Discussion: Health And Healthcare II

[dnno1]

Im all for suspending any tax cuts across the board for at least 2-4 years

I am sure that is not what you mean. I think you meant continuing tax cuts across the boards for at least 2-4 years. I am in favor of continuing it for people making less than $250K only. People making more than that seem to be getting a larger cut by outsourcing their business overseas. That way they avoid having to pay the 35% tax so long as their profits stay offshore. That's more significant than a 4% tax cut.

 

[BlackLantern]

it is EXACTLY what I mean.....and I mean ACROSS THE BOARD....taxes go back up on EVERYONE

 

[chaseter]

Once again, I would like to see a valid economic plan that calls for a tax increase during a recession.

Also, people outsource overseas because their corporate taxes are too high.

 

[BlackLantern]

well tax cuts haven't worked to date so is there some sort of reasonable alternative?

 

[chaseter]

Tax cuts have worked every single time they have been utilized during a recession. After the recession, you have to raise taxes back up, which Bush should have done, and cut down the size of the government, which Bush did do.

Obama for some reason thinks raising taxes and increasing the size of the government is going to fix everything. I don't know where he learned economics from...maybe Bizarro World.

 

[Franklin Richards]

Bush cut down the size of the government?


Department of Homeland Security?

 

[dnno1]

Tax cuts have worked every single time they have been utilized during a recession. After the recession, you have to raise taxes back up, which Bush should have done, and cut down the size of the government, which Bush did do.

Obama for some reason thinks raising taxes and increasing the size of the government is going to fix everything. I don't know where he learned economics from...maybe Bizarro World.

Well, we are still under the Bush tax cuts and we have been in a recession for more than two years now (since 2007). Wasn't it supposed to work? We were not supposed to have a recession. Tax cuts have not worked because they have only lead to recessions. Coolidge cut taxes and we had the Great Depression after that. Regan cut taxes and we had a recession at the end of his administration. Bush cut taxes and we had a recession towards the end of his administration. It seem to me that cutting taxes (especially when it is unregulated) causes recessions or depressions.

 

[chaseter]

Bush cut down the size of the government?


Department of Homeland Security?

http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=228

 

[chaseter]

Well, we are still under the Bush tax cuts and we have been in a recession for more than two years now (since 2007). Wasn't it supposed to work? We were not supposed to have a recession. Tax cuts have not worked because they have only lead to recessions. Coolidge cut taxes and we had the Great Depression after that. Regan cut taxes and we had a recession at the end of his administration. Bush cut taxes and we had a recession towards the end of his administration. It seem to me that cutting taxes (especially when it is unregulated) causes recessions or depressions.

Bush cut taxes with the burst of the dotcom bubble in the early 2000s. We had a recession then. His tax cuts worked and we saw economic growth until the housing bubble burst and the banking crisis of 2007. Bush had unemployment down to 4%, His tax cuts were to help the 2000-2001 recession, not the 2007-current recession. Bush's tax cuts did exactly what they were supposed to do.

 

[StorminNorman]

it is EXACTLY what I mean.....and I mean ACROSS THE BOARD....taxes go back up on EVERYONE

That would generate less personal savings, further stifle job creation and ensure a stagnant economy.

Once again, I would like to see a valid economic plan that calls for a tax increase during a recession.

Also, people outsource overseas because their corporate taxes are too high.

The question isn't increasing or decreasing taxes, but changing them fundamentally.

well tax cuts haven't worked to date so is there some sort of reasonable alternative?

FairTax

Tax cuts have worked every single time they have been utilized during a recession. After the recession, you have to raise taxes back up, which Bush should have done, and cut down the size of the government, which Bush did do.

Obama for some reason thinks raising taxes and increasing the size of the government is going to fix everything. I don't know where he learned economics from...maybe Bizarro World.

Bush did not cut the size of government. Neither did Reagan. Reagan didn't even cut taxes, he cut income taxes and then increased social security taxes (which of course effected the lower income families in a greater way).

The answer is to stop with income tax and move to the FairTax. Remove corporate taxes entirely and move to dismantle agencies like the FDA that serve to increase the cost of entry into business as well as increasing prices for consumers.

 

[BlackLantern]

FairTax aint happening this generation....too many people in the upper ecehlon benefit from the current system

 

[StorminNorman]

This is the generation that changes that. The Tea Party is going to reform taxes and the FairTax makes the most sense.

 

[BlackLantern]

and then roll society back into the 50s.....guess I have the fire hose to look forward to

 

[StorminNorman]

I didn't know they had the FairTax in the 50's.

I hope you wouldn't fall for the "conservative is inherently racist" card. For example, in spite of slavery the South was correct on the Constitution. In spite of America being a slave country when it was created, it was still founded upon the wonderful foundations of liberty.

 

[BlackLantern]

liberty for who exactly?? I know its 2010 and great strides have been made and bla bla bla, but I still am and always have been playing from behind, as are many black people in this country

 

[Kelly]

I agree BL, as a woman I can say the same thing. I am lucky that I am in a career where there is little if any gender discrimination in salary. EXCEPT, in the area of coaching......and since I don't coach anymore, it doesn't impact me as much.

 

[chaseter]

Bush did not cut the size of government. Neither did Reagan. Reagan didn't even cut taxes, he cut income taxes and then increased social security taxes (which of course effected the lower income families in a greater way).

The answer is to stop with income tax and move to the FairTax. Remove corporate taxes entirely and move to dismantle agencies like the FDA that serve to increase the cost of entry into business as well as increasing prices for consumers.

Yes he did Look at the link I posted.

Please quit answering everything with Fairtax. My girlfriend wants to get an abortion...what should I do? Fairtax. My house was destroyed by a tornado, what do I do? Fairtax. I am looking to get a degree, where should I start? Fairtax.

 

[StorminNorman]

liberty for who exactly?? I know its 2010 and great strides have been made and bla bla bla, but I still am and always have been playing from behind, as are many black people in this country

I agree BL, as a woman I can say the same thing. I am lucky that I am in a career where there is little if any gender discrimination in salary. EXCEPT, in the area of coaching......and since I don't coach anymore, it doesn't impact me as much.

The answer is to treat everyone the same. The government shouldn't act any different for you than it does for me or it does for Kel. I have placed a tremendous emphasis on my scholarship on Civil Rights, I recommend reading Thomas Sowell.

The reality is that the black community was prospering before the gigantic increase in social welfare in the 60's. Black were marrying at a higher rate than white families and were increasing their revenue at higher rates than white families. Government intervention has crippled the black community with the culture of welfare in the inner cities and perpetuating the notion that they are dependent upon government for improving their lot in life.

Black communities benefit from the FairTax as much as whites do. They benefit from the jobs it creates, the benefit from the less complicated system and they benefit from the increased revenue flowing into their government .

 

[StorminNorman]

Yes he did Look at the link I posted.

Look at government spending during Bush's term. Defining the "size of government" by employee numbers instead of government spending (i.e. portion of the economy) or extension of powers (Patriot Act, Department of Homeland Secutiy, etc.) is a ridiculous argument

Please quit answering everything with Fairtax. My girlfriend wants to get an abortion...what should I do? Fairtax. My house was destroyed by a tornado, what do I do? Fairtax. I am looking to get a degree, where should I start? Fairtax.

And this is simply sophomoric.

The FairTax is a viable solution to the economy and no one has presented an alternative. When the economy is the number one issue, the FairTax deserves to my attention.

 

[chaseter]

Fairtax itself is not the cure all. It also needs reform. While it does have some good ideas, that is like saying we need HCR to fix the problem with insurance companies.

Size of the government means size...not spending. Creating 100,000 new government jobs like Obama did isn't a ridiculous argument but of course decreasing 100,000 government jobs is. I thought you were for decreased government!

It is sophomoric to take debate points and instead of debating them, saying Fairtax would fix this. No, no it wouldn't fix everything.

 

[StorminNorman]

Fairtax itself is not the cure all. It also needs reform. While it does have some good ideas, that is like saying we need HCR to fix the problem with insurance companies.

Size of the government means size...not spending. Creating 100,000 new government jobs like Obama did isn't a ridiculous argument but of course decreasing 100,000 government jobs is. I thought you were for decreased government!

It is sophomoric to take debate points and instead of debating them, saying Fairtax would fix this. No, no it wouldn't fix everything.

Explain what the FairTax doesn't do that I have claimed it will.

Will the FairTax create jobs? Yes.
Will the FairTax improve the lives of every tax paying American by decreasing the complication of paying taxes? Yes.
Will the FairTax increase government revenue? Yes.
Will the FairTax improve Washington by removing the government's ability to tax businesses (thus decreasing the utility of lobbyists)? Yes.
Will the FairTax generate confidence in "small government" reforms that can jump start an entire anti-New Deal era of Federal policy? Absolutely if it does the above.

 

[dnno1]

Bush cut taxes with the burst of the dotcom bubble in the early 2000s. We had a recession then. His tax cuts worked and we saw economic growth until the housing bubble burst and the banking crisis of 2007. Bush had unemployment down to 4%, His tax cuts were to help the 2000-2001 recession, not the 2007-current recession. Bush's tax cuts did exactly what they were supposed to do.

One could argue that the Dot-com bubble burst as a result of the multiple interest rate increases levied by the Federal Reserve in the space of a year. This caused the economy to lose speed between 1999 and 2000 and resulted in the Dot-com bust. It was the action of the Feds to lower interest rates to stimulate people to take loans and bring us out of the recession in 2001 (just think about it, you could borrow a lot more than any tax cut would give you). The net effect was that the tax cuts did nothing to stop the Great Recession from happening nor get us out of it (the lowering of interest rates were more significant).

 

[StorminNorman]

Artificially lowering interests rates is what caused the Great Recession.

 

[dnno1]

Explain what the FairTax doesn't do that I have claimed it will.

Will the FairTax create jobs? Yes.
Will the FairTax improve the lives of every tax paying American by decreasing the complication of paying taxes? Yes.
Will the FairTax increase government revenue? Yes.
Will the FairTax improve Washington by removing the government's ability to tax businesses (thus decreasing the utility of lobbyists)? Yes.
Will the FairTax generate confidence in "small government" reforms that can jump start an entire anti-New Deal era of Federal policy? Absolutely if it does the above.

That would probably require a Constitutional Amendment and a repeal of the 16th Amendment. I don't know if that will happen. Also, I don't like the idea of buying a house for $500,000 and having to pay $115,000 in taxes for it (that is not including any State taxes).

 

[StorminNorman]

That would probably require a Constitutional Amendment and a repeal of the 16th Amendment. I don't know if that will happen. Also, I don't like the idea of buying a house for $500,000 and having to pay $115,000 in taxes for it (that is not including any State taxes).

It would not require a Constitutional Amendment - though I am all for repealing the 16th Amendment. In fact I favor using the third form of Constitutional Amendment:

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html

I believe this to be the ultimate purpose of the Tea Party.

Here is a link regarding the FairTax and Home Ownership:

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PromotingHomeOwnership.pdf