Merged Credit downgrade threads

[masquerade]

So we were downgraded because we spend too much. Does this really shock anyone?

It's still Bush's fault.

 

[Toro]

LOL, I don't think anybody's going to get a mandate to cut SS, Medicare, and Defense spending. But that is precisely what needs to happen, and I don't think raising taxes is going to make much of a difference. The CBO says that allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire on the wealthy nets you about 70-80 billion a year. So, at 75-25 you cut 3 times that, or around 210-240 billion. But our deficits are running at 1.5-1.6 trillion a year, so you knock off say 300 billion but you still got 1.2 trillion to go. We are not going to get out of this hole by running annual deficits that are near or over a trillion bucks a year. And here's the kicker - when you raise the top tax rates you discourage investment in this country, not only from US investors but also foreign investors coming in. They go elsewhere, and our economy does nothing. That isn't ideology talking, that's reality. Money flows to wherever it makes the best return.

If you only cut spending by say 225 trillion, you haven't really addressed the underlying problem we have, which is the entitlements. There's no getting around it, you can trim around the edges and use all kinds of accounting tricks, but those programs are going bust and must be reformed. And no amount of tax hikes is going to change that. Wehave a spending problem, we're spending too much and wasting a lot of it. Talk to me about raising taxes after the gov't starts spending our money more wisely.

The CBO has estimated that the extension of the Bush tax cuts will increase the accumulated debt by $3.5 trillion a year over the next decade. Of that, $3 trillion is directly related to the tax cuts and $500 billion is due to interest on the tax revenues foregone. Thus, the Bush tax cuts cost the Treasury about $300 billion a year.

I think we should cut corporate tax rates and close a bunch of loopholes. The corporate tax regime is bizarre, to say the least.

I also think we have to reform entitlements. I have argued for a long time that we should raise the retirement age, claw back SS income for those at the top, and invest SS like a real pension fund. But the real problem will be in Medicare. We have to find a way to shift costs away from the government. That's the real problem. There are lots of things I'd also cut.

But we in Canada raised tax rates to help close the deficit, and it never effected foreign investment, and Canadians then had a much higher rate of tax than Americans do today. Canada today is BOOMING! So the idea that raising any tax at all is always bad is a canard not grounded in reality.

We heard the same thing in the early 90s when Clinton raised taxes. When I was a young pup just starting out, I can't tell you how many people in the finance community were telling me what a disaster the tax increases were, and how money was going to flow out of America. America wound up having the opposite problem, having too much capital flowing into the country, creating a Tech Bubble.

You also have to differentiate between structural and cyclical deficits. Today's massive deficits aren't because of any new programs the government has instituted over the past two or so years. It is because we are in a weak economy, caused by the implosion of a massive asset bubble. The structural deficit is about half the current deficit, or $700-$800 billion. That's bad enough, for sure, but it is not too difficult to find $200 billion in tax revenues. Finding $600 billion in spending cuts will hurt some more, but it can be done. By some estimates, spending will fall by about $200 billion from the ending of the wars. So you are looking at $400 billion. If you want to say from there, $150 billion in tax increases and $450 billion in spending cuts, OK, I'd think that was fine.

 

[Ravi]

Anyone who believes there should be higher taxes should be taxed at least 10% more than they currently pay...

I've found that most people who are for higher taxes are for other people to pay them...

The government takes in enough - it needs to learn how to live within that...

I would be willing to be taxed at the rate I was taxed under Clinton.

I have no problem sacrificing for my country, because in the end, it benefits me.

then write them a check.

I'd be happy to. Unfortunately, my entire income wouldn't put a dent in the national debt. But if we all go back to Clinton era taxes, the debt would be reduced.

I'm willing, but apparently you partisan hacks aren't.

Yeah, yeah, you want to raise everyone's taxes except your own.

 

[Ravi]

Anyone who believes there should be higher taxes should be taxed at least 10% more than they currently pay...

I've found that most people who are for higher taxes are for other people to pay them...

The government takes in enough - it needs to learn how to live within that...

I would be willing to be taxed at the rate I was taxed under Clinton.

I have no problem sacrificing for my country, because in the end, it benefits me.

You do know you can send in more than you owe now, don't you?

You do know that if you're owed a refund on your taxes, you can change that amount to zero, right?

Do you do these things now?

You can, you know...

Yes, I know that. And as I said, my entire income would make no difference at all.

But thanks for being the idiot you always are.

 

[BoycottTheday]

You want me to pay more taxes? Stop wasting money then i might, otherwise, not one more penny.

 

[Neotrotsky]

The left has raised spending to 25% of GDP
while the historical has always been around 19-20%

I'm willing to lower spending to it's normal rates
but apparently the partisan hacks are not

 

[Ravi]

The Following User Says Thank You to Dr.House For This Useful Post:
Annie (Today)

I have to laugh at that. Here is a woman that has admitted that she survived because of handouts from the government, ie, money paid to her because she had more kids than she could afford as a single woman.

But that's okay, because she's a "conservative" that wouldn't bat an eye at cutting off the same benefit to a black woman with more kids than she could afford.

 

[Neotrotsky]

The Following User Says Thank You to Dr.House For This Useful Post:
Annie (Today)

I have to laugh at that. Here is a woman that has admitted that she survived because of handouts from the government, ie, money paid to her because she had more kids than she could afford as a single woman.

But that's okay, because she's a "conservative" that wouldn't bat an eye at cutting off the same benefit to a black woman with more kids than she could afford.

black women with kids

Did she actually say that?

 

[Wiseacre]

LOL, I don't think anybody's going to get a mandate to cut SS, Medicare, and Defense spending. But that is precisely what needs to happen, and I don't think raising taxes is going to make much of a difference. The CBO says that allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire on the wealthy nets you about 70-80 billion a year. So, at 75-25 you cut 3 times that, or around 210-240 billion. But our deficits are running at 1.5-1.6 trillion a year, so you knock off say 300 billion but you still got 1.2 trillion to go. We are not going to get out of this hole by running annual deficits that are near or over a trillion bucks a year. And here's the kicker - when you raise the top tax rates you discourage investment in this country, not only from US investors but also foreign investors coming in. They go elsewhere, and our economy does nothing. That isn't ideology talking, that's reality. Money flows to wherever it makes the best return.

If you only cut spending by say 225 trillion, you haven't really addressed the underlying problem we have, which is the entitlements. There's no getting around it, you can trim around the edges and use all kinds of accounting tricks, but those programs are going bust and must be reformed. And no amount of tax hikes is going to change that. Wehave a spending problem, we're spending too much and wasting a lot of it. Talk to me about raising taxes after the gov't starts spending our money more wisely.

The CBO has estimated that the extension of the Bush tax cuts will increase the accumulated debt by $3.5 trillion a year over the next decade. Of that, $3 trillion is directly related to the tax cuts and $500 billion is due to interest on the tax revenues foregone. Thus, the Bush tax cuts cost the Treasury about $300 billion a year.

Yeah, but you're talking about the entire tax cuts, you really think there wouldn't be a serious negative impact to the economy? Aside from the fact that no politician in his right mind would propose it or vote for it.

I think we should cut corporate tax rates and close a bunch of loopholes. The corporate tax regime is bizarre, to say the least.

No kiddin'. Right with you here.

I also think we have to reform entitlements. I have argued for a long time that we should raise the retirement rates, claw back SS income for those at the top, and invest SS like a real pension fund. But the real problem will be in Medicare. We have to find a way to shift costs away from the government. That's the real problem. There are lots of things I'd also cut.

But we in Canada raised tax rates to help close the deficit, and it never effected foreign investment, and Canadians then had a much higher rate of tax than Americans do today. Canada today is BOOMING! So the idea that raising any tax at all is always bad is a canard not grounded in reality.

Well now, back in the early to mid 90s there was a worldwide bullmarket running, debt was nowhere near what is it now and people were seeing their property values rise every year. When I came back from a tour in Germany in 1990 I bought a house for 62k and sold it 6 years later for 102k. Lotta people had wealth in their homes and that mighta influenced the overspending that many people indulged in at the time.

So - a tax hike then was not much of a deterrent then. Dunno how much of a negative it might be today or next year, but I'd say it might be more significant than it was then. I personally don't want to take the chance.

We heard the same thing in the early 90s when Clinton raised taxes. When I was a young pup just starting out, I can't tell you how many people in the finance community were telling me what a disaster the tax increases were, and how money was going to flow out of America. America wound up having the opposite problem, having too much capital flowing into the country, creating a Tech Bubble.

You also have to differentiate between structural and cyclical deficits. Today's massive deficits aren't because of any new programs the government has instituted over the past two or so years. It is because we are in a weak economy, caused by the implosion of a massive asset bubble. The structural deficit is about half the current deficit, or $700-$800 billion. That's bad enough, for sure, but it is not too difficult to find $200 billion in tax revenues. Finding $600 billion in spending cuts will hurt some more, but it can be done. By some estimates, spending will fall by about $200 billion from the ending of the wars. So you are looking at $400 billion. If you want to say from there, $150 billion in tax increases and $450 billion in spending cuts, OK, I'd think that was fine.

Still can't see how you could raise taxes by 150-200 billion a year without hurting the economy. I got no problem with a tax increase a few years down the road if and when the economy gets going and UE drops down to around 7% or so. I think raising taxes now or cutting spending too much in these perilous times would hurt too many people. I see no reason to get crazy about it, let's do it in a sane and rational manner. Yeah sure, that'll happen, LOL.

 

[bripat9643]

black women with kids

Did she actually say that?

And they claim they aren't racists!

 

[Sactowndog]

You also have to differentiate between structural and cyclical deficits. Today's massive deficits aren't because of any new programs the government has instituted over the past two or so years. It is because we are in a weak economy, caused by the implosion of a massive asset bubble. The structural deficit is about half the current deficit, or $700-$800 billion. That's bad enough, for sure, but it is not too difficult to find $200 billion in tax revenues. Finding $600 billion in spending cuts will hurt some more, but it can be done. By some estimates, spending will fall by about $200 billion from the ending of the wars. So you are looking at $400 billion. If you want to say from there, $150 billion in tax increases and $450 billion in spending cuts, OK, I'd think that was fine.

I am not so sure more of it isn't stuctural. The asset bubble masked a deteriorating middle class which has been shrinking at a significant rate over the past 20 years and has accelerated in the last 10. I have worked at the same US multi-national for 25 years and the rate of off-shoring has been unprecedented in the last 5 years.

We have a tax structure highly dependent on the middle class being in place and paying income taxes. It is true the taxes on lower incomes are taxed more lightly and upper incomes are shifting payment into capital gains. As the middle class shrinks it is adding to our revenue problem.

We have a tax structure tilted to serve the wealthy because historically that has generated US jobs. This local linkage is no longer true and if we don't recognize and adjust for this fact we could be in deep shit.

 

[Dr.House]

I would be willing to be taxed at the rate I was taxed under Clinton.

I have no problem sacrificing for my country, because in the end, it benefits me.

You do know you can send in more than you owe now, don't you?

You do know that if you're owed a refund on your taxes, you can change that amount to zero, right?

Do you do these things now?

You can, you know...

Yes, I know that. And as I said, my entire income would make no difference at all.

That's no reason not to... Every little bit helps...

Give what you can...

But thanks for being the idiot you always are.

Awww... Love you too, shnookims...

 

[Sactowndog]

Still can't see how you could raise taxes by 150-200 billion a year without hurting the economy. I got no problem with a tax increase a few years down the road if and when the economy gets going and UE drops down to around 7% or so. I think raising taxes now or cutting spending too much in these perilous times would hurt too many people. I see no reason to get crazy about it, let's do it in a sane and rational manner. Yeah sure, that'll happen, LOL.

Depends on how you raise them.

If I drop Corporate income taxes and raise capital gains taxes equally, I think I help the economy because business can hire more and a significant portion of the capital gains tax would come from overseas investments which would have limited US impact.

If I start a capital export tax then again I raise revenue and don't hurt the US economy because those dollars where leaving the states anyway and won't directly generate US jobs.

The Globalization of the economy does present opportunities to raise taxes without directly impacting the local economy.

 

[Dr.House]

The Following User Says Thank You to Dr.House For This Useful Post:
Annie (Today)

I have to laugh at that. Here is a woman that has admitted that she survived because of handouts from the government, ie, money paid to her because she had more kids than she could afford as a single woman.

But that's okay, because she's a "conservative" that wouldn't bat an eye at cutting off the same benefit to a black woman with more kids than she could afford.

Sounds like you're way too stupid to realize that you prove my point... (but I knew that)

You militant, radical liberals are very generous with other peoples money, but clam up and make excuses when it's your own... All talk, no action...

"Why should I bother if it won't make a dent?"

Put your money where your mouth is, idiot....


The stench of hipocrisy is wafting off of you....

 

[Dr.House]

I would be willing to be taxed at the rate I was taxed under Clinton.

I have no problem sacrificing for my country, because in the end, it benefits me.

then write them a check.

I'd be happy to. Unfortunately, my entire income wouldn't put a dent in the national debt. But if we all go back to Clinton era taxes, the debt would be reduced.

I'm willing, but apparently you partisan hacks aren't.

All talk...

Pay it now - why do you need an act of congress to get you to fork over more cash?

Yeah, yeah, you want to raise everyone's taxes except your own.

Actually, most conservatives believe your sugar daddy government collect enough to operate... We want all people to pay less taxes, even dumb liberal hacks like you...

 

[JakeStarkey]

black women with kids

Did she actually say that?

And they claim they aren't racists!

So do you.

 

[Full-Auto]

I would be willing to be taxed at the rate I was taxed under Clinton.

I have no problem sacrificing for my country, because in the end, it benefits me.

then write them a check.

I'd be happy to. Unfortunately, my entire income wouldn't put a dent in the national debt. But if we all go back to Clinton era taxes, the debt would be reduced.

I'm willing, but apparently you partisan hacks aren't.

Yeah, yeah, you want to raise everyone's taxes except your own.

NOT ANOTHER DIME. Until I see it can be spent wisely. I am also not afraid to say I will use any loop hole or slight of hand to avoid doing so. Short of going to prison of course. Take a few bucks and find a CPA that worked for the IRS and learn the threshold of audits.

 

[Neotrotsky]

black women with kids

Did she actually say that?

And they claim they aren't racists!

The Democrats have always been racists (KKK )
the only thing they have change is the race

 

[JakeStarkey]

The KKK moved into the GOP during the 1960s and 1970s as you well know. Men like Harry Byrd repented their back ground and did good to do better. Men like Strom Thurmond moved into the GOP and fathered illegitimate black children.

NeoFascist, you are a racist and a far righty extremist fascist pretending to be a conservative Republican.

 

[Full-Auto]

The KKK moved into the GOP during the 1960s and 1970s as you well know. Men like Harry Byrd repented their back ground and did good to do better. Men like Strom Thurmond moved into the GOP and fathered illegitimate black children.

NeoFascist, you are a racist and a far righty extremist fascist pretending to be a conservative Republican.

LOL Cute story, but the fact remains the feds prevented your local leadership from intimidating the populace.