Bush Tax cuts for the rich

[backtoschool]

Raising taxes in a recession/depression leads to retrenchment which increases the severity of the recession/depression.

Cutting spending in a recession/depression also leads to retrenchment which increases the severity of the recession/depression.

There are no quick answers and old approaches probably won't work to get us out of this mess. But with businesses hoarding money like never before, the government has to pick up the slack in benefits and job creation for the short term in my opinion.

The real question that interests me, is how do we get businesses to stop hoarding money, and to invest in growth?

[Dougie011]

Raising taxes in a recession/depression leads to retrenchment which increases the severity of the recession/depression.

Cutting spending in a recession/depression also leads to retrenchment which increases the severity of the recession/depression.

There are no quick answers and old approaches probably won't work to get us out of this mess. But with businesses hoarding money like never before, the government has to pick up the slack in benefits and job creation for the short term in my opinion.

The real question that interests me, is how do we get businesses to stop hoarding money, and to invest in growth?

That is the real problem, and not an easy one at that. Businesses wont start spending money Until the see an upswing in spending. The customer doesn't want to spend when they are uncertain about how things are going to play out. It is a catch 22. Not an easy solution at all but one that HAS to be addressed and answered.

[helpmeout]

Clinton did so during the DOT COM boom. Tax revenues were awesome, just like they were in the years preceding this boom. Also, if you recall, they passed the balanced budget act and didn't have this crazy spending.

I'm not arguing... ask an economist.

Which one? There are economists who would agree with me and economists who would agree with you.

I think I will just go with what I learned in my economics classes in college.

Yes, I do recall that. I also recall that Bush pretty much wrecked that balanced budget act with his tax cuts to the rich.

Like I said, your argument doesn't hold water. Because if it did, we would not have done so well during Clinton's two terms, even with the dot.com boom.

[justbroke]

Exactly. I know enough to know I don't know enough. I leave it to the experts to disagree. That's why there is no argument here. NO ONE has the answers.

I know enough about economics and the stock market, that all fundamentals are off and cycles are harder to predict. A hurricane alone can upset the entire balance, so can war. So, it's more than just tax cuts or tax increases.

I don't think any wartime President has ever had a balanced budget and record surpluses.

[banca rotta]

The tax debate to me is kind of a moot point no matter what happens January 1st 2011.

There's not enough rich, middle class and poor to pay down the debt, unfunded liabilities, stimulas, obamacare, bush care, etc.

If you were to tax ever person and business on earth 100% of their income and profits it still wouldn't make a dent in the debts.

Some here are trying to be positive, but no one can seem to win this debate. The math does not add up no matter what.

[tacomeat]

i think its a little disingenuous for wealthy people to whine about tax increases.

1. they arent inordinately high and would be on par with that of 10-20 years ago. does it logically make sense that while everything else is going up in price, that taxes should go down? those taxes are used to pay for things that are subject to the same price increases - either directly or indirectly. it basically means our GDP HAS to keep expanding to make up the difference and for a country that doesnt make anything anymore, it necessarily means a larger chunk of that figure is coming from giant investment banks (rich, meet richer).

2. the wage gap between rich and everyone else is ever widening. the tax gap should expand to mirror that that.

3. its a specious argument to say their businesses are "barely scraping by" with the tax rates today and that they NEED their taxes cut to expand. it means they are 1-2% margin away from closing shop? no, it means they have built in expenses that come first. so they pay themselves first, the execs, they allot for some arbitrarily reachable bonuses, the jets, their corporate getaways, and then it becomes like a bait and switch where they shift the actual burden of the tax bump to the working class (oh sorry, we cant hire any more - sorry, wages are frozen... or cut).

4. it sorta makes them sound like like the "socialists" they mock. see, they suddenly become so burdensomely dependent upon a government "handout" (tax cut) to run a business. they play the helpless victim and use it as a crutch. well, where is that entrepreneurial spirit and the personal responsibility they always talk about to take the initiative to make THEIR businesses run more efficiently in spite of the nominal tax increase? and then instead of doing something substantive, they just craft ways to shift assets and income offshore and shelter their own nest eggs ... and then of course pay themselves giant bonuses for lowering those expenses! (digression: i'll never forget the tactics of the WAMU execs. part of their bonus package was set up to REMOVE the cost of bad debt from the income statements so they could artificially show a higher profit for the sole purpose of determining bonuses. and speaking of that clever "CEO MENTALITY" that republicans want to bring to washington, bush/cheney ran the cost of the war OFF THE BOOKS! - digression ended)

5. many of these rich people are connected to the big firms that get to take advantage of the bloated govt contracts, so again, for them to complain about the out of control spending as some sort of defense against paying hire taxes is conflicting.

[justbroke]

Until you are the rich or wealthy, you probably shouldn't weigh in on how they feel about taxes. As an upper bracket tax payer (top 5%), I will tell you that I personally don't like it. When the top 5% pay over 60% of all tax revenues, you basically want the top 5% to pay closer to 100% of all taxes to run the country... that makes me nervous.

You have to remember that our founding fathers -- yes, them -- were smugglers and tax evaders. I wonder why? I use those labels in a manner befitting of what pushed us to declare independence. I don't blame any person, rich or not, to be opportunistic. If there's money being handed up for free... where do I sign up.

[banca rotta]

The one thing I would like to see is a corporate tax break to once again make it more affordable for businesses to do business here at home.

The "rich and poor" debate is so old and just divides Americans.

Any tax cut that will give incentives to bring back a productive America.

I would leave all Americans taxes where they are now and bring back a "super tariff" on imports. Once the dollar collapses this will happen anyway.

I will say that Bush argued that a tax break for the rich would help everyone and we see just how wrong he was and we all know why he did it.

I also recently noticed that John Kerry the democrat that ran on helping the little guy also needs a tax break for docking his yacht.

Not to drift off the original topic but how one can still buy the d & r thing is nuts!

[justbroke]

I also recently noticed that John Kerry the democrat that ran on helping the little guy also needs a tax break for docking his yacht.

Under pressure, he has decide to pay the tax. You see... it will always be the same. Greedy men who don't want to pay taxes. The poor don't want to pay taxes and neither do the rich.

[banca rotta]

Under pressure, he has decide to pay the tax. You see... it will always be the same. Greedy men who don't want to pay taxes. The poor don't want to pay taxes and neither do the rich.

Who does want to pay all of these immoral taxes? No one and rightfully so!

The problem here is the Greedy John Kerrys of the world want to give away money for stupid failed programs that have all proven to be failures and even they don't want to pay for their own policies that they supported.

Based on what you said justbroke the issue should be much more centered on govt spending at every level of govt and less about taxes.

Amazing how the rich and the poor pay the least and get the most from all these taxes.

[justbroke]

The problem here is the Greedy John Kerrys of the world want to give away money for stupid failed programs that have all proven to be failures and even they don't want to pay for their own policies that they supported.

We are 1000% in agreement! If Congress wants to pass unfunded programs -- by passing social programs when the budget is overburdened and unsupported by revenue collection -- then they should forgo their salaries. It would be nice that we went back to when the 1st Continental Congress was created and Congressmen served their country without pay.

Based on what you said justbroke the issue should be much more centered on govt spending at every level of govt and less about taxes.

Can you please get elected, go to Congress, and let them know this... please!

Amazing how the rich and the poor pay the least and get the most from all these taxes.

You're where I'm at and have been for a long time. Except I'm part of the "middle" (upper middle class) that is getting the big squeeze.

[backtoschool]

I'm not seeing how cutting spending is going to grow the economy and get us out of this recession/depression.

Can someone please explain?

[justbroke]

I'm not seeing how cutting spending is going to grow the economy and get us out of this recession/depression.

Can someone please explain?

Spending is temporary, but you can't create new programs that are unfunded or underfunded when you're in this situation. I think it's a double edged sword and everyone would agree that you have to spend, but at the same time... overspending is bad.

We are not in a depression. I have never seen more people eating out at restaurants these days. I have seen no gasoline rationing nor have I seen the government handing out cheese and bread.

Unfortunately, all the spending requires borrowing, and the Chinese hold a lot of T-bills. So do the rich people that everyone says should be taxed to death. The rich actually put a lot of their money into Treasuries (and TIPS). That actually "bets" on the country doing well, but we want to chastise the rich for having money.

It's a vicious cycle. (And note, I have no answers... just observations.)

[banca rotta]

I'm not seeing how cutting spending is going to grow the economy and get us out of this recession/depression.

Can someone please explain?

Sure!



The economy grows by encouraging risk takers to innovate products and services and hire American workers to produce these goods and services and sell them to folks home and abroad at market prices.

Today for many reasons one being high taxes to pay for entitlements, bailouts, etc. it pays for these business people to do all the hiring in China and not here.

As for getting out of the "recession/depression" nightmare I'm afraid that we can't.

As the deflationary depression sets in everything in sight loses value except for money since there's so little of it. The bad news is people will lose big time unless they are holding only cash.

The good news is a couple of years of this and assets will find their correct price and those with money will start buying again and we will come out of it. This already happened during the depression of 1920/21 that very few people even heard about.

The myth that we all learned was when a depression sets in the govt has to print, borrow and spend it's way out of it.

If you research this you will see that for 5000 years EVERY TIME this was tried the currency collapsed. What makes today different???

Point is no matter what Obama and the rest of them do it will not work as you can see now. The stimulas is almost gone and they are asking for more.

The houses for example must get back to a price that we can afford since they are still too high. The tax rebate only bought time but homes are back on their downward trajectory again. Just check out zillow.com.

[Pandora]

if congress wants to pass unfunded programs -- by passing social programs when the budget is overburdened and unsupported by revenue collection -- then they should forgo their salaries. It would be nice that we went back to when the 1st continental congress was created and congressmen served their country without pay.

amen brother - amen!