Holes in Republican Tax Policy

one set

you have to use one or the other. as long as you use one set of numbers all the time and do not switch back and forth when it is convenient then I see no problem with which set of figures you choose to employ. Regarding the Clinton surplus I will have to disagree with you. The federal budget uses a cash system of accounting, always has. The only way that the Clinton budgets do not run surpluses is if you use an accrual style of accounting, which the federal government has never used.

I don't know what chart you are looking at but the deficit grew exponentially as soon as the tax cuts took effect.

they don't. they make projections that are used by both parties. that said, they make projections based on key economic indicators and the current path of revenues and spending and the growth of gdp. I don't know what else we are supposed to base our figures on.

All of this is true in the fairy land that supply side economics resides in. The problem is that this is a failed system of economics.

 

this is a very misleading statement and you know it. You are smart enough to know that Obama has had no choice but to extend the Bush tax cuts. And in fact, Obama has ended the war in Iraq, has reduced the federal budget deficit, has added 10 years of solvency to medicare while extending medical insurance to 30 million additional people who otherwise would not have it and did it without scrapping the current medical system. Stop trying to blame Obama for the shit storm that the Republicans and GWB created. Obama didn't cause this mess and you know it.

Obama has by no means been perfect but I'll take his steady handed leadership over anything that the radical Republicans can find.

 

Which part is misleading? Did he not further cut taxes with the "Making Work Pay" credit? Did he not cut payroll taxes? Has he not continured to run up massive spending increases? Has he not thrown more massive big dollar programs on top of an already ballooned budget? Exactly which part is misleading?

Yes he has reduced his supersized budget deficits which were tripple the biggest budget deficit ever run. We are no where near the deficit size he promised in 2008, and there is no roadmap to even get there.

Debateable, and at tremendous cost. Congress has already stripped away the 1099 requirements that were supposed to cover a quarter of Obamacare's cost. So we went from budget neutral based on a scoring using biased numbers to an additional 250 billion dollars in deficit using those samed biased numbers.

Obama continued to cut taxes and increase spending. I am holding him accountable for that. He signed the making work pay credit into law. He signed the bill that extended the Bush tax cuts. He signed the bill that allowed the estate tax and gift tax to go away temporarily. Republicans are not without blame in any of this, but the Democrats have been as terrible in all of this and probably a little worse.

And he sure as shit didnt fix it.

What leadership? Harry Truman was a leader. He dealt with the issues caused by FDR by saying the buck stops here. Obama's slogan has been the buck stopped with Bush. A leader accepts responsibility and moves forward. With Obama it has been nothing but looking backwards.

 

The entire post was misleading. It's not like Obama hasn't tried to raise taxes where they need to be raised: on those making over X amount, but he hasn't gotten the least bit of cooperation from congress. Before you say, "He had a democratic house and senate during his first two years," also keep in mind that when he took office we were shedding 750,000 jobs a month. Only after the stimulus did we start creating jobs again. Because of the depth of the shit mess that he inherited he had no choice but to leave taxes alone until the economy gained some....any....sense of stability.

As I recall there was a huge debate last summer about reducing the deficit and debt with a "Grand Bargain" that Boehner had to walk away from because the ideologues from the Tea Party wouldn't accept even the least little tax increases.

It's not debateable. Look at the CBO scoring of Obamacare and you will see that they very clearly state that the medicare savings that Romney and Ryan like to campaign against even though it is also a part of their budget, will extend the life of medicare by 10 years. Their words not mine. Also, I have already shown you proof in another thread that the 1099 requirements you are talking about were repealed last year. You are just looking for something to bitch about now.

Aside from the stimulus, which everyone agreed was necessary....and worked....name one area where Obama has increased spending. and you better not say Obamacare because the CBO scored it as a 131 billion dollar savings over the next 10 years.

No one could have. This is part of the stupidity of the Republican argument right now. To insinuate that any other person could have fixed this fucking mess in four measly years doesn't have a clue or a calculator.

Truman had nothing to clean up after FDR. The cleaning up came from spending that was incurred in order to win WW2. Leadership is knowing the facts, as you obviously do not, and reacting to those facts in a rational and sensible manner....something Republicans have a hard time with right now.

 

You proved that (1)Clinton ran a surplus adjusted for inflation and (2) that Clinton ran a surplus by the same accounting scheme that any other president did. What you did not prove was that Clinton ran a surplus. When you run a surplus, it means you take in more money than you spend. Clinton didn't do that. Debt went up. That's the end of the debate.

Did you read it?

 

Shrug. If you're going to claim a surplus, it may do the government good to get a dictionary. A surplus means you take in more than you spend. Clinton did not do that.

Okay, well let's test something then.

If you tax at 100%, do you think you'll get 100% of everyone's income?

 

Of course I can. The treasury's own numbers show that debt went up, and debt doesn't go up unless you're running a deficit.

No, it's been explained to you a hundred times. When the national debt goes up, it can only mean that the budget was running a deficit. If I take in $10 and spend $12, I went into debt for $2. I'm sure you have no intention of opening the debate as long as I concede the point, and that's not happening. I can't bring myself to disagree with the dictionary.

 

Clinton ran a surplus regardless of how you want to spin it. Once more we have a situation where the Republicans choose to employ a different method for accounting or registering in order to make the numbers match their narrative.

Of course you will not get 100% of everyone'e income and it's dumb to even insinuate it. that said, we are currently too low on your precious laffer curve and need to raise the top marginal rate to around 40% and the capital gains tax to 25%.