The govt. doesn't need more revenue. They need to stop spending. And yes it is too much to ask for. How about you give another 2%. How about people that pay zero pay $5. Stealing from one person to give to another is morally wrong. Tax cuts are good. Wars are bad. Entitlements drain the system.
the government needs to do both: raise revenue and slow spending. no serious economist would dispute this. only ideologues believe that a balanced budget can be attained through spending cuts alone; at least not in a modern society. another 2-3% is not too much to ask for. and, yes, I will be among those effected by the increase so please spare me the "woe is me" story about how such a modest increase is going to break the bank because I know better. tax rates are at historic low levels. in fact, rates have not been this low in almost ninety years so some increase is in order. laissez faire capitalism doesn't work any better than socialism.
This is true for some things and not for others. Using your logic the mortgage interest deduction is a subsidy. Some of the so called tax subsidies are true subsidies where money is distributed from the collective to an individual or entity (earned income credit). Some are not (oil and gas subsidies). The term is then widely misunderstood by people who can only concentrate on minutia. Ther terminology is different, but essentially yes. It is pretty much the depreciation of an asset over the life of said asset. Again, different terminology, but in line with costs of goods sold accounting. What you fail to see is there is nothing substantively different in the accounting theory applied. Just the terms change for the different models. Why are you so mad that oil and gas companies make money? And you continue to argue from a flawed premise. Oil and gas companies did not collect money from the tax provisions. These provisions allowed them to keep more of the money they earned in conducting their business. How is keeping your own money a subsidy?
When you take subsidies from the government, you are not keeping your own money. No one is fooled by semantics here. Yes, a mortgage deduction is a subsidy, too. Such loopholes must go if everyone is to pay taxes.
I don't speak for Red but I am curious to understand your logic better, Supa. At a time when we are looking to cut spending why shouldn't the subsidies that we give to oil and gas companies be on the table? I think everyone realizes that we are capitalists and that the point of any business is to make money. That said, if we can't take an honest look at things like said subsidies then what the hell are we doing?
The problem is the democrats aren't taking cutting seriously. Can you tell me what 2-3% to rates adds to revenue NC?
50% of the population doesn't pay income taxes because they have very little income to tax. So you can certainly do this, but then that would put more people below the poverty level and increase the number of people eligible for social benefits, right when people are wanting them cut. This position completely ignores the stagnation of middle class wages and increase in middle class productivity over the past two decades while the cost of living has increased. It also ignores the fact that a large portion of the 50% are people who have already spent their entire lives paying into the social system and now it's time for them to get back what they put into it. A very small percentage of that number are people abusing the system and it's unbelievably ignorant for people to keep throwing that number out there as if it's something bad. Now I don't have a problem with the upper class making more money. I do have a problem with them gaming the system and shipping jobs overseas and out of the hands of the middle class to do it and then refusing to pay back into the problem they created. Their current tax rates are ridiculously low and if that issue doesn't get fixed now, any gains made in the next few months will be for nothing in the long term. The problem that I have with tax cuts right now is that it will be at the expense of social programs that are needed right now with so many people out of work. These programs are needed right now to bridge the gap until employment catches up. When it does, that will be the time to trim spending. Right now, cutting spending in these areas doesn't help anyone. Personally, I think Obama should left them expire. The GOP has lost touch with the middle class. When the tax cuts expire, tax revenue increases. It increases on everyone, but at least it increases without massive cuts to social programs. After that it's a PR battle for who is to blame. That's when we'll see if Obama learned anything from his first term mistakes.
roughly 400 billion over the next decade. closing loopholes and deductions should raise around 800 billion more for a grand total of 1.2 trillion over the next decade.
So how many jobs does this add? Because no matter how much you raise taxes, if we do t grow the economy, what's the point? Also, why aren't more people pissed Obama is giving us a 15 year recovery plan just to be pre-2008?
