• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Deal in Congress to Keep Tax Cuts, Widening Deficit

Todd33

Todd33

Diamond Member
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/politics/23tax.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 - Putting aside efforts to control the federal deficit before the elections, Republican and Democratic leaders agreed Wednesday to extend $145 billion worth of tax cuts sought by President Bush without trying to pay for them.

"I wish we could pay for them, but this is a political problem and we have people up for re-election,'' said Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. "If you have to explain that you voted for these tax cuts because they benefit the middle class and against them because of the deficit, you've got a problem.''

Fearful of being attacked as supporters of higher taxes, Democrats said they would go along with an unpaid five-year extension of the $1,000 child tax credit; a four-year extension of tax breaks intended to reduce the so-called marriage penalty on two-income families; and a six-year extension of a provision that allowed more people to qualify for the lowest tax rate of 10 percent.

The result of the reversal on the part of the Democrats and the Republican moderates is likely to be a tax measure that will last longer and increase federal deficits more than a two-year extension that Republican Senate leaders offered this summer. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that debt will climb by $2.3 trillion over the next 10 years, and that making all Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent would cost an additional $1.9 trillion by the end of 2014.
Click to expand...

It's to bad that voters can be bought off so easy at the expense of their children and grandchildren. The right wingers played election year politics and the Democrats and fiscal conservatives backed down at the risk of losing the election, pity.
 
Originally posted by: Todd33
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/politics/23tax.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 - Putting aside efforts to control the federal deficit before the elections, Republican and Democratic leaders agreed Wednesday to extend $145 billion worth of tax cuts sought by President Bush without trying to pay for them.

"I wish we could pay for them, but this is a political problem and we have people up for re-election,'' said Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. "If you have to explain that you voted for these tax cuts because they benefit the middle class and against them because of the deficit, you've got a problem.''

Fearful of being attacked as supporters of higher taxes, Democrats said they would go along with an unpaid five-year extension of the $1,000 child tax credit; a four-year extension of tax breaks intended to reduce the so-called marriage penalty on two-income families; and a six-year extension of a provision that allowed more people to qualify for the lowest tax rate of 10 percent.

The result of the reversal on the part of the Democrats and the Republican moderates is likely to be a tax measure that will last longer and increase federal deficits more than a two-year extension that Republican Senate leaders offered this summer. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that debt will climb by $2.3 trillion over the next 10 years, and that making all Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent would cost an additional $1.9 trillion by the end of 2014.
Click to expand...

It's to bad that voters can be bought off so easy at the expense of their children and grandchildren. The right wingers played election year politics and the Democrats and fiscal conservatives backed down at the risk of losing the election, pity.
Click to expand...

I've said it before and I'll say it again - voters plainly can't be trusted not to mortgage the future to receive benefits in the present. We need structural reform (such as a Balanced Budget Amendment) with which to address this issue. Otherwise, we will continue to see the sort of unholy alliances we see in Congress, when high spenders/high taxers 'compromise' with low spenders/low taxers, resulting in high spending/low taxes/massive deficits. It's a shame that during these polarized times, people from both the Right and Left seem more interested in passing the blame rather than addressing the issue.
 
conservative house + conservative senate + conservative presidency = least fiscally conservative government in American history. Kind of ironic.
 
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
least fiscally conservative government in American history.
Click to expand...

It depends on your criteria. The federal budget deficit as a percentage of GDP has been higher on many occasions. But I'm not defending the current Congress, either. There's little to defend.
 
Cut Middle-Class Taxes To Raise Middle-Class Incomes
When John Kerry is president, middle-class taxes will go down. Ninety-eight percent of all Americans and 99 percent of American businesses will get a tax cut under the Kerry-Edwards plan.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Todd33
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/politics/23tax.html

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 - Putting aside efforts to control the federal deficit before the elections, Republican and Democratic leaders agreed Wednesday to extend $145 billion worth of tax cuts sought by President Bush without trying to pay for them.

"I wish we could pay for them, but this is a political problem and we have people up for re-election,'' said Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. "If you have to explain that you voted for these tax cuts because they benefit the middle class and against them because of the deficit, you've got a problem.''

Fearful of being attacked as supporters of higher taxes, Democrats said they would go along with an unpaid five-year extension of the $1,000 child tax credit; a four-year extension of tax breaks intended to reduce the so-called marriage penalty on two-income families; and a six-year extension of a provision that allowed more people to qualify for the lowest tax rate of 10 percent.

The result of the reversal on the part of the Democrats and the Republican moderates is likely to be a tax measure that will last longer and increase federal deficits more than a two-year extension that Republican Senate leaders offered this summer. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that debt will climb by $2.3 trillion over the next 10 years, and that making all Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent would cost an additional $1.9 trillion by the end of 2014.
Click to expand...

It's to bad that voters can be bought off so easy at the expense of their children and grandchildren. The right wingers played election year politics and the Democrats and fiscal conservatives backed down at the risk of losing the election, pity.
Click to expand...

both sides bribe their own constituencies... if you want to get rid of it you've got to cut government services a lot and get a balanced budget amendment (with certain provisos relating to war and recession)

of course, if the government were able to collect all the taxes owed it wouldn't be as much of a problem.
 
Originally posted by: jjzelinski
conservative house + conservative senate + conservative presidency = least fiscally conservative government in American history. Kind of ironic.
Click to expand...

It seems their only "tighie righties" when it comes to their money. Another good reason not to vote for the aholes.
 
You all realize this is a continuation of the middle class taxcuts that were set to expire? I don't see the protest in this. Such taxcuts are vital to growing the middle class of America (the real power of this nation.) Kerry has proposed such tax cuts himself as part of his economic plan.

If we want to reduce the budget we need to focus on cutting the spending this administration and Congress has been passing. The medicare drug bill which disallows price negotiation would be a great place to start.

Protesting this is a losing issue.
 
Originally posted by: Hafen
You all realize this is a continuation of the middle class taxcuts that were set to expire? I don't see the protest in this. Such taxcuts are vital to growing the middle class of America (the real power of this nation.) Kerry has proposed such tax cuts himself as part of his economic plan.

If we want to reduce the budget we need to focus on cutting the spending this administration and Congress has been passing. The medicare drug bill which disallows price negotiation would be a great place to start.

Protesting this is a losing issue.
Click to expand...

Especially on an election year and knowing that the opposition will pounce on you for voting against it. But I agree, the ludicrous spending going on now is truly mortgaging our country's future.
 
your precious democratic party didnt even do anything about it or try to oppose it. Why is that? Oh yeah, they don't actually give a sh!t about the deficit, they just cant afford to be on the wrong side of this issue.
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
your precious democratic party didnt even do anything about it or try to oppose it. Why is that? Oh yeah, they don't actually give a sh!t about the deficit, they just cant afford to be on the wrong side of this issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because the vultures called the Repug Party would love to use it as leverage in the election.
 
gotta love these liberal Bush-Haters...
anything he does makes them mad.
they are against any legislation he wants passed...

except!!
oops!!

Kerry supported this bill!!!

only three Senators voted against the tax cut bill, and Kerry wasn't one of them!!!

HAHAHAHA

i love you guys, you make it to easy...
 
No one is against the concept, it was the timing and lack of spending cut to go along with them. Stop acting like a twelve year old HS.
 
it was the timing and lack of spending cut to go along with them
Click to expand...
Now wait a minute, your man of nuance Kerry voted against the funding bill for the Iraq war (after he voted for it), because it didn't contain adequate tax provisions to offset the cost of the funding.

well, if he was such a man of principle about the iraq war funds, why didn't he vote against the tax cuts being extended, without "spending cuts to go along with them"

flip-flop-flip-flop
 
I see this economy as being very fragile and in need of a demand side stimuli (Tax cut to spenders). The problem I'm having is what the folks will use their funds to acquire. Many have adjusted their life style to the previous tax cut scenario and if that still has not lessened the fragility of the economic status then this enactment won't do much to help..
We need to rethink our consumption of foreign made products and turn to USA made at least for the near term.
 
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
it was the timing and lack of spending cut to go along with them
Click to expand...
Now wait a minute, your man of nuance Kerry voted against the funding bill for the Iraq war (after he voted for it), because it didn't contain adequate tax provisions to offset the cost of the funding.

well, if he was such a man of principle about the iraq war funds, why didn't he vote against the tax cuts being extended, without "spending cuts to go along with them"

flip-flop-flip-flop
Click to expand...

You are seriously like a child. Kerry was against the republican appropriation in part because of the $20B blank check for reconstruction, his worries proved correct.

He didn't even vote on this tax cut and is for them in one form anyhow, what did he flip-flop on? I never even claimed Kerry was looking for spending cut to offset tax cuts, that was my point, not Kerry's. You need to read slower and lay off the RNC talking point, read a newspaper or listen to NPR.

The Republicans are the party of conservatives, yet no critism from you on their spending and deficits? Oh ya, as long as they are your people, they can do anything they want without a word.
 
You guys worry way too much. You either print more money which is a fat flat tax on everyone or nationalize the debt if things get too bad. Remember we have the guns for a good reason and this makes us top dog in international finance. You're living in a dream world if you think governemnt can control itself or a balance budget amendment will ever pass.

Remeber it's all play money anyway,
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
You guys worry way too much. You either print more money which is a fat flat tax on everyone or nationalize the debt if things get too bad. Remember we have the guns for a good reason and this makes us top dog in international finance. You're living in a dream world if you think governemnt can control itself or a balance budget amendment will ever pass.

Remeber it's all play money anyway,
Click to expand...

:laugh:

1. Repudiate the debt not nationalize it. Nationalization occurs when a country takes away the assets of a private corporation for its own use.

2. Printing more money causes inflation. See the Carter admin. circa 1979 for more information. This is not a flat tax on anyone, but a watering down of buying power.

3. The world combined has more guns then we do.

4. We didnt need a balanced budget amendment to enjoy a balanced budget passed by the Republican controlled houses prior to 2000 under the Clintoon admin.


Your money is play. Mine is real. And thanks to the actions of people who want to keep their jobs, we will be enjoying prolonged tax cuts for some time to come. We need to get a grip on spending which George hasnt done yet.
 
It's to bad that voters can be bought off so easy at the expense of their children and grandchildren.
Click to expand...

Don't the "children and grandchildren" inherit the assets we bought with that debt and the investments the notes represent? Like t-bills, aircraft carriers, highways....etc etc tec? They get it all, I don't see the problem.

BTW these are intrest only loans...we never have to pay the debt back. See when I buy a 30 year treasury bond and go to sell it after 30 years the fed rolls the debt over by selling it to you...infinitum.
 
Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Originally posted by: Zebo
You guys worry way too much. You either print more money which is a fat flat tax on everyone or nationalize the debt if things get too bad. Remember we have the guns for a good reason and this makes us top dog in international finance. You're living in a dream world if you think governemnt can control itself or a balance budget amendment will ever pass.

Remeber it's all play money anyway,
Click to expand...

:laugh:

1. Repudiate the debt not nationalize it. Nationalization occurs when a country takes away the assets of a private corporation for its own use.

2. Printing more money causes inflation. See the Carter admin. circa 1979 for more information. This is not a flat tax on anyone, but a watering down of buying power.

3. The world combined has more guns then we do.

4. We didnt need a balanced budget amendment to enjoy a balanced budget passed by the Republican controlled houses prior to 2000 under the Clintoon admin.


Your money is play. Mine is real. And thanks to the actions of people who want to keep their jobs, we will be enjoying prolonged tax cuts for some time to come. We need to get a grip on spending which George hasnt done yet.
Click to expand...

We put more money into circulation every day, and carter can't do it..only banks can. Yup infaltion is another thing that makes the debt meaningless glad you mentioned it.🙂

#3. We could extract 25% of every nations GDP tomorrow if we were serious about it. I hate working anyway. Use france as an example I'm sure you neo-cons would LOVE this. "France give us 25%" no? Glass. "Germany, Gi.." "here here here here's your 25% please don't hurt us!!" and all the others follow. Not that we should do this... My point is all commerce starts and ends with USA and its currency due to our power and stability. People will always SEEK usa bonds from around the globe which costs us nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top