Republicans in denial

[Guns Guns Guns]

Every independent, bipartisan, blue-ribbon panel that has looked at the deficit problem has reached the same conclusion:




The gap between spending and revenue is much too big to be closed by budget cuts alone.




With fervent conviction but zero evidence, Tea Party Republicans believe otherwise — and Establishment Republicans, who know better, are afraid to contradict them.










http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...7/02/gHQAd1hByH_story.html?fb_ref=NetworkNews

 

[signalmankenneth]

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

​

Jim DeMint: “We're at the point where there would have to be some, you know, some serious disruptions. I'm willing to do that.”






Bach-to-Mom: “As a mom of five, a foster parent and a former tax lawyer and now a small business job creator, I know we can’t keep spending money we don’t have. That’s why I fought against the wasteful bailout, against the stimulus. I will not vote to increase the debt ceiling.”










RINO Paul: Paul said he would loosen federal control over the economy. The lawmaker advocates returning to the gold standard, a system where paper money is backed by units of precious metals. He has also vowed to end deficit spending and cut taxes. He would reduce costs by cutting spending and eliminating the Department of Education and the Department of Energy.














http://www.slate.com/content/slate/blogs/weigel/2011/06/28/romney_and_the_bush_tax_cuts.html

 

[Rationalist]

Obviously, we need more revenue to close the deficit. Nobody denies that. Do you believe raising taxes is the only way to increase revenue?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) has reiterated his demand that no tax increases be included in a deal on the debt ceiling.

"The American people simply won't stand for it. And their elected representatives in Congress won't vote for it."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Wednesday "We're not for any proposal that increases taxes."​

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011...o-tax-hikes/UPI-64471309939200/#ixzz1RQlv4AaL








http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011...o-tax-hikes/UPI-64471309939200/#ixzz1RQlv4AaL​

​

​

 

[SmarterthanYou]

didn't obama say something about promising not to raise taxes on people below 250k a year?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

didn't obama say something about promising not to raise taxes on people below 250k a year?

Did he?

 

[Crashk]

didn't obama say something about promising not to raise taxes on people below 250k a year?

Dec. 17, 2010
When President Obama officially extended tax cuts enacted by his predecessor in a Rose Garden ceremony today, he ensured the average American will pay about $2,000 less in taxes per year for the next two years.

That figure includes a temporary holiday on the payroll tax, which helps fund Social Security.

The tax cut extension means big bucks for the super-rich. LeBron James, who makes $14.5 million each year, will save more than $600,000 in taxes for this year. A family making $100,000 per year will pay about $6,000 less in taxes than if the tax cuts had expired. The average savings for all Americans, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, is about $2,800."

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/paycheck-obama-tax-cut-extension-means/story?id=12423601

Didn't you hear about this on Faux 'News'? Didnt think so.

When Bohner says..."The American people simply won't stand for it. And their elected representatives in Congress won't vote for it."
He's not talking about working people or the middle class, he's talking about his multibillionaire political backers.

 

[The Dude]

Obama the supply-sider

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Looks like the Republican oligarchs may be caving.


Republicans have agreed to revenue increases as part of a deficit reduction package, Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said Wednesday night.






http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/depending-on-your-point-o_n_892263.html

 

[Rationalist]

Obviously, we need more revenue to close the deficit. Nobody denies that. Do you believe raising taxes is the only way to increase revenue?

^ Still waiting for an answer...

 

[Bonestorm]

Obviously, we need more revenue to close the deficit. Nobody denies that. Do you believe raising taxes is the only way to increase revenue?

Are you asking about raising tax rates or raising taxes? They are two different things. No, raising tax rates is not the only way to increase revenue. And raising taxes is not the only way to increase revenues. You could do other things like increase user fees and the like, but the most effective way to meaningfully increase revenues is to either increase tax rates or increase taxes.

 

[Rationalist]

Are you asking about raising tax rates or raising taxes? They are two different things. No, raising tax rates is not the only way to increase revenue. And raising taxes is not the only way to increase revenues. You could do other things like increase user fees and the like, but the most effective way to meaningfully increase revenues is to either increase tax rates or increase taxes.

Wow... I am speechless.

Here's a thought: how about we reduce burdensome regulation and cut the corporate tax (one of the highest in the world, I might add) and make the USA an overall better place to do business. This would result in economic growth, which would increase revenue via the existing tax structure. Did that thought ever enter your mind?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Dolt, you are never speechless.



Brainless, yes.


Witless, check.


Humorless, absolutely.


I don't suppose it's occurred to you that with a bit more 'burdensome' regulation the realty/credit meltdown may have been avoided.


The USA has the second highest corporate tax rates in the world....trouble is, it also has more loopholes than a sieve.


A GAO study released in 2008 found that 55 percent of United States companies paid no federal income taxes during at least one year in a seven-year period it studied.




http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/business/economy/03rates.html?_r=1

 

[Bonestorm]

Wow... I am speechless.

Here's a thought: how about we reduce burdensome regulation and cut the corporate tax (one of the highest in the world, I might add) and make the USA an overall better place to do business. This would result in economic growth, which would increase revenue via the existing tax structure. Did that thought ever enter your mind?

If we could magically increase economic activity without any meaningful impact on consumers, the environment, etc . . . by cutting regulations and cutting the corporate tax rate, I'd be all for it, but it just isn't that easy. The fact of the matter is that corporate profits are soaring, business investment is growing substantially but economic growth remains anemic largely due to decreased consumer activity. It isn't as though suddenly cutting regulations and cutting corporate tax rates would result in robust economic growth and increased tax receipts. "Burdensome regulations" and high corporate taxes aren't the main driver behind low GDP growth.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Corporate taxes accounted for about 9 percent of all federal revenue in 2010...






http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/business/economy/03rates.html?_r=1

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Wow... I am speechless.

Here's a thought: how about we reduce burdensome regulation and cut the corporate tax (one of the highest in the world, I might add) and make the USA an overall better place to do business. This would result in economic growth, which would increase revenue via the existing tax structure. Did that thought ever enter your mind?

Man Brent....it's amazing how stupid you can be. I mean don't you learn from anything? We just had the nation about bankrupted by a bunch of greedy Wall Street bankers due to de-regulation.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Man Brent....it's amazing how stupid you can be. I mean don't you learn from anything? We just had the nation about bankrupted by a bunch of greedy Wall Street bankers due to de-regulation.

Yes, we should take Clinton's head off for that collassal mistake and we should vote Obama out of office for failing to correct that error and leaving us exposed.

Side note moron.... we now have MORE regulation (in terms of quantity) of the banking industry, higher costs of that regulation, new government agencies to handle the new regulations.... yet we are LESS protected from what happened reoccurring than if the idiots in DC had simply put Glass Steagall back in place.

Side note 2 moron..... you can REDUCE BURDENSOME meaningless regulations WITHOUT DE-regulating the industry as a whole you friggin moron.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Yes, we should take Clinton's head off for that collassal mistake and we should vote Obama out of office for failing to correct that error and leaving us exposed. Side note moron.... we now have MORE regulation (in terms of quantity) of the banking industry, higher costs of that regulation, new government agencies to handle the new regulations.... yet we are LESS protected from what happened reoccurring than if the idiots in DC had simply put Glass Steagall back in place. Side note 2 moron..... you can REDUCE BURDENSOME meaningless regulations WITHOUT DE-regulating the industry as a whole you friggin moron.

Care to explain?

 

[Rationalist]

Man Brent....it's amazing how stupid you can be. I mean don't you learn from anything? We just had the nation about bankrupted by a bunch of greedy Wall Street bankers due to de-regulation.

Regulation of Wall Street is not the only sort of regulation. That is not to what I was referring. What I am proposing is that we should review existing regulations on business to determine whether they make sense. Even Obama agrees with that.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ation-review-to-boost-growth-wsj-reports.html

Unfortunately, Obama's talk was exactly that: just talk.