Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your $1 TRILLION stimulus was supposed to do that, remember?
As soon as Americans WAKE UP and FINALLY FIGURE OUT THAT THE GOVERMENT CAN NOT CREATE JOBS -- ONLY THE PRIVATE SECTOR CAN, he wouldn't be able to get away with making such deceitful promises he KNOWS he could never deliver on. More government jobs cost us all more money in taxes. More private sector jobs SAVE us tax dollars!
The best thing government can do is take its grubby hands off the private sector; roll back regulations; repeal fees; taxes; permits. Then and ONLY then will we see the private sector-- especially small and medium sized businesses--- being able to hire people.
How dare the President devote money to rebuilding the infrastructure of America?
Wasn't that what the $1 Trillion failed stimulus was for? And then the second "jobs" bill?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJoey
I'm curious...What would you expect McCain to have done at this point? What do you think is wrong (not what the R party says is wrong) with spending on infrastructure, education, and research?
He wouldn't have taken $1+ trillion out of the private sector to distribute in a long wish list of liberal pork barrel projects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff
I don't rage about anything. I prefer mature discourse to faux outrage.
I don't understand your answer. By keeping the tax rate on the richest American's inappropriately low the government doesn't receive revenue that it should. If the tax rates were at the same levels they were pre-Reagan, the government would be taking in a lot more revenue and the deficit and debt would both be less...
Yes, spending needs to be better managed. It's both a revenue side and spending problem.
You're not serious about deficit reduction and debt reduction unless you acknowledge that the post-Reagan era tax rates are too low.
Ah-ha. So you want tax rates to go back up to 70%? Yes, the government would be taking in more revenue, and continue to grow and grow and spend and spend and then one day 70% tax rate just wouldn't be enough to sustain it.
There is no revenue problem. We have a spending problem. If the government can't afford to pay for new entitlements and programs, they shouldn't be creating them, it's really that simple.
How dare the President devote money to rebuilding the infrastructure of America?
If only it truly went to that endeavor.
However, like his first excursion into financial altruism, it's doomed to be spent paying off political cronies, leftist organizations and bank/corporate fat cats.
Ah-ha. So you want tax rates to go back up to 70%?
On all income earned above 2.5 million dollars, sounds about right. Please don't confuse this with tax rates for average working families.
I also feel that corporations should pay their fare share.
Why would you NOT support this? Why would anyone campaign so adamantly for interests not aligned only with the very, very wealthy class of which they are not a member?
On all income earned above 2.5 million dollars, sounds about right. Please don't confuse this with tax rates for average working families.
I also feel that corporations should pay their fare share.
Why would you NOT support this? Why would anyone campaign so adamantly for interests not aligned only with the very, very wealthy class of which they are not a member?
Tax hikes would be the death knell of the economy. You want to punish success with hikes on the wealthiest individuals, who drive the economy, the job creators.
Oh, our corporate tax rate is second highest in the WORLD.
Tax hikes would be the death knell of the economy. You want to punish success with hikes on the wealthiest individuals, who drive the economy, the job creators.
Oh, our corporate tax rate is second highest in the WORLD.
That's funny because plenty of places have HIGHER taxes and better economies at the moment. We had a much better economy in years where taxes where much HIGHER. That 1950's America which the Tea Party seems to want back so badly had top marginal tax rates of 90%.
(Check out the article in the new issue of Inc. on socialist Norway if you'd like to see an example....)
Jobs are created by an incredibly complex and difficult to understand number of factors. (Which include business expansion, consumer demand, money supply, ,unionization (or lack of), government hiring, investment infrastructure projects and about 1000 other factors). Reducing the complexities of job creation to a convenient soundbite (although apparently easy to remember and repeat ad nauseaum-- regardless if its actually true) while politically convenient and expedient doesn't actually address the REAL problems with creating jobs.
Re: Corporate tax rates... True. Corporate tax rates are the second highest in the world. It's too bad that deductions and limitations for corporations are so onerous that highly profitable corporations don't pay any taxes at all... It's not about tax rate, it's about eliminating deductions and loopholes that corporations use to escape paying their taxes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
