And Democratic candidates insist tax increases are desperately necessary?
Huh? Wha!!?
Wait a minute! The federal budget deficit is shrinking... and getting smaller every month! As of the end of May '07 the deficit is down 34.6% from May of '06. The deficit is now sitting in the neighborhood of 149 billion. Didn't we spend more in the first year of the Iraq War than what our current deficit reflects? Wasn't it somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 billion we the taxpayers shelled out for Iraq. So why is the deficit plummeting? The Bush Tax Cuts... IN SPITE OF 9.11 AND THE WAR ON IRAQ!!!
WOW! Imagine that! Tax cuts allow for greater prosperity across the board. Let's see, there are more jobs, less unemployment, booming business, and cash and opportunity to be made. No one is exempt who is willing to work to achieve that goal, that dream, that Mercedes Benz.
But Dems, especially the candidates, want to raise taxes on the evil rich. They want to squash prosperity. Hillary wants to adopt the oft-discredited Marxist Maxism:
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"
That's right she wants to reshape the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave into Stalinland. Yeah, that's hyperbole, but that doesn't mean she isn't pushing a socialist ideal. Said Candidate Hillary:
"It's time for a new beginning. For an end to government of the few by the few and for the few [I agree, it's time the Senate and House stop acting like enthroned rulers. The American people are not your peasants, you work for US!]. Time to reject the idea of an on-your-own society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a "we're all in it together" society. [Can America survive another 'It Takes a Village' attack on America from socialist shill Hill?]"
[bracketed portions added]
Tax cuts work. They help everyone to prosper. America should not be in the business of punishing those who succeed HOWEVER much they have in the bank. What incentive, after all, is there for the poor and middle-class to make it rich if Government is going to punish them for it. And not simply punish... but steal from them.
_______________
Sources:
US budget deficit narrows sharply in first eight months of this fiscal year
WE HAVE TO GET THE TAXES RAISED ... AND FAST!
U.S. Deficit Climbs $67.7 Billion Last Month
from the mind of... Eric | 11:36 AM
17 Comments:
Talk on, brother, talk on.
I agree. There is a good debate on the subject of tax cuts at rightfromtheright.blogspot.com. A guy named Philip is making a decent attempt at contradicting our beliefs and a guy named Jason is shoring up our side quite well. Serious research is required (at least by me) to analyse Phil's position. Though he makes some good points, I find myself unconvinced. Keep taxes as low as possible and the best results will manifest. That's my position.
Oh yeah, you have to scroll down a bit to the part entitled "left wing intolerance".
Seriously. Check out the FairTax. There's a link in the sidebar under "News & Special Interests..."
The FairTax would revolutionize the economy, and take back the reins of power from those thieving boneheads in Washington.
You should stick to posting about Christianity. In that subject you have a better grasp of the issues. When it comes to economics you just repeat Neal Bortz's talking points.
The federal government revenues are increasing and that is letting the government pay off the deficit faster than expected. The government however has not stopped deficit spending. Right now we spend more than we take in. If tax revenues keep increasing and we don't start spending significantly more (like starting a new war with iran) then in a few years the deficit will be paid down and we will have surpluses again.
In 1962 the government took in 17.6% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to pay for services. Today it takes in 18.4%. [source: Congressional Budget Office(CBO) Historical Facts Sheet Page 4] Taxes have not increased significantly in the past 50 years, where those monies come from has. If you examine the same page you will see that corporate income taxes have fallen from 3.6% of GDP in 1962 to 2.7% today.
Examining further the numbers from the CBO on page 6 we can look at government spending. In 1962 the government spent 18.8% of GDP with 12.7% being discretionary and 6.1% being mandatory outlays. Today government spending overall totals 20.3% of GDP, with 11.9% of GDP being mandatory spending and 7.8% being discretionary.
The government doesn't in fact increase or decrease overall taxes very much. What congress does much more often is shift the burden from some backs to others. If you are unhappy with your current tax burden you should look around and see whose shoulders some of it might be placed upon. Or if you are diametrically opposed to the idea of taxes you might want to start suggesting what government spending you want to see cut.
Education? Space Exploration? Food and Drug Safety? Environmental Protection? Labor Regulations? Social Security? Medicare? Which services do you think the entire US could do without?
Most all of them, actually. And then they should be shifted to the states where they belong. The needs allegedly addressed by those services are more efficiently addressed on the most local level possible where those doling the funds know best where they'll do the most good. D.C. is too far away from the problems to know best how to use the funds. The fed's only concerns should be keeping the military strong, securing the borders and monitoring immigration, and maintaining federal infrastructure.
Exactly! The Constitution does not describe today's govenment at all. Today's government has usurped much of the authority of individual states. The FEDERAL government's job is to protect the borders, levy a standing army, and see to every other item enumerated in the Constitution. The income tax was not part of the Constitution when it was written, nor according to language set forth in the Constitution did the framers conceive that taxation as it exists today should EVER be 'constitutional'.
Granted. Taxation is a necessary evil, but it's present implementation is neither necessary, nor Constitutional. And it's use by Congress is so far from good it's as close to evil as being there.
Since taxation IS necessary these days, the job of taxing the People should be taken out of the hands of politicians who use it to win votes, and given TO the People in the form of the FairTax.
Such a system would attract foreign investment, and encourage personal investment.
It would bring in far more money to the federal coffers than our current unjust system.
Balanced budgets would become a fact of life.
The products we buy would not cost substantially more or less than they do now-- The percentage of tax embedded in each item we buy now sits around 23%, and then we pay sales tax on top of that, PLUS income tax.
With the FairTax, the embedded taxes disappear-- or rather, they become the taxes that go straight into the government coffers.
Everyone would get every penny they earned in their paycheck... no FICA, Social, Medicare... every penny would go to the employee.
No one would pay any taxes on the basic needs, as figured in the cost of living (depending on how many people in each household). Everyone would get a rebate check each month from the government to cover the basic necessities based on the aforementioned criteria.
And those who make the least? Under poverty level? They end up paying NOTHING.
The IRS would be abolished.
No one would be able to cheat the system.
Everyone: Illegal aliens, drug dealers, crooks, rich and poor alike... tourists... would pay their fair share of taxes every time they purchased anything... and monthly rebates to every American citizen for the basic necessities of life. And via this system, the poor end up paying nothing.
Power would be stripped from Liberals and Republicans alike. No one in Washington could use taxes to earn votes by either promising to raise taxes in the tried and tired class-warfare ponzi-scheme, or by lowering taxes with incentives for the uber rich.
Second best of all, Politicians would be reduced to actually doing something other than fleecing the American people... Because taxes would be in our hands, not theirs.
Now, folks like BenT will argue that what people would really end up paying is 30 cents on every dollar, but this is a lie. People who use this as an argument are either ignorant to what the FairTax really says, or they deliberately misrepresent it.
Go get the facts:
FairTax.org
Here're some FairTax links for anyone with questions;
About the FairTax
FairTax Basics
Research Papers
FAQ
Still have a question about the FairTax? Here are answers to questions submitted to FairTax and a form to submit questions not already answered on the web site....
ASK THE EXPERT
There are a few things EL doesn't mention about the "Fair Tax"
1. Do you like welfare? The fair tax has the federal government write a check to every person every month. Supposedly equal to what the taxes for basic necessities are each month. Sounds like welfare for everyone to me. And of course how is the government going to do this without a bureau like the IRS to keep track of everyone?
2. How does an extra $.90 for each gallon of gasoline sound? The Fair Tax act does not repeal the Federal Gasoline tax, so 30 cents a dollar extra for each gallon of gas.
3. The fair tax really mandates a 30% tax. If you have an item that's $1.00 and when the tax is added the final price is $1.30 how much was the tax? Fair Tax advocates say 23% because $.30 is 23% of $1.30. I never think of sales taxes that way. I think of Income tax that way, but not sales tax.
4. That 30% (or 23%) assumes 100% tax rate. Right now about 15% of the US avoids taxes some way. Fair Tax supporters say all that will end. Of course they want to get rid of the IRS so there won't be anyway to check up on businesses. I know that if I found out a store in Dothan wasn't charging taxes, I'd go there to save 30 on every purchase. That 100% tax rate also means every flea market, lawn mower, piano teacher, lemonade stand, every business is supposed to pay taxes to the treasury.
5. That 30% (or 23%) is not mandated by law. If enacted it would be easy for congress to raise the tax rate. Plus of course there's the idea that the federal and state governments will be paying those 23% (or 30%) taxes too. Are you ready for your state income tax to go up?
6. All sorts of things that are currently not taxed would become subject to the "Fair Tax". Doctors Services, New Home Purchases, Credit Card Interest, everything but education. The Fair Tax law makes exceptions for education costs. How long do you think until some enterprising congressman writes an amendment for home mortgage interests, and then of course the doors are wide open for chaos.
7. EL tries to make the claim that consumer goods would stay the same, and people would get more money in their paycheck. This is misleading. The way the Fair Tax is written, its supposed to be revenue-neutral. It is supposed to replace every dollar collected today with a dollar collected through the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax will have to be high enough to replace the monies that would come in from embedded corporate taxes plus estate and income taxes.
8. Factcheck.org a non-profit non-partisan research center did their own analysis of the Fair Tax and they found that people making $24,000-$200,000 would probably see their taxes rise under the Fair Tax. Those making above $200,000 would see their taxes decrease. As well as those making less than $24,000.
Know the reality of something. Don't let emotional arguments blind you.
BenT, of course, is bent... He's wrong. Rather than investigate the FairTax from the horses mouth he goes to FactCheck? I don't care how nonprofit they are... they're wrong.
A $100 item would cost $100... not $130. Again, the rate is 23% NOT 30. He's delusional and relying on delusional, ignorant data.
In short, BenT and all those who fear the FairTax would rather continue to live as slaves to politicians. He would rather be mugged every pay period.
EL you do remember how you lent me your Neal Bortz Fair Tax book? I read it. I started there and read further, from sites that disagree with your opinion. How can one understand an issue without hearing both sides?
Item cost = $100
Tax = 23%
Final Cost = $123
But infact what Fair Tax is promoting is
Item Cost = $100
Tax = 30%
Final Cost = $130
Fair tax supporters can say 23% because $30 is 23% of $130. But people don't think of sales taxes that way. Neither does EL. He certainly didn't talk about our local sales tax issue that way. He said a 1% sales tax would add $.01 to each dollar.
Notice how he also has no compunction about disclaiming my source and my motives. He didn't even look to see what FactCheck.org has to say about the Fair Tax. He just hates to have his assertions attacked. Apparently also I want to "remain a slave."
Your memory is just as poor, if having read the book, you still either can't grasp, or intentionally misrepresent the 23% issue.
Sweater= $100+ $0 tax
of that $100:
$23 goes to the government.
$77 goes to the retailer
How hard is that to grasp?
"Fair tax supporters can say 23% because $30 is 23% of $130."
No sir. A misrepresentation of the truth. Again! FairTax supporters DO NOT say this. FairTax OPPONENTS say this to scare off the public. Your problem here is that you can't get past the idea of a "tail-end" tax added TO a the sticker price. That's NOT what the FairTax is. When the cashier scans the barcode and $100 pops up on the screen, no tax would be added to the total.... it's included in the price. You would not pay $130. You wouldn't pay $123. For an item whose label says $100, you'd pay $100. Not a penny more, not a penny less.
And yes, I have no compunction in dissing your source if THESE are the kind of "facts" FactCheck.org generates.
As for your motives... who knows what your motives are-- I certainly don't. But I will say this: you oppose my views and stances 95% of the time which seems odd. What two people genuinely disagree that much? (I think you do it simply to be a fly in the ointment)
Furthermore, I don't have to check your source if you keep insisting a $100 sweater would cost me $130 to walk out of the store with it, because if that is what your source is telling you, they are patently false... and your "facts" become fables.
Just because the place is called "FactCheck" doesn't mean their word is beyond question or reproach. Wake up, BenT. You're letting other people do your thinking for you. If you rely too much on the facts other people provide, how will you ever learn to think or analyze critically, and for yourself? You'll be nothing more than a mindless automaton, thinking what it's told to think... believing what it's told to believe... living the life it's told to live.
And that sir, IS slavery. It's a shame you can't see the walls of your own intellectual prison.
Everything and everyone has an agenda, and as such truths and facts are mutable, and not to be fully trusted.
The final cost of the sweater is $100 fine. If the fair tax portion of the object is $23.00 and the retail cost is $77.00 then $77.00 times 1.30 will equal an after-tax cost of $100.00. In my book that makes the fair tax a 30% tax. If you plug in the 23% number you only end up with a final cost of $94.71.
You want to try to hide the tax portion of the price by counting it added before any other taxes or fees. I read your book. Then I thought about it. Do you know that the actual Fair Tax Law proposed to congress doesn't actually abolish the 16th amendment? It only has language saying the amendment SHOULD be abolished. Did you know that the Fair Tax Law doesn't abolish the federal gas tax? Americans for Fair Taxation don't address these issues on their website. Pardon me if I asked questions to which you don't like the answers.
According to the Fair Tax to eliminate corporate embedded taxes, items and raw materials sold to corporations would be tax free. So that means when a company buys computers, real estate, vehicles, printer ink, they'll get it without that Fair Tax price bump. But when EL, or I or anyone else not incorporated buys ink cartridges, we'll pay 23% (or 30%) more. Ain't tax policy fun!
Jiminy Cricket, BenT! How freaking bad are you at math!!!??? 23 cents out of every dollar goes to the freaking government! That's 23%!!! 23 pennies is 23 freaking percent of 100!!!!!!!!!!
Lay off the fuzzy math! It's pickling your freaking brain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you apply a 23% tax to a $77 sweater, the final cost is $94.71. Period. Pull out a calculator if you don't believe me. If Neal Bortz gave you that example and said the sweater would cost $100 then he was using fuzzy math.
The way Far Tax supporters get 23% is they take the total AFTER the tax is added in. $23 is 23% of $100. But that's not how taxes are figured. You take a $77 sweater apply a 30% tax and you get $100. That's how a cashier will figure the Fair Tax. Anyone who won't admit that the Fair Tax is 30% is trying to bamboozle you. That's why with these subjects you have to read opposition websites.
From copper and tin you get bronze.
Post a Comment
<< Home