Is there a problem in this country that McCain won't fix with more taxcuts?

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

They could slash those programs without lowering taxes and I would cheer.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

They could slash those programs without lowering taxes and I would cheer.

Yes, because who needs education, energy, law enforcement, medicare and Social Security?
Obviously you live in a fantasy world.

 

[DealMonkey]

More borrow and spend shenanigans from the Republicans! Go figure. Seems there's no end to the debt they will rack up.

 

[jpeyton]

McSame/Bush and their taxcut-and-spend policies will put us deeper into the hole, pushing our dollar further into the gutter, increasing inflation and pricing gas/food out of reach for the lower/middle class.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

The kids, think of the kids!

btw I give him props for at least addressing the alternative min tax.

Repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax is what you choose to compliment him on???
I guess you are too young to remember multi-millionaires who paid no tax for many years before the AMT.
I support the Democratic approach to raise the amount before it kicks in. I see no reason why millionaires and billionaires should pay no tax while I pay tax.

Well I would expect with a democratic congress the compromise would be to repeal and rewrite the damn thing so it actually hits the intended people. Not filter its way down into the upper and eventually the middle class.

As it stands right now the thing is expected to hit tens of millions of households by the middle of the the next decade. Which is simply ridiculous given it was designed to hit 123 families using loopholes to avoid paying their taxes.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: RichardE
He doesn't know anything about the financial market at all, something he has stated publicly on many occasions.

he said economics is not his strongest area.

but even if he did say that he knows nothing about financial markets whatsoever... so what?

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

The kids, think of the kids!

btw I give him props for at least addressing the alternative min tax.

I give him props for that and cutting the corporate tax rate. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and it is part of the reason why US companies outsource and/or leave the country. Attracting more business and reducing the tax burden of consumers who ultimately pay for the corporate taxes would be a good thing.

BTW, we had record tax revenue in April. The current tax rate isn't the problem. It is the out of control spending in D.C. and the Dems have already shown themselves to be just as bad if not worse than the Republicans in that regard.

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

Those two should be paid for out of the deductions from my paycheck and not by income, AMT, corporate, or any other tax.

Government wastes tons of money. Want a prime example? I was over at the PD this morning and they received a grand for a 40,000 computer. I could have built the damn thing for 5,000. The detectives excuse... We didn't have to pay for it! WTF.

We're already in deficit spending, so those items need to be cut anyway, with or without tax cuts.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

The kids, think of the kids!

btw I give him props for at least addressing the alternative min tax.

I give him props for that and cutting the corporate tax rate. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and it is part of the reason why US companies outsource and/or leave the country. Attracting more business and reducing the tax burden of consumers who ultimately pay for the corporate taxes would be a good thing.

BTW, we had record tax revenue in April. The current tax rate isn't the problem. It is the out of control spending in D.C. and the Dems have already shown themselves to be just as bad if not worse than the Republicans in that regard.

I call SHENS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...e_as_percentage_of_GDP
Out of the 37 developed countries the US has the third LOWEST tax rate.
Basically the current tax rate IS the problem

And the corporate tax RATE is not as important as what can be deducted from a companies earnings. the US leads the way in this area, with most large companies paying little or no taxes. (which is a big reason the US has one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world)
So double SHENS

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

The kids, think of the kids!

btw I give him props for at least addressing the alternative min tax.

I give him props for that and cutting the corporate tax rate. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and it is part of the reason why US companies outsource and/or leave the country. Attracting more business and reducing the tax burden of consumers who ultimately pay for the corporate taxes would be a good thing.

BTW, we had record tax revenue in April. The current tax rate isn't the problem. It is the out of control spending in D.C. and the Dems have already shown themselves to be just as bad if not worse than the Republicans in that regard.

I call SHENS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...e_as_percentage_of_GDP
Out of the 37 developed countries the US has the third LOWEST tax rate.
Basically the current tax rate IS the problem

And the corporate tax RATE is not as important as what can be deducted from a companies earnings. the US leads the way in this area, with most large companies paying little or no taxes. (which is a big reason the US has one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world)
So double SHENS

Shens on your shens

WASHINGTON - Federal revenue collections hit an all-time high in April, contributing to a further improvement in the budget deficit for the year.

Releasing its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Thursday that through the first seven months of this budget year, the deficit totals $80.8 billion, significantly below the $184.1 billion imbalance run up during the first seven months of the 2006 budget year.

So far this year, tax revenues total $1.505 trillion, an increase of 11.2 percent over the same period last year. That figure includes $383.6 billion collected in April, the largest monthly tax collection on record.

Corporate tax rates

At least 25 developed nations have adopted Reaganite corporate income tax rate cuts since 2001. The U.S. is conspicuously not one of them. Vietnam has recently announced it is cutting its corporate rate to 25% from 28%. Singapore has approved a corporate tax cut to 18% from 20% to compete with low-tax Hong Kong's rate of 17.5%, and Northern Ireland is making a bid to slash its corporate tax rate to 12.5% to keep pace with the same low rate in the prosperous Republic of Ireland. Even in France, of all places, new President Nicolas Sarkozy has proposed reducing the corporate tax rate to 25% from 34.4%.

What do politicians in these countries understand that the U.S. Congress doesn't? Perhaps they've read "International Competitiveness for Dummies." In each of the countries that have cut corporate tax rates this year, the motivation has been the same -- to boost the nation's attractiveness as a location for international investment. Germany's overall rate will fall to 29.8% by 2008 from 38.7%. Remarkably, at the start of this decade Germany's corporate tax rate was 52%.

All of which means that the U.S. now has the unflattering distinction of having the developed world's highest corporate tax rate of 39.3% (35% federal plus a state average of 4.3%), according to the Tax Foundation. While Ronald Reagan led the "wave of corporate income tax rate reduction" in the 1980s, the Tax Foundation says, "the U.S. is lagging behind this time."

Foreign leaders are also learning another lesson: Lower corporate tax rates with fewer loopholes can lead to more, not less, tax revenue from business. The nearby chart shows the Laffer Curve effect from business taxation. Tax receipts tend to fall below their optimum potential when corporate tax rates are so high that they lead to the creation of loopholes and the incentive to move income to countries with a lower tax rate. Ireland is the classic case of a nation on the "correct side" of this curve. It has a 12.5% corporate rate, nearly the lowest in the world, and yet collects 3.6% of GDP in corporate revenues, well above the international average.

The U.S., by contrast, with its near 40% rate has been averaging less than 2.5% of GDP in corporate receipts. Kevin Hassett, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute who has studied the impact of corporate taxes, says the U.S. "appears to be a nation on the wrong side of the Laffer Curve: We could collect more revenues with a lower corporate tax rate."

If only the tax writers in Washington would heed this advice. Congress is moving in the reverse direction, threatening to raise the tax rate on corporate dividends, which is another tax on business income. There's also movement in the Senate to raise taxes on the foreign-source income of U.S. companies. The effect would be to raise the marginal tax rate for companies that base their corporate headquarters abroad.

But one reason those countries chose to move to the Cayman Islands and elsewhere is because of the high U.S. corporate tax rate. The Laffer Curve analysis indicates that these corporate tax increases are likely to raise little if any additional revenue, because companies will have a new incentive to move even more of their operations out of the reach of the IRS.

For all the talk of "tax equity," this is also a recipe for further inequality by driving more capital offshore. Research from Mr. Hassett and others has shown that high corporate tax rates reduce the rate of increase in manufacturing wages (See our editorial, "The Wages of Growth," Dec. 26, 2006.). For that matter, most economists understand that corporations don't ultimately pay any taxes. They merely serve as a collection agent, passing along the cost of those taxes in some combination of lower returns for shareholders, higher prices for customers, or lower compensation for employees. In other words, America's high corporate tax rates are an indirect, but still damaging, tax on average American workers.

One immediate policy remedy would be to cut the 35% U.S. federal corporate tax rate to the industrial nation average of 29%. That's probably too sensible for a Congress gripped by a desire to soak the rich and punish business, but a Democrat who picked up the idea could turn the tax tables on Republicans in 2008. Meantime, as the U.S. fails to act, the rest of the world is looking more attractive all the time.

Our corporate tax rate encourages companies to hide their taxable revenue overseas.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: RichardE
He doesn't know anything about the financial market at all, something he has stated publicly on many occasions.

he said economics is not his strongest area.

but even if he did say that he knows nothing about financial markets whatsoever... so what?

Yeah, just what we need. A Senator and possible President who knows nothing of financial markets whatsover. Stupidity is now a requirement for President?
How's the current financial moron doing as President?
Which is why we call the future Presidential moron, McSame.

 

[nageov3t]

what impact does a president have on the stock market or, really, the economy in general?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: RichardE
He doesn't know anything about the financial market at all, something he has stated publicly on many occasions.

he said economics is not his strongest area.

but even if he did say that he knows nothing about financial markets whatsoever... so what?

Yeah, just what we need. A Senator and possible President who knows nothing of financial markets whatsover. Stupidity is now a requirement for President?
How's the current financial moron doing as President?
Which is why we call the future Presidential moron, McSame.

Is this response supposed to be serious? How many economists have we had as president in the past?

Is Obama an economist? How about Hillary?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: loki8481
what impact does a president have on the stock market or, really, the economy in general?

In the time of great prosperity nothing, in the time of recession everything.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: techs
I call SHENS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...e_as_percentage_of_GDP
Out of the 37 developed countries the US has the third LOWEST tax rate.
Basically the current tax rate IS the problem

And the corporate tax RATE is not as important as what can be deducted from a companies earnings. the US leads the way in this area, with most large companies paying little or no taxes. (which is a big reason the US has one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world)
So double SHENS

Firstly, as I noted elsewhere, your chart linked above does not support your contention about tax rates.

Secondly, lets see some proof about your asssertion regarding deductions afforded US companies not available under foreign taxing rules. I don't think you'll find much, if any.

Fern

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

They could slash those programs without lowering taxes and I would cheer.

Yes, because who needs education, energy, law enforcement, medicare and Social Security?
Obviously you live in a fantasy world.

Education - my local government takes care of that
Energy - there are plenty of private investments going into energy
Law Enforcement - my local government takes care of that
Medicare - why should I pay for grandpa's medicine?
Social Security - I'm pretty set with 401k and Roth IRA. I don't need it.

So yes, cut all that shit.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: glenn1
From the article:

The key provisions of McCain's tax agenda are:

* Extend Bush?s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts
* Cut the corporate tax rate
* Allow expensing of corporate investments
* Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax

McCain Cannot Pay for His Plan without draconian Spending Cuts

*Massively cut education, energy, and law enforcement.
* Massively cut Social Security and Medicare

So what's the problem? Sounds good to me.

They could slash those programs without lowering taxes and I would cheer.

Yes, because who needs education, energy, law enforcement, medicare and Social Security?
Obviously you live in a fantasy world.

Education - my local government takes care of that
Energy - there are plenty of private investments going into energy
Law Enforcement - my local government takes care of that
Medicare - why should I pay for grandpa's medicine?
Social Security - I'm pretty set with 401k and Roth IRA. I don't need it.

So yes, cut all that shit.

:thumbsup:

 

[Vic]

The only thing I'm going to add to this thread is that the Republican strategy of continuously running budget deficits is counter-productive to their supposed goal of smaller government. The reasoning is simple. As long as the people don't have to pay the full amount of their government, the less need they will feel to reduce the size and cost of government. Sadly, in their otherwise righteous quest for low taxes, the Republicans forgot this, leading to our current situation.

This thread reminded me of one of my favorite quotes BTW, from one of the most infamous liberals speaking about one of the most infamous conservatives -
"I like to say I'm more conservative than Goldwater. He just wanted to turn the clock back to when there was no income tax. I want to turn the clock back to when people lived in small villages and took care of each other." -- Pete Seeger

Things are not what you think they are, and certainly not what you have been told they are.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: RichardE
He doesn't know anything about the financial market at all, something he has stated publicly on many occasions.

he said economics is not his strongest area.

but even if he did say that he knows nothing about financial markets whatsoever... so what?

Yeah, just what we need. A Senator and possible President who knows nothing of financial markets whatsover. Stupidity is now a requirement for President?
How's the current financial moron doing as President?
Which is why we call the future Presidential moron, McSame.

I don't see you out there boosting Bloomberg, easily the champion of financial markets amongst presidential candidates. :roll:

 

[Jhhnn]

Well, one thing's for sure- JS80 obviously thinks it's all about him, and nobody else. I see the self-interest, but not any sort of enlightenment in that, at all...

Which is pretty much the position of modern conservatives wrt everybody else, other than unborn non-persons and those whose minds are actually gone entirely, a la terri schiavo...

Basically, they've got your compassionate conservatism swingin' in their trousers- get some, biatch!

The only point where I disagree with Vic is wrt the idea that repub leaders and thinkers don't realize that the current trajectory will destroy the fiscal integrity of the govt. Quite the contrary. They know it full well, and exploit the illusion of explosive indebtedness in an attempt to thwart the social compact of the New Deal... In their "vision" there will be a lot of things the govt can't afford, and social programs will be the first to go, even SS, which has largely been paid for in advance... Also, under their leadership, govt is deliberately inept and wasteful- making it highly exploitable and profitable. They create a self-fulfilling prophesy, feeding off debt, ultimately using maintenance of it to control the govt.

McCain? he's just another figurehead, a guy who'll read any script that his advisors think will get him to the whitehouse, support any policy that they say will keep him there. The flip-flops he has to make to do that are immaterial- the only thing that really matters is his ego, and his ambition to be president, an ambition he's held for a very, very long time...

Both he and Bush are equally blind- blind to the malignant intent of the real brains behind the party- the Norquists, the Cheneys, the Mellon-Scaifes, and others of their means and persuasions...