The Federal debt was mostly run up during the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II administrations. Reagan & Bush I tripled the debt, even exceeding the cost of WWII. Clinton LOWERED the debt. Obama’s deficit is, in large part, due to two factors: the financial failures stemming from the relaxation of regulations done by the Republicans in Congress + Reagan & the two Bushes and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, started by Bush II. (Bush tried to hide the cost of the wars by not including them in the official budget. Obama put them back into the budget, where they belong.)
The “Fair Tax” is “fair” only for the rich. It would mean an INCREASE in taxes for the lowest-earning Americans and especially the middle class. The “class warfare” is fueled by the Republicans in the Senate, who, suddenly conscious of the deficit (after having voted in huge deficits under Bush), want to cut unemployment support, repeal health care reform (which will actually INCREASE the deficit in the long run by returning to the Bush handouts to the pharmaceutical industry), and cutting taxes for the rich.
I love the way that people making it easier for the rich to get richer and poor to get poorer accuse the Democrats of class warfare. Class warfare is real. The only aristocracy we have is that of wealth, and the late, great Alexis de Tocqueville nailed THAT down bleeding in 1840.
I agree. Class warfare is perfectly fine as long as the rich win (as they have for the past 9 years). Keep it up! *
We should be trying to find money to cut from everywhere else, like education, social security, Medicare, and all of that stuff ‘common people’ pay into and then expect to be able to call upon later. We can’t afford any of this stuff. Everyone has to tighten their belt (as long as they’re middle class, poor, or otherwise not in the DoD). Suck it up. *
Harley–To echo motivmagus’ point, I question your rhetoric. When the gov creates policies that close loopholes for the wealthy and get them to contribute the country’s prosperity, it is class warfare. But when the gov create policies that give wealthy individuals and corporations gov handouts and allows them to pass on the responsibility of their poor decisions to the middle-class, working-class, and poor, that’s what? Business as usual?
Harley - Your “Fair” tax isn’t at all fair. The lower economic classes will be stuck here at home paying the tax while the rich will fly off to the Cayman Islands or Hong Kong and buy their Ferraris and baubles tax-free. You know they’ll avoid the “Fair” tax somehow. That’s why they pay their high-priced lawyers.
The only “Fair” tax would be if every USA citizen and corporation had to pay a flat 5 - 10% on their gross income. No deductions, no write-offs, no tax shelters, no depletion allowances. Just the same flat tax on everybody. I know it’s a regressive tax, but I think the poor would be willing to pay it if they knew that ALL of the corporate and Wall Street fatcats and ALL of the Corporations had to pay the same percentage.
There are 2 basic economic approaches to fight a depression. The school of Keynes and the Austrian school.
Keynes says spend public dollars, pour money in from the government and people will spend those dollars. Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, England, Canada and FDR etc have tried that approach and it failed. They are now all cutting back expenditures.
Obama tried that also and it has horribly failed. The Krugmans of this world say you only spent $787B. spend more. He can’t lose because no matter how much you spend and it doesn’t work he will always say you didn’t spend enough.
Remember more troops in Viet Nam? We aren’t winning because we haven’t sent in enough soldiers. Same stupid philosophy.
“Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on.
“I do,” Alice hastily replied; “at least–at least I mean what I say–that’s the same thing, you know.”
“Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. “You might just as well say that “I see what I eat” is the same thing as “I eat what I see”!”
— Lewis Carroll
“Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, England, Canada and FDR etc have tried that approach and it failed.”
Gosh, if FDR failed and the US became a world poltiical and economic superpower, I would like to see what success would look like! Start making sense, man.
BTW, China tried it too, some time in late 2008 and early 2009, with just above a trillion of their own - mind you, it was administered faster and in a smaller economy. It didn’t fail either.
That’s rather doubtful, Lib. Actually, the US economy did fairly well in the mid-30s compared to before that. The 37-38 recession didn’t help, but ironically it went away during WWII - a period of government investment and deficit spending like few others in US history.
I’m not saying the Keynesian view is always right, but if you imply it’s always wrong and fails unequivocably everywhere, you are imo quite wrong.
Libertarian - it’s not true that FDR failed with Keynesian approaches. The one time it stalled was when (as you note) he stopped spending and introduced austerity measures, just the way the GOP is calling for today. The economy was rebounding – WWII accelerated it.
You with the sad eyes
don’t be discouraged
oh I realize
it’s hard to take courage
in a world full of people
you can lose sight of it all
and the darkness inside you
can make you fell so small
But I see your true colors
shining through
I see your true colors
and that’s why I love you
so don’t be afraid to let them show
your true colors
true colors are beautiful
like a rainbow
Show me a smile then
don’t be unhappy, can’t remember
when I last saw you laughing
if this world makes you crazy
and you’ve taken all you can bear
you call me up
because you know I’ll be there
And I’ll see your true colors
shining through
I see your true colors
and that’s why I love you
so don’t be afraid to let them show
your true colors
true colors are beautiful
like a rainbow
Heh! What the libertarians are afraid to admit that the most socialist period the US has known in the 20th century was WWII, and we emerged from it an economic superpower the likes of which the world had never seen.
^ Well the conservative estimate for those tax cuts is about 2 trillion dollars, which is far higher than the ObamaRomneyCare bill at a trillion and that shortfall is going to continue to grow for years to come, as projected by the CBO.
If Unemployment Insurance [read: something a portion of the taxes I pay goes into so that in case I ever get fired I can have something of a safety net] is “entitlement” then you’re durn right I feel ‘entitled.’
Clinton, shortly after taking office, was stopped by the Republicans in passing a huge Keynesian ‘stimulus’ - it was significantly reduced, and as correctly noted by many, the Federal spending actually became balanced - after Clinton’s few vetoes, he too has seen the light.
There is not a single example where Keynesian stimulus worked in an open market environment - especially not the FDR lovefest.
“Who will you blame when you must send a hefty check ti The IRS for the 1st time in your life”
The easiest way is to always take 0 deductions on your paycheck. I do this already.
As for the rest: “It’s either me or my children, right?” Everyone talks about how their children will be saddled with debt. No one wants to pay for everything but everyone wants this, that, and the other thing. Lefties want a ton of social programs and Righties want a ton of defense. You can’t have these things and not pay for them.
“tax cuts” do not “cost government” money from the Treasury…..SPENDING is what costs government money!
The government does not “own” our income dollars!
Every dollar the government demands as taxes, is a dollar that is not working to grow the American Economy….it is a dollar that is GROWING GOVERNMENT.
Taxes are dollars TAKEN FROM EARNERS, and taxes are dollars not available to invest and loan to new businesses that could create new jobs. Lowering tax rates and therefore lowering the total dollars each citizen pays to government, grows the economy that then produces a bigger pie of income that is taxable, and raises the living standard for more workers. JFK and Reagan proved this.
“and raises the living standard for more workers.”
Which is why middle class workers’ conditions improved over the past 9 years, because of this philosophy.
*whisper whisper*
Err… I’ve just been informed that , ‘no,’ that isn’t what happened. Middle-class workers remained stagnant and CEOs and shareholders got richer and richer.
kennethcwarren64 almost 14 years ago
The rich think it is a great idea, as I understand it this would make their tax cuts permanent.
If we can’t spend our way out of this recession maybe we can tax cut our way out.
gslusher almost 14 years ago
@harleyquinn:
The Federal debt was mostly run up during the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II administrations. Reagan & Bush I tripled the debt, even exceeding the cost of WWII. Clinton LOWERED the debt. Obama’s deficit is, in large part, due to two factors: the financial failures stemming from the relaxation of regulations done by the Republicans in Congress + Reagan & the two Bushes and the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, started by Bush II. (Bush tried to hide the cost of the wars by not including them in the official budget. Obama put them back into the budget, where they belong.)
The “Fair Tax” is “fair” only for the rich. It would mean an INCREASE in taxes for the lowest-earning Americans and especially the middle class. The “class warfare” is fueled by the Republicans in the Senate, who, suddenly conscious of the deficit (after having voted in huge deficits under Bush), want to cut unemployment support, repeal health care reform (which will actually INCREASE the deficit in the long run by returning to the Bush handouts to the pharmaceutical industry), and cutting taxes for the rich.
Motivemagus almost 14 years ago
I love the way that people making it easier for the rich to get richer and poor to get poorer accuse the Democrats of class warfare. Class warfare is real. The only aristocracy we have is that of wealth, and the late, great Alexis de Tocqueville nailed THAT down bleeding in 1840.
Motivemagus almost 14 years ago
Oh, and harley - if the GOP is the party of fiscal responsibility, asking for these tax cuts kind of shoots a hole in that, don’t you think?
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
I agree. Class warfare is perfectly fine as long as the rich win (as they have for the past 9 years). Keep it up! *
We should be trying to find money to cut from everywhere else, like education, social security, Medicare, and all of that stuff ‘common people’ pay into and then expect to be able to call upon later. We can’t afford any of this stuff. Everyone has to tighten their belt (as long as they’re middle class, poor, or otherwise not in the DoD). Suck it up. *
CourageCD almost 14 years ago
Harley–To echo motivmagus’ point, I question your rhetoric. When the gov creates policies that close loopholes for the wealthy and get them to contribute the country’s prosperity, it is class warfare. But when the gov create policies that give wealthy individuals and corporations gov handouts and allows them to pass on the responsibility of their poor decisions to the middle-class, working-class, and poor, that’s what? Business as usual?
SoreJack almost 14 years ago
to motive magus
the American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money. Alexis de Tocqueville
Bluejayz almost 14 years ago
Harley - Your “Fair” tax isn’t at all fair. The lower economic classes will be stuck here at home paying the tax while the rich will fly off to the Cayman Islands or Hong Kong and buy their Ferraris and baubles tax-free. You know they’ll avoid the “Fair” tax somehow. That’s why they pay their high-priced lawyers.
The only “Fair” tax would be if every USA citizen and corporation had to pay a flat 5 - 10% on their gross income. No deductions, no write-offs, no tax shelters, no depletion allowances. Just the same flat tax on everybody. I know it’s a regressive tax, but I think the poor would be willing to pay it if they knew that ALL of the corporate and Wall Street fatcats and ALL of the Corporations had to pay the same percentage.
Libertarian1 almost 14 years ago
There are 2 basic economic approaches to fight a depression. The school of Keynes and the Austrian school.
Keynes says spend public dollars, pour money in from the government and people will spend those dollars. Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, England, Canada and FDR etc have tried that approach and it failed. They are now all cutting back expenditures. Obama tried that also and it has horribly failed. The Krugmans of this world say you only spent $787B. spend more. He can’t lose because no matter how much you spend and it doesn’t work he will always say you didn’t spend enough.
Remember more troops in Viet Nam? We aren’t winning because we haven’t sent in enough soldiers. Same stupid philosophy.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^ Actually he only spent about half of that. The other half were tax cuts, which as we all know, magically pay for themselves.
lonecat almost 14 years ago
^^ Gosh, Canada is in great shape right now.
SoreJack almost 14 years ago
“Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on.
“I do,” Alice hastily replied; “at least–at least I mean what I say–that’s the same thing, you know.”
“Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. “You might just as well say that “I see what I eat” is the same thing as “I eat what I see”!” — Lewis Carroll
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^ That’s enough blabbering out of you, Canadans.*
4uk4ata almost 14 years ago
“Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain, England, Canada and FDR etc have tried that approach and it failed.”
Gosh, if FDR failed and the US became a world poltiical and economic superpower, I would like to see what success would look like! Start making sense, man.
BTW, China tried it too, some time in late 2008 and early 2009, with just above a trillion of their own - mind you, it was administered faster and in a smaller economy. It didn’t fail either.
Libertarian1 almost 14 years ago
It failed under FDR until we entered WWII. Even the Keynesians admit it failed but say that was because FDR stopped spending.
CashewJim almost 14 years ago
Unemployment is NOT working.
4uk4ata almost 14 years ago
That’s rather doubtful, Lib. Actually, the US economy did fairly well in the mid-30s compared to before that. The 37-38 recession didn’t help, but ironically it went away during WWII - a period of government investment and deficit spending like few others in US history.
I’m not saying the Keynesian view is always right, but if you imply it’s always wrong and fails unequivocably everywhere, you are imo quite wrong.
Motivemagus almost 14 years ago
Libertarian - it’s not true that FDR failed with Keynesian approaches. The one time it stalled was when (as you note) he stopped spending and introduced austerity measures, just the way the GOP is calling for today. The economy was rebounding – WWII accelerated it.
SherriannPederson almost 14 years ago
“True Colors” LYRICS:
You with the sad eyes don’t be discouraged oh I realize it’s hard to take courage in a world full of people you can lose sight of it all and the darkness inside you can make you fell so small
But I see your true colors shining through I see your true colors and that’s why I love you so don’t be afraid to let them show your true colors true colors are beautiful like a rainbow
Show me a smile then don’t be unhappy, can’t remember when I last saw you laughing if this world makes you crazy and you’ve taken all you can bear you call me up because you know I’ll be there
And I’ll see your true colors shining through I see your true colors and that’s why I love you so don’t be afraid to let them show your true colors true colors are beautiful like a rainbow
Prof_Bleen almost 14 years ago
Heh! What the libertarians are afraid to admit that the most socialist period the US has known in the 20th century was WWII, and we emerged from it an economic superpower the likes of which the world had never seen.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^ The government needs our cans! And I have 2 to loan!
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^ So basically, “they’re going to cheat regardless of how much regulation, ‘fair tax’ or whatever is or isn’t there.”
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
^ Well the conservative estimate for those tax cuts is about 2 trillion dollars, which is far higher than the ObamaRomneyCare bill at a trillion and that shortfall is going to continue to grow for years to come, as projected by the CBO.
If Unemployment Insurance [read: something a portion of the taxes I pay goes into so that in case I ever get fired I can have something of a safety net] is “entitlement” then you’re durn right I feel ‘entitled.’
Other than that… what new entitlement programs?
petergrt almost 14 years ago
Clinton, shortly after taking office, was stopped by the Republicans in passing a huge Keynesian ‘stimulus’ - it was significantly reduced, and as correctly noted by many, the Federal spending actually became balanced - after Clinton’s few vetoes, he too has seen the light.
There is not a single example where Keynesian stimulus worked in an open market environment - especially not the FDR lovefest.
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
“Who will you blame when you must send a hefty check ti The IRS for the 1st time in your life”
The easiest way is to always take 0 deductions on your paycheck. I do this already.As for the rest: “It’s either me or my children, right?” Everyone talks about how their children will be saddled with debt. No one wants to pay for everything but everyone wants this, that, and the other thing. Lefties want a ton of social programs and Righties want a ton of defense. You can’t have these things and not pay for them.
disgustedtaxpayer almost 14 years ago
“tax cuts” do not “cost government” money from the Treasury…..SPENDING is what costs government money!
The government does not “own” our income dollars! Every dollar the government demands as taxes, is a dollar that is not working to grow the American Economy….it is a dollar that is GROWING GOVERNMENT.
Taxes are dollars TAKEN FROM EARNERS, and taxes are dollars not available to invest and loan to new businesses that could create new jobs. Lowering tax rates and therefore lowering the total dollars each citizen pays to government, grows the economy that then produces a bigger pie of income that is taxable, and raises the living standard for more workers. JFK and Reagan proved this.
kennethcwarren64 almost 14 years ago
DISGUSTED - Just when did JFK do this?
You do know that Reagan raised taxes and spent money to get us out of a recession don’t you?
Jaedabee Premium Member almost 14 years ago
“and raises the living standard for more workers.”
Which is why middle class workers’ conditions improved over the past 9 years, because of this philosophy. *whisper whisper* Err… I’ve just been informed that , ‘no,’ that isn’t what happened. Middle-class workers remained stagnant and CEOs and shareholders got richer and richer.Well… I guess it worked partially?