Tax cuts do not cost anything. Nor do they need to be "paid for"

Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.


They do not have a right to perceived taxes, but they base their budgets on last years budget and taxes received. Let's just say they "assume" they're getting at least the same dollars they did in the prior year....and they always need more.
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.


They do not have a right to perceived taxes, but they base their budgets on last years budget and taxes received. Let's just say they "assume" they're getting at least the same dollars they did in the prior year....and they always need more.
Well they should do like a business does deal with it because shit does happen…
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.
Naive much?
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.


They do not have a right to perceived taxes, but they base their budgets on last years budget and taxes received. Let's just say they "assume" they're getting at least the same dollars they did in the prior year....and they always need more.
Well they should do like a business does deal with it because shit does happen…

And which politician understands that concept. Better yet, which government employee understands that.
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.


They do not have a right to perceived taxes, but they base their budgets on last years budget and taxes received. Let's just say they "assume" they're getting at least the same dollars they did in the prior year....and they always need more.
Well they should do like a business does deal with it because shit does happen…

And which politician understands that concept. Better yet, which government employee understands that.
Yeah, just because something was budgeted last year in a whole different political environment does not mean it has to follow through to this year.
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.
Naive much?
Tax cuts should never have to be "paid for" because they are not owned by the federal government...
 
You republicans really are a bunch of dense fuckers...The Bush tax breaks made up nearly a 1/3rd of the deficit spending adding to the debt.

We can't be the most powerful nation on earth without investing in science, infrastructure and education but you want cut the revue? At a time when china is very close to surpass us..

Dumb.
 
Ah, a supply-side True Believer.

Supply side policies always fail, of course, because they're fantasy-based. In their mythical world, cutting taxes on rich people and leaving less for the middle class means rich people will create jobs, and eventually it will trickle back down on everyone else.

Not what happens, of course. The rich people just pocket the money, so the middle class pays more and gets nothing.

First, there's no shortage of investment capital, so having more investment capital available doesn't do anything.

Second, cutting taxes on the rich doesn't actually create make more capital. Tax cuts have to be paid for by selling T-bills, which take the money that the rich saved in tax cuts right back out of the economy.

And third, economies are demand driven, not supply driven. If there's demand for products from the middle class, then the supply will follow. Someone will want to make money satisfying that demand. That's capitalism. It builds up from the bottom.
The motherfucking federal government has no claim to future perceived taxes, they have no right to think they do.


They do not have a right to perceived taxes, but they base their budgets on last years budget and taxes received. Let's just say they "assume" they're getting at least the same dollars they did in the prior year....and they always need more.
Well they should do like a business does deal with it because shit does happen…

And which politician understands that concept. Better yet, which government employee understands that.
Yeah, just because something was budgeted last year in a whole different political environment does not mean it has to follow through to this year.

Government operates on the principle that budgets always go up. Typically, close to the end of a budget cycle, a government office will spend like drunken sailors, because they know if they haven't spent up to or over the budget, next time their budgeted funds will be less.
 
You republicans really are a bunch of dense fuckers...The Bush tax breaks made up nearly a 1/3rd of the deficit spending adding to the debt.

We can't be the most powerful nation on earth without investing in science, infrastructure and education but you want cut the revue? At a time when china is very close to surpass us..

Dumb.
4719_3.jpg

4719_1.jpg

gov-receipts-expenditures-1980-1988.png
 
Facts are a dangerous thing to Liberals. Because they post via emotion and not factual data.

Under Kennedy who would be thrown out of the Dem Party today tax cuts increased revenue.

Under both Reagan and Bush revenues increased with tax cuts.

According to them they say the cuts cost us money. Yet under the cuts of 3 presidents in history Revenues increased every time.

Clueless.
 

Forum List

Back
Top