shanna: remember, the money belongs to the people who paid the taxes not to the government. It's not the people's debt it is the government's!! It doesn't work both ways. If it's the people's money, it's the people's debt. If it's the government's money, it's the government's debt. Regardless, it all comes out of our pocket. The responsible thing to do is pay back what is owed. Otherwise *WE* have to keep paying the interest on it. If we had no national debt, we could have TWICE the tax cut Bush wants without cutting a single service. Pay the debt off first, and our future tax load can be far less. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Shanna: Now that IS amusing. You know what's deliciously ironic about all of this? If Ronald Reagan hadn't accrued such a massive amount of debt, bigger tax cuts would be possible. HA HA HA. Maybe conservatives should go blame Reagan for their high taxes *snicker snicker* ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
If Ronald Reagan hadn't accrued such a massive amount of debt, bigger tax cuts would be possible. HA HA HA. Maybe conservatives should go blame Reagan for their high taxes *snicker snicker* Yep. Bush's proposed tax cut comes out to an average of $130 billion per year. We currently pay about $250 billion per year on interest on the national debt (or did as of a few years ago). You kill the whole debt (admittedly, this would take a while) and you could cut taxes by $250 billion per year without cutting anything of value. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Look up the word "refund" in the dictionary. Tax refunds each year aren't an indication of the government's generosity in giving away. They are only giving "back" what didn't belong to them in the first place. If you got a refund, did it come out of your paycheck or from government generosity? By the same principle, cutting taxes means lowering the rates thereby leaving the money in the pockets of the people from whom it was about to be unnecessarily appropriated through excessive taxation. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
RichRocket: Problem is, we can't afford it right now. There are two fatal flaws with this tax cut: 1. All of the projections Bush used to justify his tax cut were made during rapid economic expansion. Even at the time, the projections were very unrealistic, as they assumed incredibly rapid growth over an extended period of time - not bloody likely. Even after the bubble burst, he didn't make revisions, so this is a tax cut that everyone knows isn't fiscally responsible. 2. His methodology in determining the amount was extremely arbitrary. Despite his protestations, he seems to have concluded "aha! That's a nice round #, let's do it!" He didn't look at which programs could be cut, and which were valuable... he just decided on a number, and worked in the rest of the budget AROUND the tax cut. That's incredibly foolish and irresponsible. If it's truly a "refund," as you suggest, then you first determine how much money isn't essential, and give that back. Shanna: I'm curious... how did you manage to become self-employed at the tender age of 14? ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001 [This message has been edited by haven (edited June 04, 2001).]
I'm NOT suggesting it is a refund. I am simply pointing out the whether a refund or a cut, tax dollars make their way back to the owner of the money and THAT IT WAS NEVER THE GOVERNMENT'S MONEY as others have asserted here. If you think that you know better than 400 people working on the plan, God Bless You!! What are your qualifications?! ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Four-hundred people working on the plan? Good heavens, it must be a good idea then! What an awful argument. I've read numerous econonomists argue very similar things on the tax cut. Go read about it Newsweek or Time if you want to do so. Sheesh. I do have some personal basis in economics, but let's steer clear of personal resumes. ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
This really is my favorite. That is why everyone above tha age of, what, 40 is conservative? Ah, youth...silly, inexperienced youth. If that one day I could take you upon my knee and tell you a story about life. I can tell you about everything that is wrong with the world. Soon, you will see...my child. Take arms, my peaceful kid. Kill the cockroaches. Spout slogans all day long. Base your personal philosophy upon a forwarded email...or tv...or a cereal box. Silly college kids, don't believe your communist professors, Karl Marx would love Wal-Mart. Sigh, if only you would learn, if only you *knew.* Alas, poor mule, the glue factory awaits. ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
So RichRocket, do you agree with everything that Congress passes? ------------------ www.swirve.com "Pre-born, you're fine, pre-school, you're f*****."-George Carlin
Rocketman95: No, I don't agree with everything that Congress passes, but this tax-cut was bipartisan. Now comes the sniping a tad too late. haven: perpaps I am underestimating your inestimable abilities but I'll have to go with the committee of 400 until I've seen your resume!! rimbaud: do you ever do anything but mock? We are all speaking in generalities here so there will always be exceptions. I'll cast my lot with the ilk of Churchill and Twain. ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited June 04, 2001).]
RichRocket: You're mistake is the fact that there were just as many people who disapproved of the thing. Do you read, much? If anything, I'd say the majority of economists OPPOSED the tax cut. Furthermore, it isn't like a committee of 400 objective observers gathered round and crafted the tax cut. Bush had already determined the amount PRIOR to taking office in 1999 for CHRISTSAKE! You neglected to mention that, didn't you... RANK SOPHISTRY! How, exactly does that work? Want to explain that away? Bush came up with an arbitrary #, and that's when the sophistry and rationalizations began. Your 400 number-pluggers and yes men worked away. Aha! We can cut this program! Aha! Nobody will notice if we slam the poor here. That's how it worked. Bipartisan? What planet have you been on? The Democrats had this one rammed down their throats. They pared it down as much as they could, but Shrub had his way for the most part. He had majorities in both houses, after all. All the Democrats could do was make it more palatable Remember: Bush is behind this tax cut. And bush is a complete idiot. He doesn't understand the future subjunctive tense, he made C's at a school where the average GPA is like a 3.5, and he's incapable of even engaging other heads-of-state in moderately intelligent conversation. He's a failed businessman and buffoon who used his daddy's name to become President. That's more shameful than a frickin' c*m stain on some Gap dress. ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
Did you skip your evening medicine? What got you so riled? Your partisanship is showing! I don't think that Bush just pulled a number out of thin air and wrapped a tax-cut plan around it. Oh, there I go committing sophistry again! Sorry..... ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils. [This message has been edited by RichRocket (edited June 04, 2001).]
RichRocket, I temper my posts to the subject at hand. ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
And you answer questions like a politician! ------------------ Time is a great teacher-- only problem is it kills all its pupils.
Actually, I speak in parody. I abstain from party-line rhetoric, I leave that to those such as yourself. ------------------ "You sanctimonious philistines, who scoff at me!"
If you think that you know better than 400 people working on the plan, God Bless You!! What are your qualifications?! You're kidding, right? So you think the Clinton health-care plan was a good idea, because I'm sure it had 400 people working on it too. If that's your reason for thinking it is a good idea, wow. No, I don't agree with everything that Congress passes, but this tax-cut was bipartisan. No, it really wasn't. Not even close. Look up the word "refund" in the dictionary. Tax refunds each year aren't an indication of the government's generosity in giving away. They are only giving "back" what didn't belong to them in the first place. If you got a refund, did it come out of your paycheck or from government generosity? A tax-refund comes because the estimated taxes you pay in your paychecks turned out to be more than you owed. The fact that the remainder was owed means you no longer own it after you pay the money. By the same principle, cutting taxes means lowering the rates thereby leaving the money in the pockets of the people from whom it was about to be unnecessarily appropriated through excessive taxation. So basically, your theory is that our government should never pay off our debts because any excess money should be refunded to taxpayers? (Since you have determined that paying off the debt is an unnecessary appropriation) Shanna: I'm curious... how did you manage to become self-employed at the tender age of 14? Haven -- computer programming. For those of you (I think there was one in another thread) who played BBS games and remember playing a game called BRE (Barren Realms), I wrote that. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
RichRocket: It's not sophistry to argue that he *didn't*, but rather to justify that # if he *did.* He came up with the number in 1999, before he had hired these 400 economists. At that point, he hadn't even hired Condoleeza Rice. Even some of his Republican competitors questioned where he came up with the #. He just suggested it out of nowhere based on projections of current economic growth extrapolated over a 17 year period. That's where all the rhetoric about "giving back" to the people who "created the booming economy" came from. He said he was simply going to cut FUTURE spending. Something for everyone, right? WRONG. The economy began to stagnate, and that promise became impossible to fulfill. The question, then, became HOW to fit in such a massive tax cut into an economy without rapid expansion. This leads to the following statement: he came up with a basically arbitrary # based on a faulty premise, then insisted that the # stick even when that was no longer compatible with fiscally responsible goals. If you really think the tax cut was a matter of careful deliberation, explain to me HOW he came up with this number before he had an economic advisory staff. There was a feature on this in Time magazine last spring. They crunched the numbers of the Bush and Gore proposals, and determined that Gore's numbers were LESS wrong... Gore was misrepresenting, but far less than Bush. Everything I said was correct. It's not partisan to be truthful. Shanna: I played that game a bit, although the community for LORD was more vibrant on the BBSs I frequented. What do you do now? ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001 [This message has been edited by haven (edited June 04, 2001).]
Shanna: I played that game a bit, although the community for LORD was more vibrant on the BBSs I frequented. What do you do now? I don't want to derail this fine thread but I now run Swirve.com. LORD first came out about a year or so after BRE if I remember right. Our growth kind of overlapped. For a period of a year or two (92-94ish), the two games were the two biggies in the BBS world and they were our main competition. When I went to UT and discovered the internet , I lost interest in the games and LORD took over quite a bit. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Shanna: *look sheepish* Aha! Now your signature makes perfect sense! Using clutch's BBS for advertising... shame on you . ------------------ A few years back on the Senate floor... Phil Gramm: "If Democrats could, they'd tax the air we breathe." Ted Kennedy (jumping up): "By God, why didn't I think of that sooner!" Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
