United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Will tea partiers protest the $858 billion tax deal?
Source:
AJC
URL Source: http://blogs.ajc.com/cynthia-tucker ... /?cxntfid=blogs_cynthia_tucker
Published: Dec 10, 2010
Author: Cynthia Tucker
Post Date: 2010-12-10 16:52:41 by go65
Keywords: None
Views: 65553
Comments: 104
During the election season, tea party activists declared deficit-reduction one of their primary goals. The nation is swimming in red ink, they noted, posing a huge burden for generations to come. So I’m waiting for those tea party activists to mount a huge protest over the tax deal between President Obama and Republicans. It is expected to cost $858 billion over ten years. Where’s that tea party protest? Are they headed to Washington to denounce the deal, as they did repeatedly with the health care plan — which will lower the deficit over ten years? Yes, there are other things in the deal besides tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. But extending the tax cuts for all Americans for two years cost $675.2 billion. Extending them for the richest Americans — along with generous cuts to the estate tax — will cost about $50 billion over two years. Are the tea partiers at all concerned about that? Then were the ethanol subsidies, which most reasonable people agree are a spectacular waste of government resources — a giveaway to corn farmers. But farm state legislators wanted ethanol subsides included in the package, and they are there. Any day now, I’m sure, tea partiers will gather on the Mall to protest this big addition to the national deficit. Any of you have your bags packed for the party?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 55.
#2. To: All (#0)
Nah, they are too busy celebrating: and the first deal the GOP leadership strikes with Obama is to add nearly $900 billion to the deficit over two years.
The only thing that adds to the deficit is spending. The extension to the unemployment insurance Obama insisted on does not amount to additional $900 billion than they politicians were already planning on spending.
Lowering taxes adds to the deficit.
Typical nonsense from someone who doesn't know SHIT about economics. Do some research on the Laffer Curve, before you make yourself look any more stupid... Liberal morons NEVER understand money...
The Laffer Curve is exactly that, a curve. At some points on the curve lower taxes increases revenue, at some points it decreases revenue. If you are on the left side of the cuve, lowering taxes adds to the deficit. Meanwhile:
Very good. We're on the RIGHT side of the curve. Share E-Mail Print It's income tax day -- the day of reckoning. Fortunes are spent trying to understand the tax code and file documents that accurately reflect taxes owed while attempting to legally minimize the amount that must be paid. In 2002, taxpayers spent an estimated 5.8 billion hours complying with the federal income tax code, according to the Tax Foundation. The total estimated cost of compliance was over $194 billion. That's equivalent to a 20.4-cent surcharge for every $1 in taxes collected! The agony of filing a tax return is a subject for psychiatrists and punsters, as well as politicians. Albert Einstein famously said: "The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax." And he died in 1955, before it got really complicated. But it's not only the challenges of complying with the tax code that are misunderstood by so many. The real confusion arises over the impact of income taxes on generating tax revenues. Challenging tax assumptions At first glance, it seems logical to assume that if you raise tax rates, you'll increase revenues. And that if you cut tax rates, revenues will fall. But history clearly shows those assumptions are faulty. And if you put politics aside to look at the numbers, you can see that tax cuts actually increased revenues throughout the 20th century. John F. Kennedy proposed major tax cuts in 1963, and in February 1964, after his assassination, the top tax rate was cut to 70 percent from 91 percent. Tax revenues nearly doubled in the next four years. After Ronald Reagan cut taxes in the mid-1980s (and those tax cuts were phased in over a period of years), revenues grew to $1.2 trillion from $900 billion. In fact, Kennedy recognized the phenomenon that the government can get more revenues by cutting taxes in this famous statement: "An economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget, just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits. ... In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today, and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the tax rates now." If tax cuts have worked to increase revenues, why, then, has our country run such huge deficits- The answer lies on the spending side. There has never in the last 50 years been a year of lower federal tax revenues than the previous year. And there has never been a year of lower spending. The gap grows when spending outpaces revenues. That's a fact understood by every family facing a budget. Another misperception is that tax cuts benefit the rich. Since the "rich" pay more in taxes, they do receive more benefits from a tax cut. But that's not to say the rich don't pay their fair share -- and an even greater share when rates drop. After the Kennedy tax cuts, the proportion of taxes collected from those in the top brackets surged. The same results came from the Reagan tax cuts. In 1981, the top 10 percent of taxpayers paid 48 percent of the taxes collected. But after the Reagan tax cuts were fully phased in, the same top 10 percent of taxpayers paid a 57 percent share of taxes collected. The reasons are logical. In the top brackets, people have a choice of working more or working less. If every extra dollar they earn is taxed at a high rate, they simply decide it's not worth it to work the extra hours -- or make the extra investments to expand their businesses. The United States is the best place on earth to live (pardon the chauvinism), so very few people leave to avoid taxes. But when rates get too high, people do resort to other measures, things like tax shelters and an underground cash economy, all of which distort the efficiency of our economic system. It's far better to have a reasonable and lower tax rate, which history has shown will bring in greater tax revenues. Spending restraint Then all we need is some restraint on spending to balance our budget. Today, on April 15, Income Tax Day, our tax code has become so complex that even the IRS can't give consistent answers to tax questions. This year, Americans worked until April 11 -- Tax Freedom Day -- to pay all their federal, state and local taxes. There must be a better system. The federal income tax was in its infancy when Will Rogers, who died in 1935, said: "The income tax has made more liars out of the American people than golf has!" Now, that's a Savage Truth. Thanks for playing, go56. And yes, I spelled your sig this way, because you're ass-backwards on everything else, it seemed apt.
It's closer to $500 billion today. That's enough to run GM, Ford, and several other companies combined. It's money that it completely wasted. It's a big reason (along with mindless regulations) that companies are moving jobs offshore.
#58. To: jwpegler (#55)
I wouldn't doubt it. I noticed a lot of replies after my last post... I presume go56 is trying to do his schtick, "war is peace, ignorance is knowledge, stupidity is (liberal) intelligence," yeah? Feh.
It's closer to $500 billion today. That's enough to run GM, Ford, and several other companies combined. It's money that it completely wasted. It's a big reason (along with mindless regulations) that companies are moving jobs offshore. That is a goofy argument. This past year I've spent more time waiting for Sears contractors to show up and repair my water heater then I have in the past 10 years preparing income taxes (don't buy a Sears waterheater!). I spend far more time navigating automated phone systems and on hold annually than preparing income taxes (I would love it if some one did a study on how much time and money was wasted on that for business and individuals). I pray daily to be spared the necessity of contacting my internet provider! I gave Comcast three shots at hooking up my cable, more time wasted waiting than I spent on taxes last year. (Astound got it done the first time) Come to think of it, the private sector ain't all that efficient.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWill tea partiers protest the $858 billion tax deal?
Boehner and company OWNED Owe-bama last night.
Badeye posted on 2010-12-07 11:56:56 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Must be killing you this morning to learn Owe-bama agrees with me, not you.
Have a nice day....(laughing)
Badeye posted on 2010-12-07 10:09:29 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#4. To: go65 (#2)
the first deal the GOP leadership strikes with Obama is to add nearly $900 billion to the deficit over two years.
#5. To: jwpegler (#4)
The only thing that adds to the deficit is spending.
#37. To: go65 (#5)
Lowering taxes adds to the deficit.
#38. To: Capitalist Eric (#37)
Do some research on the Laffer Curve, before you make yourself look any more stupid...
#49. To: go65 (#38)
At some points on the curve lower taxes increases revenue, at some points it decreases revenue. If you are on the left side of the cuve, lowering taxes adds to the deficit.
Let's clear up a couple misconceptions on tax cuts BY TERRY SAVAGE SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Nov 16, 2010 05:26PM
#55. To: Capitalist Eric (#49)
In 2002, taxpayers spent an estimated 5.8 billion hours complying with the federal income tax code, according to the Tax Foundation. The total estimated cost of compliance was over $194 billion. That's equivalent to a 20.4-cent surcharge for every $1 in taxes collected!
Replies to Comment # 55.
#71. To: jwpegler, Capitalist Eric (#55)
In 2002, taxpayers spent an estimated 5.8 billion hours complying with the federal income tax code, according to the Tax Foundation. The total estimated cost of compliance was over $194 billion. That's equivalent to a 20.4-cent surcharge for every $1 in taxes collected!
End Trace Mode for Comment # 55.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]