understand where these idea are coming from.
Because this doesn't solve the problem and you know it. Your red herring still doesn't distract from the fact that the greediest among us have gotten their taxes cut over and over again over the last few decades in an effort to create exactly the kind of budget crisis we now face. It is time we raise their taxes again in order to be able to pay our teachers, firefighters, and police as well as fulfill the obligations that come with being an American. Taxes are the duty of every patriotic American. To all these conservatives who are crowing about the tax cuts, I've often wondered why you don't just move to where taxes are between low and nonexistent. I hear Somalia is nice this time of year.
logic breakdown, brah 1. The top 10% pay 70% of all income taxes in this country. 2. After this statement, you claim the rich are greedy. That's your jealousy talking. 3. You try to appeal to the masses with your rabble-rousing class warefare by bringing up images of policemen, firemen and teachers. Shame on you. 4. If you feel paying taxes is dutiful, why don't you pay more? You should, according to your logic. Don't you think there are "rich liberals" who should be paying more? Would that help reduce the deficit? Put up or shut up, brah. Can't have it both ways. 5. You, in a small-minded way of thinking, believe that taxes must be high for a budget to be balanced or to have a country that doesn't resemble Somalia. Talk about intellectual laziness. It wasn't until 1913 when income tax became a permanent fixture in the US tax system. I guess our country was Somalia before then. Are you capable of thinking outside the box? How about some spending cuts? How about some economic growth? Taxes are not the solution.
No kidding, brah, you have a logic breakdown just about every single time you post... Income taxes are barely more than half of the tax revenues, why do you feel it necessary to cherry pick which taxes you count? Answer: Because your logic breaks down otherwise. I don't believe all rich people are greedy (see Warren Buffett and Bill Gates for starters), and I'm not jealous in the least. I am already in the top 5% and fully expect to be in the top 1% in the next 2-5 years, given my educational and career paths. Why do you find it necessary to disparage other people as "jealous" rather than addressing the substance of their argument? Answer: Because your logic breaks down otherwise. Why don't you similarly decry the rabble rousing class warfare that the rich have been engaged in for the last four decades or so? Answer: Because your logic breaks down otherwise. I pay exactly what I am required to pay. I still maintain that I, and pretty much everyone else, should be required to pay a bit more than we do now. No, I should according to your "logic." My position is that EVERYONE should be paying more so that we can have a balanced budget, why do you find it necessary to make up strawman arguments to represent other people's positions? Answer: Because your logic breaks down otherwise. I think that EVERYONE, no matter their particular political philosophy should be paying more in taxes so that we can balance the budget. I only want it one way, brah. Why do you find it necessary to belittle others rather than address the substance of their arguments? Answer: Because your logic breaks down otherwise. There were certainly parts of our country that were analogous to modern day Somalia in the early 1900s. The West was still wild, there was no social safety net, etc. The problem here is that again, you ignored the substance of the argument, which was to say that if you want to live in a place with lower taxes, you are welcome to move there. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. If you want to live at the pinnacle of civilization (I would argue that America is that pinnacle), then it is your patriotic duty to pay your taxes, even if they were to get jacked up to pre-Reagan levels. Who in this argument is unable to think outside their "box?" You are trying to claim that raising taxes will not help us balance the budget, an argument that is simply not based in fact in any way, shape, or form, nor is that position backed up by anything that has ever happened in history. I am saying that we need higher taxes AND lowered spending to balance the budget. We also need economic growth, which we had even after Clinton raised tax rates. Why are you incapable of grasping the fact that raising taxes is part of the solution? Your "logic" is broken.
Well, Moon, that was a lot of text, but unfortunately didn't refute any of my points. Among the more humorous (?) rejoinders were you complaining that I was only considering income taxes (which was precisely the topic at hand) and believing that America pre 1913 resembled Somalia. I'm going to be honest -- I didn't find your post to be insightful or convincing.
I counted at least five different ways in which your logic broke down and you were unable to answer any of them. You are welcome to give up, much like your brother always did, but at least try and save some face by simply slinking away, again like he always did. Otherwise, you just come across as... <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjEcj8KpuJw?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjEcj8KpuJw?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
I counted zero ways. You type and type, but offer little substance. My time is much more valuable than going point by point to try to help you correct your logic. Sorry, you're not worth me making that investment.
'In a small-minded way of thinking'? That sounds rather insulting. There's a poster on here who's constantly saying that if you're resorting to insults, you've already lost the conversation. Who is that poster again? Oh yeah, YOU.
The US Treasury does accept donations. I very thoughtfully provided the link, but instead of thanking me, the Bolsheviks here only gave me hell.
If unemployment compensation stimulates the economy, then we should make everyone quit their jobs and go on unemployment.
Again, nobody is suggesting that. Unemployment does that because by it's nature it's limited and temporary. It's like saying if Air travel is really safer than automobile travel we should force everyone to fly and outlaw cars.
We should focus on growing the pie, thereby increasing tax revenues and revenues to all. Entice foreign companies to set up shop here. Stop the anti-business rhetoric Encourage multi-national companies to bring capital to the US. Enrourage investment and hiring. Lower regulations to start businesses Lower regulations to search for global commodities Reduce indirect taxation like Cap & Trade Allow the brightest minds studying in the US to stay and not go back to China/India/Latin America. Push for higher immigration of quality educated people. Do these things and watch investment grow and see the power of the business multiplier effect. We've got to entice people and companies to invest here which will increase the pie and benefit all.
Fail I was being critical of his way of thinking. This is very different than a personal insult, as it is critical of the thought, not the person. Moon has no problem with PERSONAL insults, which I seek to avoid.
