Debt

eric lavine wrote: dont give Perry any credit, he's riding the coat tails of the oil industry.....stick him up here in Ohio and lets see if he could turn this place around... imagine Pfiezer and Cisco with off shore addresses pumping only 12% to 17% into the economy instead of the normal 35% corporate taxes, thats what we should be bitching about. is that a loophole or a haven? same fcin thing as the rich not paying taxes

And Romney never raised taxes......but BOY did our FEES go up!

By some reasoning I see, this must be a good sign?!!?

BuffaloBFN wrote: By some reasoning I see, this must be a good sign?!!?

And still 500,000 less gov't jobs than when our last republican president was in office.

phospher wrote: BuffaloBFN wrote: By some reasoning I see, this must be a good sign?!!? And still 500,000 less gov't jobs than when our last republican president was in office.

What's your source?

BuffaloBFN wrote: ononewheel wrote: Now don't start about the "fairtax" the right talks about, I will so bust that apart, promptly. Bring it on skippy! Bet you haven't read either book... In the spirit of good sportsmanship, how 'bout this one: Which bill is the most researched in American history?

Ok then, I wlll. It might take me a few, as I am working in 15, so look for it.

I do however suspect it won't end well. Arguing with righties, is sort of like arguing the a Jehova Witness.

If your only argument is going to be read the book, you fail, before you even start.

BuffaloBFN wrote: phospher wrote: BuffaloBFN wrote: By some reasoning I see, this must be a good sign?!!? And still 500,000 less gov't jobs than when our last republican president was in office. What's your source?

The BLS..

Gus Faucher an economist from Moodys:

"Faucher says the federal government should provide more stimulus-oriented programs to shore up hemorrhaging state and local governments. He notes that state and local governments have shed about 500,000 jobs since 2008, including an average of 20,000 positions per month in the past six months."

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/05/136023608/gops-debt-focus-seen-limiting-obama-on-economy


More..
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-02-04/obama-unemployment-goal-endangered-by-state-local-budget-cuts.html

More...

http://mediamatters.org/research/201104110026


I believe this story was broke by the liberal site thinkprogress but it's been in multiple publications since and I haven't seen anything that shows the numbers are incorrect.

http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/07/08/263588/the-conservative-recovery-continues-2/

phospher wrote: OverMyHead wrote: Eric, we have pretty much determined the rich do pay taxes, top 1% pay 40% after loopholes and havens. They only earn 25% of the income which is what we tax. they hold 38.8 percent of wealth, which is not what we base taxes on anyway but it is clear they are paying more than their fair share, please stop the rhetotric because it is simply not true. I think you need to go back and re-read the article. Buffet paid 17.4% of his taxable income. How much did you pay? Furthermore, he is only advocating on increasing the taxes on people making 1 million a year or more that is .03% of the population. But why would you want to tax millionaires when everyone thinks they will be millionaires one day? Wishful thinking or denial? Where do you guys learn your supply side economics? A conservative talk radio host or what? I can see giving the rich tax cuts if they really created jobs but they don't and history shows us that. The race to the bottom continues no matter the taxes.

Thanks for the back up I didnt say the rich pay enough taxes to make tax and spend liberals happy. Eric said the rich are not paying taxes which they clearly are by your statement of the 17 %. Glad you have my back. I learn trickle down economics from real life. The company I work on homes valued up to 12 million dollars, when the rich are spending I work all the overtime I want and spend accordingly when they are not I work 32 hours a week and budget severly. So I see it go from the rich to my employer, to me, and to every I buy from, and I know it goes on from them. hard to not believe it when you see it for yourself.

phospher wrote: OverMyHead wrote: What its to be gain by NYT and Buffet, pandering to reader base and maybe some type of guilt tberapy? If buffet really felt as he says he doors he could write a check to the govt our to every poor person in the country and still have money left over. Why does he feel the need to dictate what others, do? This is such a tired old argument. Warren Buffet does not donate extra tax to the government because his entire message is that you can't rely on a few rich people to donate. For the rich to pay their fair share, they have to be made to pay it. Taxation is not something you opt into or out of, and a few generous billionair­es are not going to start fixing the problem. To have any effect, it has to be mandatory. This is why he doesn't cut the government a check: Warren Buffet doing it by himself is Warren Buffet throwing money away to no noticeable benefit. He wants to be forced to pay higher taxes, because if he is forced then so are others like him. Enough rich and super rich people being forced to pay higher taxes won't solve our problems, but it is a step in the right direction.

You will notice Buffet gives no details of rates and results. I did some rough math, assuming the 236,883 millionaires making between 1 and 10 million a year all made 9 million taxed at 15% that would generate about 3.2 billion a year, double their taxes your up to 6.4 billion, then take the group of 8274 billionaires, if buffet pays 6 million a year we give them an average of 4 million in tax burden. double that,multiply, you add another 3 billion in taxes paid (this ignores decreases due to the Laffer curve), so we are up to a net gain in revenues of 9 billion a year. Should only take us 1,555 years to pay off the 14 trillion deficit,assuming a balanced budget now. Great plan!!!! There simply are not enough rich people.
Same tired old argument, tax the rich and our problems will be solved. This is just a distraction to avoid the spending problem. In 2008 we had a 2.98 trillion dollar budget, for 2011 it is 3.8 trillion. We have had little to no growth and inflation under 2% during this period. We have a spending problem that needs to be addressed. If you look at federal revenue increases and spending for the last 40 years you will see for every dollar of increased revenue our politicians spend a dollar fifty. If we are truely concerned about the deficit, knowing each dollar we give will add 50 cents to the deficit, why would we give them another cent? the problem is the people spending the money dont earn it they collect it. like Monopoly money they get more each time they pass go, or land on chance. Congratulations, you raised the debt limit, collect another 2 trillion dollars. We need to address the spending issue. The spending created the tea party, thank goodness they have at least started the conversation that needs to be had.

Eric, taxing the rich does not incent them to spend and they are not the answer to our problems. As I have shown there are not enough rich people and we need something a little better thabn a thousand year plan. Overspending absolutely got us where we are today,$1.50 for every new $1 generated is a problem that your business could not survive, same for this country, wake up and smell the coffee, not the coolaid.

Dave you can try and try to explain to the lefties about the rich, and taxes and what they do, the only plan they can come up with is tax the rich. Thats all they do, democrats come up with a plan. "Whats your plan?" We are going to tax the sht out of the rich!!! Great plan... They dont get it and never will bro..

skicat2001 wrote: Dave you can try and try to explain to the lefties about the rich, and taxes and what they do, the only plan they can come up with is tax the rich. Thats all they do, democrats come up with a plan. "Whats your plan?" We are going to tax the sht out of the rich!!! Great plan... They dont get it and never will bro..

Shouldn't you be listening to Rush Limbaugh or something?

OverMyHead wrote: Ok lets say for arguments sake we tax the hell out of the rich, its a drop in the bucket and we are still hemorraging then what?

End corporate welfare, close tax loop holes, end Bush tax cuts, end the wars/slash military spending, penalize companies that outsource work to foreign countries, invest in education, infrastruc­ture, and other such projects and programs. Do you remember the last time the federal budget was balanced and the federal deficit erased?

PHIL, ask again, its hard for them to even say it

Phil, you are a broken record I asked what else we can do about debt AFTER taxing the rich. Your answer( paraphrased) tax the rich,tax the rich,tax the rich, increase spending. Aaaaahhhhhhhhh.

OverMyHead wrote: Phil, yoi are a broken record I asked what else we can do about debt AFTER taxing the rich. Your answer( paraphrased) tax the rich,tax the rich,tax the rich, increase spending. Aaaaahhhhhhhhh.

You must not comprehend well. Cutting military spending is taxing the rich? And if you recall, bush tax cuts were not just for the rich. I like how you avoided my question though. And did you look at the link of the chart I posted? Hard to argue against that.