| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Bush-era tax cuts | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 17 2012, 07:12 AM (342 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Oct 17 2012, 11:07 AM Post #11 |
|
Deleted User
|
so you are saying employment went up in 2009 under Obama |
|
|
| Neutral | Oct 17 2012, 11:08 AM Post #12 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OMG Capps. |
![]() |
|
| Berton | Oct 17 2012, 11:12 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, it obviously did not. Obamas policies did not allow that to happen. |
![]() |
|
| tomdrobin | Oct 17 2012, 11:18 AM Post #14 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire. In fact it was irresponsible to have passed them when they were spending like drunken sailors. Of course the argument is tax cuts stimulate the economy and increase revenue, but the evidence to support that is pretty shaky. The truth is the stimulus effect is insufficient to overcome the lost revenue. I think all the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire not just for the wealthy. We shouldn't have 47% of filers with no tax liability after deductions. And, then we should raise the top rate to about 50% until we get the deficit under control. |
![]() |
|
| Berton | Oct 17 2012, 11:20 AM Post #15 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Note that the unemployment rate did go down which means more people were working and paying taxes they were not paying before. Would you be willing to go back to the same deductions we had when we had higher tax rates? |
![]() |
|
| tomdrobin | Oct 17 2012, 11:30 AM Post #16 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No. I would minimize deductions, even for dependants. Why should the taxpayers subisidize breeding. Back in the Clinton era they eliminated non mortgage loan interest. Perhaps the loan mortgage deduction should go to. |
![]() |
|
| Berton | Oct 17 2012, 11:33 AM Post #17 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So your opinion is that more taxes = more private industry jobs. |
![]() |
|
| tomdrobin | Oct 17 2012, 11:56 AM Post #18 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, my opinion is more spending drives demand, which in turn creates more private industry jobs. You finance that spending by increasing taxes on the wealthy. That does two things. It creates demand, and the redistribution corrects the out of whack wealth distribution. It has worked in the past. Now, I'm not calling for just mailing out more welfare checks. Spend it on infrastructure, education, technology. Any spending stimulates demand, but spending on the right things improves the country. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)


3:25 AM Jul 12
