W's tax plan
- Thread starter dutchboy
- Start date
Deeko
Lifer
- Jun 16, 2000
- 30,213
- 12
- 81
I'm not exactly sure how much of this "big cut" each person will get, since I don't pay taxes(I'm under 18), but here's how I see it, if I were to get like $20 or $30 more a week, there isn't a whole lot I could do with that. But consider what the government could do with that $20 or $30 times 150,000,000. So I don't think a tax cut is that big of a deal....but then again I'm a pretty selfless person, so my opinion may not be all that valid.
I got an idea Deeko, if that's such small potatoes to you, why not give that $120.00 to your parents every month. I'm sure they'll find something useful to do with it!
IT ISN'T A SURPLUS! We are still $7 trillion in debt... we should be paying off the debt, rather than giving everyone $100 off their taxes...
<< IT ISN'T A SURPLUS! We are still $7 trillion in debt... we should be paying off the debt, rather than giving everyone $100 off their taxes... >>
Actually in the next 10 years about $2 trillion of that debt will come due and it will all be retired (i.e. not reissued). Repaying the debt faster than that would probably cause inflation rates to increase dramatically. Of course, if you insist people holding that debt will be laughing all the way to the bank.
KingHam
GoldenTiger,
The US debt plays a major role in our financial markets. The US can not simply pay off all the debt.
You have obviously have not given thought to how that would affect the bond markets, risk-free investing,
and interest rates in general. Its not as simple as you might think.
KingHam, is correct in that all debt that can be retired in the next 10 years will be under the proposed budget.
The US debt plays a major role in our financial markets. The US can not simply pay off all the debt.
You have obviously have not given thought to how that would affect the bond markets, risk-free investing,
and interest rates in general. Its not as simple as you might think.
KingHam, is correct in that all debt that can be retired in the next 10 years will be under the proposed budget.
Something smells a little fishy here. I don't think this plan is going to make it. Just a hunch.
To hear the way the Democrats are crying and filling their diapers, you'd think Dubya had proposed shutting the government down! When they start lying as much as they are, you know they're worried.
To Deeko and others who think that a tax cut wouldn't do them any good or wish to appear "generous", I have a question:
Did you have a tax refund this year, and if so, did you take the money or let the government keep it?
If you took the money, please explain why you're opposed to others getting their overpayments back too?
To Deeko and others who think that a tax cut wouldn't do them any good or wish to appear "generous", I have a question:
Did you have a tax refund this year, and if so, did you take the money or let the government keep it?
If you took the money, please explain why you're opposed to others getting their overpayments back too?
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,389
- 29
- 91
<< If you took the money, please explain why you're opposed to others getting their overpayments back too? >>
The answer is plainly obvious DefRef, if there is a chance that someone might get back more than what the GWL's "receive" (cough) from the Government, well that's just wrong and needs to be stopped. Don't forget, it's the Government's money, not ours and a tax cut costs big money.
It doesn't matter that less than .1% of the money collected by tax payments actually makes it into the hands of the have nots in the form of redistribution of wealth, only that the money is taken away from the greedy rich phuckers that only care about buying $150 tennis shoes and SUV's....never mind the fact that some of that money given back will be better served in the hands of charities where most of those funds given actually does some good.
In case you guys didnt figure it out, Bush is doing exactly what Reagan did, we are going to go into a major debt. Just like Bush did in Texas, they now have a 700 million dollar deficit to pay off, and the legislature that is just meeting now has a good chance of deciding to impose income taxes in Texas to pay off that debt.
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,389
- 29
- 91
IIIBradIII, sorry there man, I thought my sarcasm was obvious in my post. Guess I'll have to use the [sarcasm] tag in the future just so there is no confusion. 
<< .....Bush is doing exactly what Reagan did, we are going to go into a major debt. >>
That's not quite a given jmcoreymv, here in the great state of Michigan, our governor, John Engler, reduced tax rates which has spawned a quite vibrant economy here--and has completely wiped out the budget deficit that he inherited from the Democrat governor Jim Blanchard. Lower tax rates encouraged a significant increase in business development here in Michigan which resulted in skyrocketing tax revenue--enough to bloat the "Rainy Day fund" to such giant proportions that its finally being turned back over to those that paid it.
Ronald Reagan's tax cuts doubled tax revenue collected by the Federal Government. Unfortunately budgetary spending was not kept in check--which is what ultimately caused the deficit to continue to grow (but at a significatly lower rate than when Carter was president). I shudder to think, however, how much that deficit would have ballooned had Reagan not instituted his tax plan and revenues had not doubled!! You commies with the short memories never think about that though, do you?
<< .....Bush is doing exactly what Reagan did, we are going to go into a major debt. >>
That's not quite a given jmcoreymv, here in the great state of Michigan, our governor, John Engler, reduced tax rates which has spawned a quite vibrant economy here--and has completely wiped out the budget deficit that he inherited from the Democrat governor Jim Blanchard. Lower tax rates encouraged a significant increase in business development here in Michigan which resulted in skyrocketing tax revenue--enough to bloat the "Rainy Day fund" to such giant proportions that its finally being turned back over to those that paid it.
Ronald Reagan's tax cuts doubled tax revenue collected by the Federal Government. Unfortunately budgetary spending was not kept in check--which is what ultimately caused the deficit to continue to grow (but at a significatly lower rate than when Carter was president). I shudder to think, however, how much that deficit would have ballooned had Reagan not instituted his tax plan and revenues had not doubled!! You commies with the short memories never think about that though, do you?
I don't believe these grand notions of "paying of the debt" have a chance of working. First off, as others have stated, it's not a mere matter of writing a bunch of checks and hey- no more debt! The world financial markets are just a little bit more complicated than that.
Secondly, any plan that involves paying of the debt assumes that we will continue to run large surpluses. Does anybody here really believe that Congress will be able to it's greedy hands off all this revenue and only use it to pay off debt? Get real. Governments have the nasty habit of somehow finding a way to spend as much as possible. No matter how much money comes in, they'll think up something to blow it on. Better to not give them the money to waste in the first place.
Secondly, any plan that involves paying of the debt assumes that we will continue to run large surpluses. Does anybody here really believe that Congress will be able to it's greedy hands off all this revenue and only use it to pay off debt? Get real. Governments have the nasty habit of somehow finding a way to spend as much as possible. No matter how much money comes in, they'll think up something to blow it on. Better to not give them the money to waste in the first place.
Liberals look at OUR MONEY as an endless honey pot with which to do "good things for the people", which really means, "Buy votes with their own money".
They keep saying, "What if the surplus isn't as big, what then?", but they NEVER contemplate CUTTING spending like normal people do when the money gets tight.
We don't need the vast majority of the crap that government has decided to enact and hand the bill to us, so I say, cut the taxes even more and starve the beast!
They keep saying, "What if the surplus isn't as big, what then?", but they NEVER contemplate CUTTING spending like normal people do when the money gets tight.
We don't need the vast majority of the crap that government has decided to enact and hand the bill to us, so I say, cut the taxes even more and starve the beast!
Bushes tax plan, while moronic enough that it shouldn't be graced with the word plan, is just more commie pinko in your face government. It's just more useless big gov waste. The voters want better education, throw money at the education problem, seniors need medicine, throw the powerful senior vote block a bone, protect socialist security, test schools, and on and on. When are you Republican children goint to learn that the federal government is crap, can't scratch it's own ass, is the problem not the solution. George Bush, Karl Marks, they're taking their plays from the same book.
Yes i agree the beast needs to be starved. I can only hope we will see spending cuts inthe future. I am not terribly optimistic on that.
yahoo
The budget proposal for fiscal 2002, which begins on Oct. 1, aims to hold discretionary spending growth to 4 percent, increasing expenditures on education, defense and foreign affairs while trimming agriculture, energy and transportation.
Cutting growth to 4% vs. the 8% of recent years is at least a step in the right direction. Looks like Bush is doing pretty good so far.
The budget proposal for fiscal 2002, which begins on Oct. 1, aims to hold discretionary spending growth to 4 percent, increasing expenditures on education, defense and foreign affairs while trimming agriculture, energy and transportation.
Cutting growth to 4% vs. the 8% of recent years is at least a step in the right direction. Looks like Bush is doing pretty good so far.
Deeko
Lifer
- Jun 16, 2000
- 30,213
- 12
- 81
<< To Deeko and others who think that a tax cut wouldn't do them any good or wish to appear "generous", I have a question:
Did you have a tax refund this year, and if so, did you take the money or let the government keep it? >>
I'm a private DJ, so my income isn't taxed. So I don't get a refund, cause I don't have anything taken out.
<< I'm a private DJ, so my income isn't taxed. >>
Uh....er....I think the IRS might want to have a little talk with you on that one.
No doubt!:| You're saying, "Because I'm paid under the table and don't pay ANYTHING in the way of taxes, it doesn't bother me that the suckers who do pay don't get anything back, the greedy bastards."
Glad to know that I'm paying for your freeloading ass.:|:|
Glad to know that I'm paying for your freeloading ass.:|:|
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter