Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
101 online now:
Michael MD, nwr, PaulK, xongsmith (4 members, 97 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 893,980 Year: 5,092/6,534 Month: 512/794 Week: 3/135 Day: 3/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   United States Debt Default
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 1141 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 20 of 211 (624117)
07-16-2011 4:42 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Jon
07-15-2011 6:46 PM


Jon writes:

quote:
What would that do to the poor people who currently pay no taxes?

Huh? Did the sales tax suddenly not become a tax? Payroll taxes suddenly stopped being taxes?

The poor pay taxes. What they don't pay is income tax. This is why a "national sales tax" in lieu of an income tax is so stupid: Poor people will wind up paying more in taxes because their money is all spent on consumption (food, utilities, gasoline, etc.) which will now all be taxed at a higher rate.

Let us not forget, we were running surpluses at the end of the millennium. The vast majority of our current debt can be contributed to two things: Bush's tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is why there was that talk not too long ago about "doing nothing" with regard to the budget. Simply letting all that expire, going back to Clinton-era tax rates and military spending, we'd make huge dents in our debt.

Personally? I say go back even further...repeal the Reagan tax cuts.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Jon, posted 07-15-2011 6:46 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Jon, posted 07-16-2011 1:27 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 1141 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 33 of 211 (624237)
07-16-2011 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Jon
07-16-2011 1:27 PM


Jon responds to me:

quote:
quote:

Personally? I say go back even further...repeal the Reagan tax cuts.

The graph from Message 15 would certainly seem to support that sentiment.


Here's a better view:

The economic downturn has been a problem, yes. We'd still have a problem with unemployment, but we'd have much more money to help such as government investment in infrastructure, development of new technologies, extending the social safety net so that the long-term unemployed don't become completely unemployable (if you've been out of work for a year, employers no longer want to hire you.)

Cutting taxes does not create jobs. It never has:

In previous times when taxes were higher on the upper classes and businesses, employment was more fluid: Businesses took profits and put them back into the company in order to avoid having to pay those taxes. But as the tax rates on companies became lower and lower, as paying out dividends became less and less of a tax burden, those profits left the company and went into the pockets of the rich.

Companies aren't hiring because there isn't any demand. There isn't any demand because there aren't any jobs. There aren't any jobs because there's no reason for the companies to provide them. This is unsustainable.


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Jon, posted 07-16-2011 1:27 PM Jon has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022