dre Posted October 13, 2010 Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 No, you are only continuing the ideology of tax revenue. It's not the government's money. Deficits are not caused by tax cuts to "millionaires and billionaires". Deficits are caused by government spending over and above revenues. That makes no sense. Defecits are an imbalance between accounts payable and accounts recievable. They are effected by changes on either end. Tax cuts can result in lower revenues which will result in higher defecits if they arent accompanied by matching spending cuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted October 13, 2010 Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 Hope and Change has met Reality, and former President George Bush can smirk all he wants now: I wonder what would happen if you took this poll worldwide. My guess is that Bush wouldn't be smirking at all. It seems to me that the people that don't like Obama are Republicans in the US and wannabe Republicans on this board! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 13, 2010 Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 Tax cuts can result in lower revenues which will result in higher defecits if they arent accompanied by matching spending cuts. That's not true. Tax cuts leave more money with individuals and businesses in the private sector. Those funds get spent and invested in the regular cycle of money. It gets spent, and taxed, spent, and taxed, spent, and taxed, several times over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 I wonder what would happen if you took this poll worldwide. My guess is that Bush wouldn't be smirking at all. It seems to me that the people that don't like Obama are Republicans in the US and wannabe Republicans on this board! Of course you wonder, but "worldwide" polls don't mean dick in this context. Get your own presidents to play with. Sheesh.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 That makes no sense. Defecits are an imbalance between accounts payable and accounts recievable. They are effected by changes on either end. Tax cuts can result in lower revenues which will result in higher defecits if they arent accompanied by matching spending cuts. US states (49 of them) must balance their budgets (annual or bi-annual)....not so the US federal government, which actually plans (fiscal budget) to have deficits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 13, 2010 Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) US states (49 of them) must balance their budgets (annual or bi-annual)....not so the US federal government, which actually plans (fiscal budget) to have deficits. I thought there was only 23 states with balance budget laws? My bad apparently everyone other then Vermont. Edited October 13, 2010 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted October 13, 2010 Report Share Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) Of course you wonder, but "worldwide" polls don't mean dick in this context. Get your own presidents to play with. Sheesh.... Geesh, why did you start the thread anyway? Edited October 13, 2010 by Shakeyhands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 That's not true. Tax cuts leave more money with individuals and businesses in the private sector. Those funds get spent and invested in the regular cycle of money. It gets spent, and taxed, spent, and taxed, spent, and taxed, several times over. Ah....Neoliberal economics to the rescue!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Geesh, why did you start the thread anyway? Because there was an American CNN poll of American voters about American presidents Bush and Obama (also American, as required by US Constitution). I wasn't polled, and neither was the rest of the "world"....sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Because there was an American CNN poll of American voters about American presidents Bush and Obama (also American, as required by US Constitution). I wasn't polled, and neither was the rest of the "world"....sorry. Imagine my audacity for wondering such a thing... USA! USA! US....ah screw it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Imagine my audacity for wondering such a thing... You often wonder such irrelevant things...PM Martin or Harper...the "world" wants to know. USA! USA! US....ah screw it. ...try your best...and keep on trying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 THERE IS NOT LEADERSHIP LEFT IN THE WORLD- IF THERE WAS THERE WOULD BE EVIDENCE OF IT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Ah....Neoliberal economics to the rescue!!! Its a silly claim of course. I guess these people must think that if the government cut tax rates to zero they would have more revenue Its true that in certain environments lowering taxes can lead to increased revenue... But I wouldnt count on anyone who touts this as some sort of Universal Truth passing a grade 1 math test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 The above statement is as short sighted as saying if the government raises taxes to 100% they would have more revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 15, 2010 Report Share Posted October 15, 2010 The above statement is as short sighted as saying if the government raises taxes to 100% they would have more revenue. No there must be a balance. You can't take people a 100% you can't tax them 0% either. However something you ignore is that US grew the fastest when the top tax bracket was 90%. Hmmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 16, 2010 Report Share Posted October 16, 2010 No there must be a balance. You can't take people a 100% you can't tax them 0% either. However something you ignore is that US grew the fastest when the top tax bracket was 90%. Hmmmm. When the federal government get pissed off they WILL harm you and tax you 100%...it's like the proverbial biblical beast..they put you into a position where you can not "buy or sell"...taxing should be voluntary...as should be charity..forced charity is exactly liked forced taxing...Why is there a system that cripples the poor even further finacially - and enriches the rich who contribute nothing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted October 16, 2010 Report Share Posted October 16, 2010 The above statement is as short sighted as saying if the government raises taxes to 100% they would have more revenue. If that was a reply to my post you didnt even read it. I never said government could raise taxes to 100% that they would have more revenue. The government will get the most revenue if they set the tax rates correctly. The statement I was replying to was a simplistic political slogan... nothing more... its sometimes true, and it sometimes isnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted October 16, 2010 Report Share Posted October 16, 2010 Guess that hopee changee thingee isn't going too well these days... I suppose when the dems. lose their majority in November it will be a ho hum, do nothing session until 2012. Maybe that's the best they can hope for until then. ( do nothing as opposed to - more Obama ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted October 17, 2010 Report Share Posted October 17, 2010 Even ole Jon Stewart has lost his happy face, maybe he'll show up at a congressional committee to make a fool of himself too. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/23/stewart-saddened-by-obama/?iref=obinsite http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-12/obama-losing-supporters-in-poll-as-joblessness-prompts-voters-discontent.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
violator Posted October 17, 2010 Report Share Posted October 17, 2010 we do not acknowledge your sham political system.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 18, 2010 Report Share Posted October 18, 2010 we do not acknowledge your sham political system.... Check out this poster's other art work (link). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 18, 2010 Report Share Posted October 18, 2010 His whole economic team has left him after only 20 months in office. They see the train wreck, and they want no part of it. I can't say I blame them. And now Ralm (sp) Emanuel is gone too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 18, 2010 Report Share Posted October 18, 2010 Put down the pompom's. They're all the same. Ah, refreshing. Not anti-Israel spam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 And Bush takes the lead! "43 percent say that Barack Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, while 48 percent say Bush was a better president than Obama has been.”Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted October 28, 2010 Report Share Posted October 28, 2010 And Bush takes the lead! And yet Obama is out polling your boy Christie in NJ. Hmmmmmm polls must mean everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.