Tax The Rich Enough To Cover The Deficit.

[Truth Detector]

It's amazing that even after 40 years of data showing that every time taxes are cut, deficits appear, personal savings declines, and household debt increases, Conservatives are still married to their dogma.

More amazing that you make this asinine claim when the data shows that every time taxes are cut, revenues continue to grow.

Absurdity; a sure sign of the last desperate refuge for liars, fools and ignorance; and those who have lost their arguments. Yay you! It's because Conservatism is not a political ideology, but a cult. Its adherents are dumb people who are easily conned because of how weak their minds are. After all, it takes a real stupid fucking moron to get conned into voting and supporting Donald Trump.[/QUOTE]

It's because Conservatism is not a political ideology, but a cult. Its adherents are dumb people who are easily conned because of how weak their minds are. After all, it takes a real stupid fucking moron to get conned into voting and supporting Donald Trump.

Ironic coming from a clown who thinks giving the Federal Government MORE of our wealth leads to good outcomes. It is obvious your IQ is lower than your age.

 

[LV426]

A tale of two economies...

2015
No Tax Cut
GDP Growth: 2.88%
2.7 million jobs created
Deficit reduced by 10% ($484B down to $438B)

2018
Tax Cut
GDP Growth: 2.85%
2.6 million jobs created.
Deficit grows by 17% ($665B to $779B)

We have a tax cut problem.

 

[Trumpet]

If raising taxes on the rich wouldn't necessarily raise revenues to federal coffers, then cutting taxes for the rich will reduce revenues to federal coffers.

Absolutely, remember the Bush, and now the Trump tax cuts.

 

[Celticguy]

Once more for the losers on the left; we don't have a revenue problem. We have a SPENDING problem. I do wish you had a brain.

And revenues did go up with these tax cuts.
Voodoo works. Just like JFK said it would.
The problem from spending it all and more besides.

 

[LV426]

Even at the state level, tax cuts are losers.

Kansas
Budget with Tax Cut
2018: $436M deficit
2019: $564M deficit
2020: $821M deficit
2021: $864M deficit

Kansas
Budget with repeal of Tax Cut (SB 30)
2018: $155M surplus
2019: $223M surplus
2020: $19M surplus
2021: $261M deficit

 

[Truth Detector]

A tale of two economies...

2015
No Tax Cut
GDP Growth: 2.88%
2.7 million jobs created
Deficit reduced by 10% ($484B down to $438B)

2018
Tax Cut
GDP Growth: 2.85%
2.6 million jobs created.
Deficit grows by 17% ($665B to $779B)

Obamunsim = 1.4% GDP average for eight years.

Trump = 3% GDP over the last twp years.

STFU you clueless asswhipe; it's obvious you don't know what you are talking about.

We have a tax cut problem.

Wrong again you dishonest asswhipe; we have a SPENDING problem.

 

[Truth Detector]

And revenues did go up with these tax cuts.
Voodoo works. Just like JFK said it would.
The problem from spending it all and more besides.

Here's the proof:

 

[Truth Detector]

Even at the state level, tax cuts are losers.

Kansas
Budget with Tax Cut
2018: $436M deficit
2019: $564M deficit
2020: $821M deficit
2021: $864M deficit

Kansas
Budget with repeal of Tax Cut (SB 30)
2018: $155M surplus
2019: $223M surplus
2020: $19M surplus
2021: $261M deficit

View attachment 10924

We aren't talking Kansas asswhipe. Strop with the selective bullshit already. It's MORONIC to argue that tax increases are good for the economy. You have to be the singular idiot arguing this way.

 

[LV426]

Absolutely, remember the Bush, and now the Trump tax cuts.

Correct.

Bush cut taxes in 2001, and then revenue was below 2000 levels for four straight years.

Receipts
2000: $2,025.2
2001: $1,991.1 (Bush Tax Cuts passed, some went into immediate effect)
2002: $1,853.1
2003: $1,782.3 (Bush Tax Cuts accelerated)
2004: $1,880.1 (Subprime bubble starts)
2005: $2,153.6 (Subprime bubble grows, federal receipts finally exceed 2000 levels)
2006: $2,406.9 (Subprime bubble grows)
2007: $2,568.0 (Subprime bubble peaks)
2008: $2,524.0 (Subprime bubble pops)
2009: $2,105.0 (After 8 years of Bush Tax Cuts, revenue is only up 4% from 2000)

 

[Truth Detector]

We have a tax cut problem.

How many times do you have to be proven a liar before you stop making these moronic claims. Since the Kennedy tax cuts, the Reagan tax cuts, the Clinton Tax cuts and the Bush tax cuts, revenues have risen by (1965 = 116.8 billion; 2017 = 3,316.2 billion) 2,839%. How did tax cuts reduce revenue?

Spending during the same time period has risen by 3,369%. I would submit that if spending is rising faster than revenue, SPENDING is the problem and NOT revenues. Dumb fuck.

I also am tired of you lying about the effect of tax cuts:

The United States Revenue Act of 1964 signed into law on February 26, 1964. Revenue in 1964 was 112.6 Billion. Revenue in 1965 was 116.8 billion. 116.8 is greater than 112.6. In 1966 it was 130.8 billion. 130.8 is greater than 116.8. By 1969 revenues had increased to 186.9 billion. That is an increase of 166%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 was signed into law August 13, 1981. Revenue in 1981 was 599.3 billion. Revenue in 1982 was 617.8 billion. 617.8 is greater than 599.3.
By 1985 revenues had increased to 734 billion. That is an increase of 122.5%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA) was signed into law on October 22, 1986. Revenue that year was 769.2 billion. Revenue in 1987 was 854.3 billion. 854.3 is greater than 769.2. In 1988 it was 909.2 billion. 909.2 is greater than 769.2. By 1990 revenue had grown to 1,032 billion. That is an increase of 134%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 was enacted August 5, 1997. Revenue that year was 1,579.2 billion. Revenue in 1998 was 1,721.7 billion. 1,721.7 is greater than 1,579.2. In 1999 revenue was 1,827.5 billion. 1,827.5 is greater than 1,721.7. By 2000 revenue had grown to 2,025.2 billion. That is an increase of 128%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 was signed into law 7 June 2001. Revenue that year was 1,991.1 billion.

The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 was signed into law May 28, 2003. Revenue that year was 1,782.3 billion. Revenue in 2004 was 1,880.1 billion. Revenue in 2005 was 2,153.6 billion. 2,153.6 is greater than 1,991.1. Revenue by 2007 had grown to 2,568.0 billion. 2,568.0 is greater than 1,991.1. That is an increase of 129%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed into law on December 22, 2017

Do everyone a favor and just STFU.

 

[LV426]

And revenues did go up with these tax cuts.

No they didn't. This is a lie.

Revenues for 2018 were about $63B below revenues for 2017, and here's the receipts.

 

[Truth Detector]

Bush cut taxes in 2001, and then revenue was below 2000 levels for four straight years.

Receipts
2000: $2,025.2
2001: $1,991.1 (Bush Tax Cuts passed, some went into immediate effect)
2002: $1,853.1
2003: $1,782.3 (Bush Tax Cuts accelerated)
2004: $1,880.1 (Subprime bubble starts)
2005: $2,153.6 (Subprime bubble grows, federal receipts finally exceed 2000 levels)
2006: $2,406.9 (Subprime bubble grows)
2007: $2,568.0 (Subprime bubble peaks)
2008: $2,524.0 (Subprime bubble pops)
2009: $2,105.0 (After 8 years of Bush Tax Cuts, revenue is only up 4% from 2000)

The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 was signed into law 7 June 2001. Revenue that year was 1,991.1 billion.

The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 was signed into law May 28, 2003. Revenue that year was 1,782.3 billion. Revenue in 2004 was 1,880.1 billion. Revenue in 2005 was 2,153.6 billion. 2,153.6 is greater than 1,991.1. Revenue by 2007 had grown to 2,568.0 billion. 2,568.0 is greater than 1,991.1. That is an increase of 129%. The tax reductions did NOT result in lower revenue.

Revenues INCREASED. The problem was SPENDING increased at a faster pace. Particularly after Democrats took over the Congress in 2006. What happened after that? Deficits ballooned into the trillions.

 

[LV426]

Voodoo works. Just like JFK said it would.

He never said that. This is another lie.

What he actually said was: "If the economy today were operating close to capacity levels with little unemployment, or if a sudden change in our military requirements should cause a scramble for men and resources, then I would oppose tax reductions as irresponsible and inflationary -- and I would not hesitate to recommend a tax increase, if that were necessary."

The problem from spending it all and more besides.

Fiscal terrorism is flying planes of tax cuts into the budget to manufacture deficits and then cry crocodile tears over those deficits because you have no support or courage to repeal the social programs you ideologically oppose.

 

[Truth Detector]

No they didn't. This is a lie.

They did go up you moron; look at the data.

Revenues for 2018 were about $63B below revenues for 2017, and here's the receipts.

2017 Revenue = 3,316 billion
2018 Revenue = 3,330 billion

3,330 billion is greater than 3,316 billion you lying moron.

 

[LV426]

And it's not like tax cuts even grow the economy at all.

Bush needed a housing bubble to grow his (that's why he deregulated subprime lending requirements in 2004).

Trump's tax cuts resulted in lower economic growth than 2015.

So far, Trump has yet to beat Obama's best annual and quarterly GDP growth.

 

[countryboy]

More GOP voodoo trickle down economics, isn't go to fix anything.

All you have are talking points issued to you by your overlords. You are incapable of actual debate using facts and figures.

 

[Phantasmal]

And it's not like tax cuts even grow the economy at all.

Bush needed a housing bubble to grow his (that's why he deregulated subprime lending requirements in 2004).

Trump's tax cuts resulted in lower economic growth than 2015.

So far, Trump has yet to beat Obama's best annual and quarterly GDP growth.

China has given a personal income tax cut to its citizens, and its sustaining them during this trade war.

I think a tax cut should have been given, but it should have been to small business and personal income.

 

[PoliTalker]

Goodbye CookieCrusher,

"Great minds".....
Don't flatter yourself......

OK that's it.

I've given you every chance to contribute on a respectful basis. I've overlooked your little 2 line missives which now won't be missed at all.

I would have been surprised had you changed your MO, but I just wanted to toss the offer out there just in case you were receptive to the idea of deeper discussion. Obviously you are happy making your shallow little drive-by postings and not into having any kind of discussion much more involved than a sound byte. You're prejudiced toward liberals and only looking for easy marks to fit into your cookie cutter uncaring habit of little more than hurling cutsie insults to amuse yourself.

It is not a constructive contribution to the conversation, so I have zero problem making the choice to place you on permanent Ignore. I just don't see what would be missed, and I certainly don't need somebody who can do no more than be irritating. What a drag.

For me to continue to read your posts would be enabling abuse, something I am hardly apt to do.

A lot is lost when thought patterns are not allowed to go beyond a short attention span.

Such as a more detailed examination of why the United States cannot have a limited government because we simply do not live in a limited world. Crooks, thieves and ne'er-do-wells are always looking for increasingly exquisite ways to take advantage of the unsuspecting; so we would be fooling ourselves to believe that we can combat modern crime and corruption with an outdated government. The industrial age has brought amazing technologies, but with these advances come intricate new ways to rip people off. Much needs to be done to protect Americans and America from the greedy, both within and without. The threat exists from individuals and organizations inside and outside government and from positions of power in the so-called good business world.

A simplistic approach is a foolish one. There is much to talk about and focus our attention on.

I look forward to talking with expanding minds that challenge ideas. Many here at JPP are quite adept at exploring multi-faceted concepts and considering unforeseen ramifications of new developments. I had hoped you might be able to join in with that, but I see I was mistaken. No big. Anyone can make a mistake. The trick is to know when to admit it and take a lesson from it. What I have learned from these few exchanges we've shared here today is that my time would be better spent conversing with those who can express themselves with elan.

 

[CookieCrusher]

Goodbye CookieCrusher,



OK that's it.

I've given you every chance to contribute on a respectful basis. I've overlooked your little 2 line missives which now won't be missed at all.

I would have been surprised had you changed your MO, but I just wanted to toss the offer out there just in case you were receptive to the idea of deeper discussion. Obviously you are happy making your shallow little drive-by postings and not into having any kind of discussion much more involved than a sound byte. You're prejudiced toward liberals and only looking for easy marks to fit into your cookie cutter uncaring habit of little more than hurling cutsie insults to amuse yourself.

It is not a constructive contribution to the conversation, so I have zero problem making the choice to place you on permanent Ignore. I just don't see what would be missed, and I certainly don't need somebody who can do no more than be irritating. What a drag.

For me to continue to read your posts would be enabling abuse, something I am hardly apt to do.

A lot is lost when thought patterns are not allowed to go beyond a short attention span.

Such as a more detailed examination of why the United States cannot have a limited government because we simply do not live in a limited world. Crooks, thieves and ne'er-do-wells are always looking for increasingly exquisite ways to take advantage of the unsuspecting; so we would be fooling ourselves to believe that we can combat modern crime and corruption with an outdated government. The industrial age has brought amazing technologies, but with these advances come intricate new ways to rip people off. Much needs to be done to protect Americans and America from the greedy, both within and without. The threat exists from individuals and organizations inside and outside government and from positions of power in the so-called good business world.

A simplistic approach is a foolish one. There is much to talk about and focus our attention on.

I look forward to talking with expanding minds that challenge ideas. Many here at JPP are quite adept at exploring multi-faceted concepts and considering unforeseen ramifications of new developments. I had hoped you might be able to join in with that, but I see I was mistaken. No big. Anyone can make a mistake. The trick is to know when to admit it and take a lesson from it. What I have learned from these few exchanges we've shared here today is that my time would be better spent conversing with those who can express themselves with elan.

There you go again, flattering yourself.

 

[LV426]

China has given a personal income tax cut to its citizens, and its sustaining them during this trade war.

I think a tax cut should have been given, but it should have been to small business and personal income.

I think instead, people should just get paid more and if a business cannot pay its employees a wage high enough that they don't have to rely on federal assistance programs, then that business shouldn't exist.

No one is entitled to own a business, and taxpayers should stop subsidizing that entitlement.