Welcome to PatsFans.com

Budget deal savings less than advertised

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by The Brandon Five, Apr 14, 2011.

  1. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,558
    Likes Received:
    70
    Ratings:
    +218 / 0 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    "You know, I do believe this ship may sink." - Spicer Lovejoy in Titanic

    NationalJournal.com - CBO Says Budget Deal Will Cut Spending by Only $352 Million - Wednesday, April 13, 2011

    Coupled with the performance this afternoon by the POTUS, I am beginning to lose hope.
  2. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,548
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    More kabuki theater......... This time from the repubs....
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13

    Watch to see if the 'Tea Party' congresspersons vote against this joke.


    Boehner is a clown along with Cantor.


    Obama and his 'plan' is business as usual and is a disaster for the country. Wonder if he is smart enough to know this or is he really stupid?
  4. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    Nice. The Republicans really got punked.

    Obama's plan, while not perfect, is still head-and-shoulders about Ryan's "plan." And by "plan" I mean Grover Norquist's wet dream. Glad to see the POTUS telling it like it is yesterday.
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13

    Agree Boehner got punked, concerning since the country is in trouble due to overwhelming debt not sure how Obama's more of the same/smoke and mirrors game er plan is better than Ryan. Obama's plan guarantees disaster.

    Of course when he took he said that the debt would e halved in 2 years, epic fail there and of course the employment picture painted when he took office has been shown to be a massive failure.
  6. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    At least Obama is intellectually honest enough to admit that taxes are needed in addition to spending cuts to close the gap.

    Meanwhile Ryan simply cuts costs by shifting them to the consumer (Medicare) or the states (Medicaid), all so that he can cut taxes even more for the wealthiest Americans.

    As Obama said, Ryan's plan is not serious. It's simply a vehicle for enacting the Republican's vision for America. Which is not the America that we know and cherish.
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13

    He is talking about raising rates not the same as raising revenues. Neither on you seem to understand the difference. He is not honest enough to admit the programs cannot continue as they are or that his Obamacare plan will will explode the deficit.

    BY the way if he is so concerned about the deficit and debt why did he outline a roadmap to congress a couple of months ago that promised 1T+ debts as far as the eye can see.
  8. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire on the top earners will raise revenues. I'm not even sure what you're arguing here.

    One more time in English, please?

    You might have a point if Obama's plan were, in fact, to allow the programs to continue as they are.

    According to whom?

    1T+ debts? Do you mean deficits?

    Even Ryan's plan increases the deficits for ~10 years. Fact is, this gap isn't getting closed anytime soon.

    The "debt crisis" itself is a bit overstated, at least in terms of what is actually necessary to ameliorate the situation.
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13



    No people (ie 'the rich') will defer income and move their assets into non taxable investment. If there is less $$$$$ abailable for investment there is less economic growth. Smaller economy = less revenue.



    Sure the economy isn't a linear system. If you double tax rates you don't double income. Because the amount of money the government takes from individuals affects their economic behavior. If you taxed the rich at 100% do you think they would continue to work and earn $$$$ to turn it all over to the government?

    As an example. When the capital gains tax rates were dropped by Bush (and in other cases when cap gains rates were lowered) the amount of revenue increased because choose to take the capital gains and reinvest them.



    Both the deficits add to the debt. We are on track to have a debt >100% of GDP, with unfunded liabilities of over 130T (~ twice the assets of the USA public and private).




    Sadly after the Pelosi/Reid spending binge you are correct. For fy2006 the last year before the dems took congress and Pelosi became speaker the deficit deficit was 160B way too much IMO, last month the deficit 188B, in Feb we ran a 226B deficit.


    The dems have been a total disaster and it ain't getting any better.

    More of the same is going to fail.
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  10. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13

    BTW Jack when the Fed has to raise interest rates (check the failures of the last few Fed Bond auctions) see what happens to the deficit and debt when the higher rates hit the interest payments on the debt. We are screwed.
  11. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,558
    Likes Received:
    70
    Ratings:
    +218 / 0 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I think he is referring to the Hauser effect or Hauser's law, which is the idea that the amount of revenue that can be raised is bound between ~15% and ~20% of GDP regardless of marginal rates. I don't think we are at the upper end of that range right now and actually were below the historic range in 2008-2009 so it may be that an increase in rates will raise revenue. The argument against it is that doing so will slow down the economy or cause changes in behavior (people realize less income and capital gains to avoid the higher taxes) so that while rates increase, revenues stay the same (or even decrease).

    Hauser's Law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,830
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +227 / 8 / -13

    Which is why a Flat Tax at a 17% rate is the most efficient and will grow the economy.
  13. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,092
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +248 / 3 / -4

    Ridiculous that the sides were pretending there differences were so earth-shattering that they would shut down the government over it.

    What was your take on Obama's speech? (didn't watch)
  14. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    A flat tax is regressive. There's a reason we have a progressive tax structure; the economy is most efficient under said conditions.
  15. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,092
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +248 / 3 / -4

    How are you getting to that conclusion?


    Evidence for this?
  16. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    Well, you better get used to it because Obama's re-election looks more and more likely with each passing day :)
  17. JackBauer

    JackBauer On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,085
    Likes Received:
    272
    Ratings:
    +629 / 6 / -18

    Because a sales tax is one of the more regressive taxes and a flat income tax would be similar in nature and effect.

    Not to be glib, but: The United States?

    No, but really. Progressive taxes allow greater disposable income for mid-range earners (i.e. the middle class), which creates the largest base of demand for goods and services.
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  18. chicowalker

    chicowalker On the Roster

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,092
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +248 / 3 / -4

    A sales tax is regressive because the notion of a tax being "regressive" uses income as a base.

    A flat tax should be neither regressive nor progressive, unless certain assumptions are being made about the "flat" tax (expemtions, etc.)


    That may be the case in theory, I'm just wondering if there is empirical support.
  19. Gainzo

    Gainzo Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,179
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    #11 Jersey

    Is that just the Federal tax rate? What about State taxes? Social Security? Medicare?

    Let's say an individual makes $30K a year. Under your flat tax plan their take home pay would be $24,900. Add in the above and they would probably take home around 22K a year or around $1850 a month.

    On the flip side if an individual makes $300K a year they would take home $249,000. Include the other stuff and they are probably looking at taking home around $218k a year or 18,000 a month.

    You have no problem with this?
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2011
  20. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,558
    Likes Received:
    70
    Ratings:
    +218 / 0 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I think the FAIR Tax plan (a flat tax proposal) allows for no Federal tax liability for a family of four making less than $30,000.

    Americans For Fair Taxation: Frequently Asked Questions Answers

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>