Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Then you don't understand what the word "pay" means in its entirety. You are using it in a narrow and political context, as I stated above. If there is a jacket on sale, the sale ends and you buy it full price, you "pay" for waiting and not buying it on sale. "Pay" can be used in many contexts. People who make your argument only understand it one way.
And BTW, I agree with you that it is not the government's money.
I am not using it in a political context, you are. Here are all the definitions of the word pay that exist, I challenge you to find any of them that come close to paying for tax cuts.
Pay | Define Pay at Dictionary.com
Pay - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
pay, n. : Oxford English Dictionary
pay, v.1 : Oxford English Dictionary
pay, v.2 : Oxford English Dictionary
You are very much arguing from a political context. From a Marxist standpoint, the collective has a right to your labour, and that the collective pays when the individual receives a tax cut. Even if I agree with your political argument - which I do - it is still wrong from a linguistics standpoint.
From Webster
In the English language is the same as
To compensate for our tax cuts, we will have to cut our police force and will have higher crime.Compensate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster DictionaryDefinition of COMPENSATE
transitive verb
1
: to be equivalent to : counterbalance
The counterbalance of tax cuts are fewer police. We "pay" for tax cuts by having less police. The term "pay" does not just fit within the political context of individual private property ownership, as you imply.
For the record, neutralizing the effect of is not the same thing as paying for. You have to neutralize the effect of lost wages by reducing spending, not by paying more for something.
Couple things...the government social services produces consumers, and those consumers buy from private businesses thus shoring up their economies,
too stupid but 100% liberal.
1) If tax and spend worked recessions and depressions would be a thing of the past.
2) taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive depresses an economy obviously
3)an economy grows one way and way only and that is from new or improved products from the productive class.
See why we are positve a liberal will be slow, so very very slow?
When the productive become unproductive & start hording cash causing recession then tax & spend works. Tax cuts little to stimulate spending & hiring for someone bent on hording cash.
The only way a tax cut is going to help the economy in the long term is to keep the spending low.
The problem with the Bush tax cuts, is that his administration is spending money like it isn't lent and sold to us at interest or something. So how the hell is the economy going to strengthen, the budget stay balanced, and our debt stay low, if you're going to lessen revenue, but increase spending? It doesn't make any sense, does it?
For the record, neutralizing the effect of is not the same thing as paying for. You have to neutralize the effect of lost wages by reducing spending, not by paying more for something.
"Pay" in the context of "paying for tax cuts by firing police and having more crime" is absolutely correct in the English language. "Pay" does not only mean monetary compensation, though it does mean that as well. That's why we say one pays for being drunk the night before by being hung over today, or one pays for infidelities by one's wife leaving. There is not a monetary transaction, but a compensating response to one's action. There is a trade-off. One "pays" for the trade-off. "Pay" doesn't just mean paying the police out of taxes. It also means the trade-offs of having a police force or the lack thereof.
Those citizens who want a police force agree on a social contract that allows for a police force as well as fire protection, a water and sewer system, shared utilities, shared schools, and all other city services that were quite adequately produced before the federal government got involved in any of that. These are not intended nor practical functions of the federal government.
they absolutely can. For example, you reduce the capital gains tax on venture capitalists, they have more money to fund more new ventures like Apple Google Intel and Facebook and the government has tons and tons of new revenue for eternity!!
There is no tax on investing. Only on gains at the end of an investment when it is sold. Investors do not reduce investing due to capital gains. I thought the market would soar when Bush cut capital gains tax in half, but it did not. The market & investment went down & money flowed into housing. Capital gains should be taxed just like ordinary income. Once you earn above standard deduction amount you should have to pay just like earned income. This tax money goes to pay someone else who will in turn invest it just as the tax payer would have. the investment is not lost.
This tax money goes to pay someone else who will in turn invest it just as the tax payer would have.
Yes! The increased tax revenues will go to Obama and will be invested in great companies.....like Solyndra!
the OP is very misleading.
Cutting taxes DOES create surplus. As long as you don't spend it right back.
Cutting taxes like Property Taxes will save homeowners a truckload.
Cutting taxes on Imported/Exported goods will save American taxpayers a bundle.
If Obama and Mittens were smart they would RAISE TAXES on China/Japan/Germany because they are getting away with murder on the import/export front.
Have any you been to the Mercedes car lot lately?...a fucking Mercedes CLS55 is $102,000 bucks. that's murder when I can fly over there to Germany in person and get one for $50,000
the OP is very misleading.
Cutting taxes DOES create surplus. As long as you don't spend it right back.
Cutting taxes like Property Taxes will save homeowners a truckload.
Cutting taxes on Imported/Exported goods will save American taxpayers a bundle.
If Obama and Mittens were smart they would RAISE TAXES on China/Japan/Germany because they are getting away with murder on the import/export front.
Have any you been to the Mercedes car lot lately?...a fucking Mercedes CLS55 is $102,000 bucks. that's murder when I can fly over there to Germany in person and get one for $50,000
If you raise taxes on Germany the CLS55 will cost the American people more than $102,000! Higher prices are a bad thing.
There is no tax on investing. Only on gains at the end of an investment when it is sold. Investors do not reduce investing due to capital gains. I thought the market would soar when Bush cut capital gains tax in half, but it did not. The market & investment went down & money flowed into housing. Capital gains should be taxed just like ordinary income. Once you earn above standard deduction amount you should have to pay just like earned income. This tax money goes to pay someone else who will in turn invest it just as the tax payer would have. the investment is not lost.
This tax money goes to pay someone else who will in turn invest it just as the tax payer would have.
Yes! The increased tax revenues will go to Obama and will be invested in great companies.....like Solyndra!
12+ million defaulted bad loans made by Wallstreet & backed by us taxpayers -VS- a few bad loan guarantees made by government.
This tax money goes to pay someone else who will in turn invest it just as the tax payer would have.
Yes! The increased tax revenues will go to Obama and will be invested in great companies.....like Solyndra!
12+ million defaulted bad loans made by Wallstreet & backed by us taxpayers -VS- a few bad loan guarantees made by government.
are you a socialist? Do you want Obozo to make all our investment decisions or do you want them made by private people investing their own hard earned money?
Now even a liberal can understand why the USSR failed!!
12+ million defaulted bad loans made by Wallstreet & backed by us taxpayers -VS- a few bad loan guarantees made by government.
are you a socialist? Do you want Obozo to make all our investment decisions or do you want them made by private people investing their own hard earned money?
Now even a liberal can understand why the USSR failed!!
Are you saying that Bush's no bid contracts & cost plus contracts were better than Solyndra?
A GSE that allows business to socialize losses & privatize gains is worse than socialism.
the OP is very misleading.
Cutting taxes DOES create surplus. As long as you don't spend it right back.
Cutting taxes like Property Taxes will save homeowners a truckload.
Cutting taxes on Imported/Exported goods will save American taxpayers a bundle.
If Obama and Mittens were smart they would RAISE TAXES on China/Japan/Germany because they are getting away with murder on the import/export front.
Have any you been to the Mercedes car lot lately?...a fucking Mercedes CLS55 is $102,000 bucks. that's murder when I can fly over there to Germany in person and get one for $50,000
If you raise taxes on Germany the CLS55 will cost the American people more than $102,000! Higher prices are a bad thing.
Not if we tell them they have a set number of vehicles they can sell in our Market they won't. they will drop those car prices so fast your head will spin.
Not if we tell them they have a set number of vehicles they can sell in our Market they won't. they will drop those car prices so fast your head will spin.
when liberals restrict imports with a quota or tax, that makes the price go up, not down.
Temporary price hike to scare us.
I'm telling you, a sure fire way to boost this Economy
Temporary price hike to scare us.
you missed the point!! If they can sell x units at $102,000 they can sell x-20% units at $150,000!!
its basic supply and demand!! sorry. As the quanity goes down
the price goes up
