Timing of shutdown is no accident!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Most of the spending for the ACA is mandatory spending, which isn't dependent on annual appropriations.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
No Dung. I said show how the 2001 cuts affected receipts.
The 2001 tax cuts were designed to slowly implement changes in the tax brackets over a nine year period. It was in 2003 that the breaks were escalated. The bulk of the cuts were done in 2003 to the income brackets. The 2003 cuts also are what altered the cap gain structure. The only substantial 'cut' was the rebate checks that were sent out. But I know you aren't going to pretend that was the bulk of the decline in receipts.
You also continue to dodge answering... do you ignore the effect of the stock market decline from 2000-2002's impact on tax receipts due to capital losses vs gains?
Actually, this all started with you pretending that the tax cuts started in 2003, not 2001 and then pretending that they didn't decrease revenues by looking only at 2004 onward (and ignoring the three consectuve year decline in revenues, the first since the end of WWII, notwithstanding incresed GDP), which is laughable.
So, like, if you want to argue that the tax cuts didn't reduce revenues, you're free to do that. I'm not going to argue it with you again. But you don't get to pretend that the earlier tax cuts and revenue declines simply don't exist.
So, like, if you want to argue that the tax cuts didn't reduce revenues, you're free to do that. I'm not going to argue it with you again. But you don't get to pretend that the earlier tax cuts and revenue declines simply don't exist.
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
Great
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
When did LBJ raise taxes
And, really, these bullshit lies about tax cuts increasing revenue coming from self-annointed "deficit hawks" pisses me off. You're just completely full of shit. I mean, there's a legitimate argument that tax cuts increase economic growth and so should be pursued notwithstanding the loss of revenues and increse in the deficit, but this crap that tax cuts are this magic policy that increase revenues and grow the economy and ponies for everyone is just plain dishonest.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Given the bulk of the Bush tax cuts did indeed start in 2003, as I have repeatedly pointed out, I was not pretending anything.
Again, you once again run away from the discussion of the effect of capital losses from the market on the receipts. You again run away from discussing the FACT that the bulk of the income tax bracket cuts came in 2003, not 2001... yeah... keep running dung...
Not once have I 'pretended' the tax receipts didn't decline during the market decline. I was discussing what happened after the bulk of the Bush tax cuts went into effect. Which was in 2003, not 2001 as you continue pretending.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Tax cuts do not automatically raise revenues. Too much can lead to the reverse. You are simply desperately trying to create a straw man given that you know you are wrong on the Bush tax cuts.
What? You don't believe in Reaganomics and supply side economics. Didn't you know that cutting taxes on the corps causes them to pay more in taxes. Ask any of the gatepost stupid fucking rabid righties and they will tell you all you need to know. Yup!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Also, it started with Jarod stating that it was the Bush tax cuts that cut revenue. Which was unsubstantiated and which I challenged him on. Then you jumped in trying to pretend the bulk of the Bush tax cuts took place in 2001. When I showed you were wrong, you went into full straw man production mode.
1) Do you understand that "most" does not mean "all"?
2) Do you understand that there are other forms of revenue enhancement than direct taxes?
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
So what you are saying is that a president committing troops to war and expanding welfare benefits isn't unprecedented? You made it sound like Bush is the only one who did it while it appears he was only following in the footsteps of LBJ. Now do not mistake my post as tacit support for said behavior I do not. Just pointing out your illogical premise.
I sure hope you present better arguments on behalf of your clients than you do here. You suck.
i never claimed it never happened before and LBJ was not a good president.
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
I like the Exchanges. It will be more expensive to cover my wife (my work pays for my insurance, but adding a spouse is $550+/month, so I buy hers separately), but covering our future children will be MUCH less costly, and insurance companies won't be allowed to fuck with the American public anymore, so in the end it's a win. Plus, as I make my way into the upper level of the middle class, I honestly don't mind paying a little more knowing that people that need health insurance are getting it.
Republicans can seriously go fuck themselves. Unless they ditch the Tea Party lunatics, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that I vote for them in 2016. Basically the only candidates I'd consider supporting would be Christie or Hunstman, but given the GOP's present course, I think they'll nominate some nutjob like Rand Paul or Rick Santorum. I'll be voting Dem in 2014.
Republicans can seriously go fuck themselves. Unless they ditch the Tea Party lunatics, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that I vote for them in 2016. Basically the only candidates I'd consider supporting would be Christie or Hunstman, but given the GOP's present course, I think they'll nominate some nutjob like Rand Paul or Rick Santorum. I'll be voting Dem in 2014.
Taft2016
Verified User
I don't think he had to raise taxes. If my memory is correct, LBJ was the first beneciary of Social Security being declared a "welfare program," allowing Social Security contributions to be dropped into the general funds for general spending, which ultimately financed the epic failure known as the "War on Poverty."
Which puts an "*" next to LBJ and Clinton in the argument of "The last two presidents with balanced budgets were LBJ and Clinton!"
LBJ raided the Social Security lockbox and Clinton was dragged along kicking and screaming by Newt and the boys.
evince
Truthmatters
dear fucking idiot,
newt and the Boys shut down the fucking government too
they also voted to a man against the 1993 ombra bill that the CBO gave the loins share of the credit to fro our surpluses at the time.
the republican party lies about what it wants.
it only tells the truth when they think they have a
"quiet room" to say things like 47% in.
you know like when grover preached to them how he was going to weaken this government enough that he could drown it in the bathtub.
or like when the founder of the heritage foundation talked of not wanting everyone to vote.
goo goo mother fucker
newt and the Boys shut down the fucking government too
they also voted to a man against the 1993 ombra bill that the CBO gave the loins share of the credit to fro our surpluses at the time.
the republican party lies about what it wants.
it only tells the truth when they think they have a
"quiet room" to say things like 47% in.
you know like when grover preached to them how he was going to weaken this government enough that he could drown it in the bathtub.
or like when the founder of the heritage foundation talked of not wanting everyone to vote.
goo goo mother fucker
Taft2016
Verified User
We were talking about LBJ and tax increases. Why do you always change the subject and call people "idiots"?
Even your fellow knuckle-dragging libtards are growing weary of your troll act.