Here Comes the Tax Increase

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Two thoughts. First, letting the Bush tax cuts expire is a tax increase.

No, that's letting an ill-advised temporary tax cut expire.

quote:Taxes not just on the "wealthy" (you know, those people that work hard, get educated, or otherwise have the audacity to be successful) but on businesses will go up.

I can't find any details on business taxes.  The meme that WaPo is pushing is that small business owners who show all business gains as personal profit of over $250,000 will have their tax breaks expire.  Most people don't do that because it's stupid.  Instead, they incorporate.  So letting this tax break expire will effect two percent (2% of small business owners).  That's documented.  

quote:Second, cutting the deficit is a good thing; but how does Obama plan to do that?

As the article said, by letting the ill-advised tax cuts that Bush passed, expire.  And by "winding down" the wars...it's in there.  If you recall, Bubba had a budget surplus.  Bush turned it into a deficit with wars and tax cuts for the rich.

quote:He just signed a bill saddling my children with a trillion dollars to pay back and is contemplating another auto bailout and mortgage bailout.  Oh, I know, let's impose a "green" tax on business.

Bush took a $550 billion Clinton budget surplus and turned it into a $170 billion deficit.  How? With ill-advised tax cuts and wars.

[cannon_fodder]

Clinton's surplus never materialize.  The rose glasses from Clinton still amazes me.  The world was peaceful and great and the economic never had an issue, until Bush came along (or there were 6 terrorist attacks on American assets with no real response and both the stock market and the housing market were set for massive collapses at the end of the Clinton years and the buck was passed)...

YEAR/Year Ending/ Nat. Debt / Budget Deficit

FY1994    09/30/1994    $4.692749 trillion    $281.26 billion
FY1995    09/29/1995    $4.973982 trillion    $281.23 billion
FY1996    09/30/1996    $5.224810 trillion    $250.83 billion
FY1997    09/30/1997    $5.413146 trillion    $188.34 billion
FY1998    09/30/1998    $5.526193 trillion    $113.05 billion
FY1999    09/30/1999    $5.656270 trillion    $130.08 billion
FY2000    09/29/2000    $5.674178 trillion    $17.91 billion
FY2001    09/28/2001    $5.807463 trillion    $133.29 billion

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

1950-1999
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm

1999-current
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

(FWIW, I don't embed the links so the source is more readily ascertainable)

Where are those massive surpluses?  The actually data seems to indicate the national deficit went up every year.  If we had billions in budget surpluses it would go down.

Now, for the love of god, I'm not arguing GW did a good job handling the budget or securing the economy.  But the pretty glasses looking back are not entire accurate either.  There was never actually a budget surplus, in spite of what the fuzzy governmental math may have told you the raw numbers don't lie (debt grew = no budget surplus).




(Also, if you want to see a daily balance sheet of the US Treasury you can:
http://fms.treas.gov/webservices/show/?ciURL=/dts/09022000.txt

As of yesterday, we had $38 Billion in our national checking account.)

[Chicken Little]

Whoops.  I got the numbers flipped, sorry.

quote:When President Clinton left office, the federal budget was showing a $127-billion surplus.

The books are closed on fiscal 2008. The surplus the current President Bush inherited has turned into a record deficit: $455 billion.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/10/budget-deficit.html

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:

He just signed a bill saddling my children with a trillion dollars to pay back and is contemplating another auto bailout and mortgage bailout.  Oh, I know, let's impose a "green" tax on business.

Bush took a $550 billion Clinton budget surplus and turned it into a $170 billion deficit.  How? With ill-advised tax cuts and wars.

This is what really irked me about the Bush Administration. They tried to fight two wars and do tax cuts at the same time, which is sheer insanity. Wars are expensive (especially when you wage them poorly), and chopping down your revenue source in such a time is unbelievably stupid.

And, worse, you had folks like Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh and apparently the whole GOP-led Congress saying in the early part of the decade that "deficits don't matter." (And, yes, I actually heard Rush say this on his show about seven years ago. Cheney's comment is well-documented.)

Now, with the economy needing help of any kind, they're suddenly deficit hawks.

Why in the hell should we listen to them at all? Their sense of priorities and timing are all screwed up. How the hell do they have any credibility?

[Conan71]

Okay, RW, I'll agree, tax cuts in light of war and multiple unprecidented natural disasters don't seem to make sense.

In four or eight years, what are we going to say the wisdom was in ramping up government spending on social programs and economic porkulus whilst "cutting taxes on 95% of Americans"?

Finally today, the markets seem to be responding positively to what the Obama team seems to be doing.  Either that, or the shorts are covering. []

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Okay, RW, I'll agree, tax cuts in light of war and multiple unprecidented natural disasters don't seem to make sense.

In four or eight years, what are we going to say the wisdom was in ramping up government spending on social programs and economic porkulus whilst "cutting taxes on 95% of Americans"?

Finally today, the markets seem to be responding positively to what the Obama team seems to be doing.  Either that, or the shorts are covering. []

As dumb as it is to cut taxes and run two wars at the same time, it's just as dumb to reel in government spending at a time when the economy is hurting for cash. That's the mistake Hoover made.

I'm a pretty significant deficit hawk, but not when you have an economy that's as bad as this one. I'm far more of a pragmatist than an idealogue.

And I agree that the shorts are covering. [] My money manager says to buy anytime the Dow is at or below 7,500, and I concur. He calls that level "bottom-testing."

[Chicken Little]

Whoops.  I got the numbers flipped, sorry.

quote:When President Clinton left office, the federal budget was showing a $127-billion surplus.

The books are closed on fiscal 2008. The surplus the current President Bush inherited has turned into a record deficit: $455 billion.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/10/budget-deficit.html

[guido911]

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Yes, the previous budgets were covering the country's expenditures very well...

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Yes, the previous budgets were covering the country's expenditures very well...

Brilliant response. This is the era of hope and change; remember?

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Yes, the previous budgets were covering the country's expenditures very well...

Brilliant response. This is the era of hope and change; remember?

Thanks.  You're posting from an opinion page (brilliant).

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Yes, the previous budgets were covering the country's expenditures very well...

Brilliant response. This is the era of hope and change; remember?

Thanks.  You're posting from an opinion page (brilliant).

CNN and Faux News are reporting the same thing as this "opinion".

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

I don't think anyone expected the stimulus not to be deficit spending. I don't recall Obama ever saying it wouldn't be, for that matter.

It is funny that depending on which party's guy is in office, either deficits don't matter or deficits are going to run the country into the ground.

I'm generally anti-deficit, but when we need to pump money into the economy during uncertain economic times, the only reliable way of doing that is to have the government spend it. Tax cuts just end up being saved and certainly don't help our crumbling infrastructure.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Well this is great news. The tax increase on the wealthy will not raise enough money to fund Obama's plans.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

I don't think anyone expected the stimulus not to be deficit spending. I don't recall Obama ever saying it wouldn't be, for that matter.

It is funny that depending on which party's guy is in office, either deficits don't matter or deficits are going to run the country into the ground.

I'm generally anti-deficit, but when we need to pump money into the economy during uncertain economic times, the only reliable way of doing that is to have the government spend it. Tax cuts just end up being saved and certainly don't help our crumbling infrastructure.

I hear you. We will never agree on this though.

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by Red Arrow

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

gee RA, if you decided to try to hit below the belt, you have succeeded...

Not my intention. I apologize if you took it that way. I've been hit with a sucker punch (real one, black eye and all) so I'll be watching.

                                                                                                      huh, no bar fights here, but I figure its only a matter of time..... unless I move over to the Peoples Republic of Cherry Street..... heard today at my local watering hole, "that Linda Carter was hotter than Georgia asphault on an August afternoon"... best chuckle I^ve had since I heard a hot looking middle aged woman at a bar in Elgin, IL sing "Redneck Woman".... with a Mike Ditka accent... lmao.