Borrow + Spend: Neocon Cowardice

[tmorr37]

Originally Posted by AZXD

Admit it!
You're on the payroll

As soon as you admit your on the Obama campaign

[tmorr37]

Increased revenue does no good if you spend more than you take in

[gsx1138]

My issue is that most of 'borrow and spend' have really done nothing for the country and more for a few select corporate entities. Both the Dems and the Republicans love their taxes for different reasons. I really don't give a crap what those reasons are because they're taking my money. As for the stimulus package, "Thanks for giving me some of my own money back."

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by jmichna

Schwarzenegger is a Republican Neocon?

Yeah, like Maria Shriver would sleep with a Republican Neocon.

I don't know who Maria is banging, but Arnie is prototype neocon. There is a movement here to amend the constitution so he can run for president... I am not making that up.

One guy said Arnie and Maria's marriage is proof the government is conducting genetic breeding experiments to create a bulletproof Kennedy.

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by tmorr37

Since 1984 the JEC has provided factual information about the impact of the tax cuts of the 1980s. For example, for many years the JEC has published IRS data on federal tax payments of the top 1 percent, top 5 percent, top 10 percent, and other taxpayers. These data show that after the high marginal tax rates of 1981 were cut, tax payments and the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent climbed sharply. For example, in 1981 the top 1 percent paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent, a 10 percentage point increase. The graph below illustrates changes in the tax burden during this period.

Click here to see Figure 1.
The share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48.0 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988.

Gee.... has anybody ever published a paper pointing out republican neocons swear a tax cut will balance the budget and everytime they GET THE CUT the deficit goes through the roof?

Or is that too complicated?

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by tmorr37

Tax rate reductions increase tax revenues. This truth has been proved at both state and federal levels, including by President Bush's 2003 tax cuts on income, capital gains and dividends. Those reductions have raised federal tax receipts by $785 billion, the largest four-year revenue increase in U.S. history.

AND DEFICITS HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ROOF.

HOW DOES IT HELP IF DEFICITS GROW FASTER THAN REVENUE?

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by tmorr37

Increased revenue does no good if you spend more than you take in

Oh, now don't start saying that 5 TRILLION DOLLAR war has economic implications.

You'll make the Bushophiles angry.....

[bountyhunter]

Originally Posted by gsx1138

My issue is that most of 'borrow and spend' have really done nothing for the country and more for a few select corporate entities.

It has done something: it has run up a debt we will never be able to pay back. It has devalued our currency and set us up for a period of "stagflation" where both recession and runaway inflation strangle the economy simultaneously.

We are well on our way to owing everybody in the world..... the hallmark of every third world nation.

[XDConvert9mm]

I tell ya, I saw the title of this thread and didn't even have to look at the OP's handle to know who it was!

The only constant between the two policies is the "spend" part of things. How's about we focus on that, no matter which method is the source of funds for said spending?

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by tmorr37

As soon as you admit your on the Obama campaign

Sorry to disappoint, but Ron Paul seems to understand this stuff much better than the choosen ones Thus I am on the point out what is wrong with most every politician from both sides style of campaign