Obama tax break

leaningright said:
Here is what I see from the discussion. SF (conservative side) says business aren't hiring because of uncertainty about thier tax burden in the coming years. Nigel (liberal side) says that businesses aren't hiring because they have no customers (ie. people have no money to spend).

Who is correct.
Click to expand...

Neither.

The picture is far to complex to be pinned down to a single variable. Nigel's theory at least takes into account a rather large part of the economy, which 3% of the portion of an individuals income above 250k a year is not.
 
CERVIXCRUSHER9000 said:
So "uncertainty" about a 3% tax hike on the portion of an individuals income greater than 250k has been causing corporations to refuse to do anything about hiring. Makes perfect since.
Click to expand...

As of right now water... ALL of the brackets will revert back to the pre-Bush levels. Until the idiots in DC decide what they are going to extend and what they aren't, then businesses are wise to plan on the worst case scenario. ie... that all brackets will revert.

Nice attempt at an emo post. But it still gets a total FAIL.
 
Rana said:
I am sorry, most economist I read don't agree with you. I don't know your degree, but i will have to go with the experts as this is not my forte!
Click to expand...

My degree is in economics.

That said, the 'experts' you read are likely those whose political opinions get in the way of actual economics. (ie... Krugman and his ilk)

A simple question for you.....

Who spends your money more efficiently for your needs... YOU or the GOVERNMENT?
 
bravo said:
Thats pinhead logic in action...
there are NO CHANGES IN THE TAX CODE...the tax rates will REMAIN the same as they have been since 2003...THERE ARE NO TAX CUTS except what Obama has added to compromise...

CHANGING the tax rates is by definition NOT the status quo...

Try a dictionary....
Click to expand...


But they're changing the tax rates. Right now, under the status quo, the tax rates are scheduled to increase. Under this compromise, the tax rates will not increase. Maybe IF you USE CAPS a little LESS you will BE ABLE TO understand the CONCEPT. It is not THAT difficult TO GRASP.
 
Toki Wartooth said:
You'll certainly here it from me. And many others. Tax cuts are meaningless and indeed harmful with spending increases.
Click to expand...
Yes. While tax cuts are nice, we need less spending to make the difference. You'll still be hearing about it. One of the first things I said was that the Rs should have called Obama's bluff. He wasn't about to veto any extension of the current tax rates, and paying for the extension of unemployment through cuts elsewhere was doable.
 
bravo said:
Thats pinhead logic in action...
there are NO CHANGES IN THE TAX CODE...the tax rates will REMAIN the same as they have been since 2003...THERE ARE NO TAX CUTS except what Obama has added to compromise...

CHANGING the tax rates is by definition NOT the status quo...

Try a dictionary....
Click to expand...

That is incorrect to a degree. As of right now the 2011 tax brackets look exactly like they did in 2000. It is going to take a bill to REDUCE those tax brackets to the current level in order to maintain the status quo.

I get what you are attempting to say, but you are technically incorrect.
 
NigelTufnel said:
But they're changing the tax rates. Right now, under the status quo, the tax rates are scheduled to increase. Under this compromise, the tax rates will not increase. Maybe IF you USE CAPS a little LESS you will BE ABLE TO understand the CONCEPT. It is not THAT difficult TO GRASP.
Click to expand...
Lets step back into reality...
Something that hasn't happened yet cannot be called the status quo...(The existing condition or state of affairs)


Look at the tax rates today and then look again in January....you might just be surprised to see the SAME FREAKIN' NUMBERS, thus no change.
 
NigelTufnel said:
So I'm guessing that you guys don't support extending the Bush tax cuts?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing that you've gone far in the world of imagination. My guess is that they support spending cuts to match actual revenue from the current rates that were continued against the protest of a man who wanted to hike taxes during a downturn.
 
Damocles said:
I'm guessing that you've gone far in the world of imagination. My guess is that they support spending cuts to match actual revenue from the current rates that were continued against the protest of a man who wanted to hike taxes during a downturn.
Click to expand...
In my best Robert Guille voice, "to dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatable foe..."
 
Superfreak said:
That is incorrect to a degree. As of right now the 2011 tax brackets look exactly like they did in 2000. It is going to take a bill to REDUCE those tax brackets to the current level in order to maintain the status quo.

I get what you are attempting to say, but you are technically incorrect.
Click to expand...
There are no 2011 tax brackets yet....just as there are no 2012 or 2013 tax brackets yet.

They would become what they were in 2000....would become by definition means the future....lets not torture the language to make a meaningless point.
Status quo is the present state of affairs
 
Damocles said:
I'm guessing that you've gone far in the world of imagination. My guess is that they support spending cuts to match actual revenue from the current rates that were continued against the protest of a man who wanted to hike taxes during a downturn.
Click to expand...


Well, I like the real world. In the real world, there are no spending cuts. It's the same old story. Deficit hawks always vote in favor of tax cuts while talking about supporting spending cuts that never ever ever materialize.
 
Its as crazy as liberal government speak saying because they didn't get a raise, they suffered a cut...
 
NigelTufnel said:
Well, I like the real world. In the real world, there are no spending cuts. It's the same old story. Deficit hawks always vote in favor of tax cuts while talking about supporting spending cuts that never ever ever materialize.
Click to expand...
Talk to Obama about that, as his speech did exactly that. "As we make the hard decisions"...
 
NigelTufnel said:
Well, I like the real world. In the real world, there are no spending cuts. It's the same old story. Deficit hawks always vote in favor of tax cuts while talking about supporting spending cuts that never ever ever materialize.
Click to expand...
Congress controls the purse
and
Democrats control the Congress since 2007....
 
NigelTufnel said:
So I'm guessing that you guys don't support extending the Bush tax cuts?
Click to expand...

Again you show your idiocy.

I do indeed support the extension of the tax cuts. I also advocate for spending cuts.

The money is better in the hands of the people than in the hands of the idiots in DC. There is far too much waste in the government to pretend we cannot make cuts there. Return the money to the people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top