|
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
|
[quote] Originally Posted by strandinthewind
Not only that, but W essentially gave a phantom tax cut. While he most certainly cut everyones' taxes at the Federal level, he simultaneously cut funding for many state programs, which caused the states to raise the lost revenue via higher taxes. So, while the average person may have had a few hundred more dollars a year off of their Federal income tax, they likely had a similar amount added to their state taxes or will have it added in the future because the sate (and the Feds) borrowed the money to close the gap. Moreover, Obama's plan will work because it has in the past and history demonstrates it can correct a huge Federal deficit like the deficit left by another 12 years of insane R rule. In 1993, the Federal deficit exceeded about $300 billion a year. Bill Clinton and Congress raised taxes and slashed spending. The effect was the deficits that had ballooned under Reagan and Bush 41 were tamed. Moreover, we had economic expansion, job creation, a stock boom, and a budget surplus of trillions of dollars when Clinton left office -- compare that to what we have now, which is insane debt, a crashing stock and housing market (due to non-existent regulation) , a ballooned national debt that W promised to pay off while in office with the rev. he expected to generate through the economic growth he promised to obtain through he tax cuts (which McSame was against) I get that the Clinton economy was not perfect due to the dot.com bust, but clearly it was much better than the crapola W has let fester. McSame wants to extend that plan though he may (a big if) control the spending slightly better, though his current platform suggests he will not no matter what he says. In the end, I am for the fair tax because the numbers show the poor will pay no tax and everone else pulls their own weight via a tax on their spending. I would even be for a flat tax where no one making under $75,000 a year is taxed at all. But, that fantasy will never happen. So, in the real world, I am for the plan that has been demonstrated to work very well despite any abstract economic theories that obviously have not worked in their application over the last 30 or so years.[quote] I hesitate to think that you honestly believe that the economic situation when Bill Clinton raised taxes is THE SAME as the economic climate today?! Do you really want to be making that claim? Again, take an econ course and we can discuss it. Until then, you are talking out of your ass and expressing meaningless opinions. To sum up your argument, Obama should #1. raise taxes, #2, increase spending to unprecedented levels as he has promised to do, #3 cut benefits as a bi-product of tax increases and the banks will suddenly stop failing and the birds will be singing and everything will be okay. This is truly the stuff of parody. I really thought you had a better grasp of the issues than this. Yes, the fair tax would work. You are correct there. Also, my theories are not vague, they are taught in EVERY economics classroom all around the world, from Harvard to the crappy falling apart trade school down the road. You claimed the be some night school president, which you are obviously not, otherwise you would have consulted your econ instructor, which you didn't. Go to the library, pick up a book and (gasp) read it. Talking out of your rear is a poor substitute for actual knowledge on a subject. You might actually learn something by reading. Also, we did have a surplus DURING Clinton's term, but we'd hit a mild recession at the end of it that started eating up the surplus. We then had a stock crash, because of the dot.com bust, or did you skip that year or two? We had much the same thing going on with banks now, where businesses did IPO's for businesses that had no line of business. People lost their shirts, but you conveniently forgot that. Our surplus was also nowhere near "the trillions" as you said. We have NEVER at any point in history had a surplus that high. Look it up, facts are readily available. Or am I being "too tedious" by directing you to facts because it contradicts your "thoughts"? Last edited by ajmccarrell; 09-19-2008 at 03:32 PM.. |
|
#77
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I have continually cited here and elsewhere that Obama cannot even begin to pay for his plans. For one, there is a diminishing returns effect on any tax increase, because business slows down. Raising taxes on the segment he plans to will make life harder for everyone else, because tax increases on any segment are passed down to the next few tax brackets by way of higher prices and lost opportunity. If you look up a term called "price elasticity" you will see that taxes play into this as well. A tax increase put on any segment is then passed along to the poorer brackets by way of higher prices. Conversely, when you cut taxes, people are more likely to invest and create jobs. Obama really needs a basic econ course. Everything he has suggested would make today seem like the good 'ol days. Simply raising taxes and closing loopholes will only work, "Ceteris paribus" meaning all things remaining equal. However, because of the inherent inefficiencies we see in the medicare system, the same thing will happen to the Obama health care system. One major reason why health care costs are so high is because Medicare is willing to pay $200 for a foam pad and $80 for a metal cane, as suppliers know they can charge whatever they want to because the government won't negotiate. This is a very basic function of supply and demand. If Obama had his way, his $150 Billion dollar health care plan would rise exponentially, because it increases the demand curve, while doing nothing to stifle price increases due to increased demand. It is painfully shortsighted. In addition, raising taxes on people who are employers will increase dependancy on the government for medical care, as employers will use the omney they are spending on your benefits to pay for their tax increases. The costs will then continue to rise and instead of 40 million in uninsured, we would see maybe 100 million uninsured and taxes would have to go up yet again to pay for it and the cycle gets worse, or we increase deficit spending and the national debt to pay for it, which lowers the value of the dollar and imports (since most of the manufacturing companies are already gone, or will leave after the tax hikes) will be vastly more expensive and the cost of living will rise further. We will then be in a full fledged depression and not just a recession. Anyway, this is a lot to digest, so if you have more questions, feel free to ask. In short, you would be living on "hope & change" and you might have to eat it too. One last note, a fundamental fact is that I have never been hired by a poor person. By making the rich pay more in taxes, you chase companies overseas where taxes are lower, as well as limit opportunities for raises and new jobs. I have worked for businesses who were put under by their tax burdens, as well as another that went to Mexico because of government regulation and high taxes. Being an accountant, I'm a little closer to the subject than your average person. McCain will not raise taxes and never said he would. He has a strong record on taxes. A good few years or so studying taxes in economics courses, as well as about ten years of work experience at a level to know the consequences of tax policy, raising taxes on one segment always raises the taxes on another because consumers always foot the bill. That nifty tax cut Obama would give you would be eaten up in higher prices and higher costs due to his tax increases on the brackets above you. But, I guess it's nice to see a middle class tax cut, however it won't mean much when you don't have a job. Last edited by ajmccarrell; 09-21-2008 at 11:39 PM.. |
|
#79
|
||||
|
||||
|
Stop the international interferences and you guys can pay for everything the USA needs. A decent healthplan to start with.
__________________
.......................................................................................... |
|
#80
|
||||
|
||||
|
Exactly. We need to fix ourselves at home before we can even think of anything else. And at this point,if McCain got his way and we went to war with Russia, who would we send?
|
|
#81
|
|||
|
|||
|
I partially agree. I think we spend a ridiculous amount in foreign aid, however part of the problem with health care IS the governmental interference. Vendors can charge whatever they want to because Medicare will pay for it, which is one of the largest reasons why supplies are so expensive. Secondly, we have the most restrictive regulation on drugs in the world, which makes drugmaking extremely expensive, thirdly we need caps on lawsuits. Fixing all of those would fix our health care problems. Government run health care hasn't worked anywhere. Our system USED to work before the government got to it.
|
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
|
He said last night on 60 Minutes that he didn't want a war with Russia. The NATO treaty mandates "response" from all allies which isn't the same as war. This idea doesn't fit on a bumper sticker, so I guess it's beyond the democrats.
|
|
#83
|
||||
|
||||
|
No it didn't. It only worked for the upperclass, and you know it. But I guess that's the way you want it.
__________________
.......................................................................................... |
|
#84
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is just pathetic. Do you have anything to support your point of view? I'd like EVERYONE to be rich, thank you. I don't need you telling me how I feel.
|
|
#85
|
||||
|
||||
|
You should visit Scandinavia and The Netherlands, dude. You just don't know what you're assessing here.
__________________
.......................................................................................... |
|
#86
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
#87
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
.......................................................................................... |
|
#88
|
|||
|
|||
|
It wasn't that long ago that Cuba seemed to be the bees knees with American liberals for their health care plan because of Michael Moore's "Sicko". The world also puts their faith in the UN, so just because the rest of the world likes something, it's usually a pretty good indication that I should have a healthy suspicion of it. I will research it though and see what it's all about.
|
|
#89
|
||||
|
||||
|
He has said countless times one thing and later said/done the opposite. When he said that he did not want war he meant not this moment. Compare the McCain 2000 voting record vs the McCain 2008 ideas for an example.
|
|
#90
|
|||
|
|||
|
Name one thing where he's said something and done the opposite. One thing people usually say about McCain is that he's consistent if nothing else.
|
![]() |
|
|

8x10 Print Fleetwood Mac Stevie Nicks Mick Fleetwood John McVie Signed #WDD
$13.99
Fleetwood Mac FULLY SIGNED On Q Newspaper JSA LOA McVie Mick Fleetwood Autograph
$399.99
Signed John McVie Mick Fleetwood Mac Autographed Rolling Stone Magazine Auto PSA
$499.99
MICK FLEETWOOD SIGNED WINE LABEL BECKETT BAS COA AUTOGRAPHED SLABBED MAC SINGER
$235.00
Sealed Mick Fleetwood My Twenty-Five Years in Fleetwood Mac HC 1992 Ltd Hyperion
$99.00