Stimulus Pkg. issues

Originally Posted By avromark

Well it is Free Enterprise afterall. We all know Corporations have Americas interest at heart. We all know Corporate America is more important than Americans after all. They are America!

 

Originally Posted By mawnck

>>Lowering tax rates when the rate is too high actually generates more government revenue, because the lower rates generate more economic activity. When people know they can keep more of what they earn, they are more willing to work harder and take more risk. <<

This is the single most ridiculous, and now most discredited fairy tale that has ever been foisted on the American public, with the possible exception of "if you give rich people money they'll use it to help America."

This absurdity, coupled with the Dems' absurdity that the Government credit line is unlimited, will be the downfall of us all. Probably in the next six or eight months.

See you on the other side (if I still have internet).

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<This is the single most ridiculous, and now most discredited fairy tale that has ever been foisted on the American public>

It's worked everytime it's been tried.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***<This is the single most ridiculous, and now most discredited fairy tale that has ever been foisted on the American public>

It's worked everytime it's been tried.***

Evidence of this?

 

Originally Posted By avromark

Look at all the executives making sound business decisions and earning their bonuses today. Ask any employee at Midway and they'd say that their executives are stimulating the economy, offering a wonderful work environment and offering a quality glitch free product at a fair price. There's your proof Mr X.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

History. Go read about what happened after JFK's tax cuts, Reagan's tax cuts, or Bush's tax cuts. Economic activity went up, the GDP expanded, and revenue to the government increased. Tax cuts almost never "cost" as much as projected, and tax increases almost never raise the revenue estimated.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***History. Go read about what happened after JFK's tax cuts, Reagan's tax cuts, or Bush's tax cuts. Economic activity went up, the GDP expanded, and revenue to the government increased. Tax cuts almost never "cost" as much as projected, and tax increases almost never raise the revenue estimated.***

I'll take that as a non-answer.

"Go look it up" is pretty weak.

 

Originally Posted By andyll

<<History. Go read about what happened after JFK's tax cuts, Reagan's tax cuts, or Bush's tax cuts. Economic activity went up, the GDP expanded, and revenue to the government increased. Tax cuts almost never "cost" as much as projected, and tax increases almost never raise the revenue estimated. >>

If revenue to the Government increased why did Reagon and Bush have the highest growth in the deficits?

In general it causes a bump but then a steady decline.

Bush's cuts really didn't work because it was mainly to the upper class. The upper class in general do not spend anymore when they receive tax cuts.

In theory the wealthy use the extra money to invest in business which should create jobs and therefore increase Government revenue.

But in the last decade we've seen a huge shift in white collar jobs overseas to go along with the shift of blue collar jobs.

So the huge tax cuts to the wealthy and large corporations are actually creating jobs and revenues in other countries... not our own

 

Originally Posted By dshyates

I like the GOP myth that if you give tax cuts to corperations, they will create jobs. So right now they ain't selling dinkle, they have stockyards of surplus product they can't move out because no one is buying anything. Give them a tax cut and they will hire more people to make WHAT? You have to create demand, and tax cut for businesses won't do that.
You give tax cuts to the rich, and they buy private islands not create jobs. You give it to the middle class and right now they will stick it in the bank. For the first time in 3 years we are seeing a positive savings rate. You can't give tax cuts to poor folks as they don't pay taxes, but they are the ones who will actually dump the money back into the econmy. No, the GOP mantra of tax cuts won't work this time. But its ALL they got.
I like the idea of an $800B stimulus package. With 95% going to infrastructure. Earlier I had said $5B. Where that comes in is that only $5B of the $30B for infrastructure will hit the economy in the next 2 years because of the lack of big projects ready to be started but there is still lots of places that a lot more than $5B could be put to use immediately. Mainly repairing and maintenence projects that they didn't include.
And $30B is WAY to small for the whole country. The "Big Dig" in Boston was $22B. The entire $30B could be spent easily in any 2 major US cities. China's stimulus pkg. is dumping $586B straight into infrastructure.

 

Originally Posted By dshyates

No, you want to stimulate this economy, you need to get more money into the hands of the lowest class. We need to increase the minimum wage to $12/hr for everyone over 21, and $10.50/hr for 16-21.
Hey, then they will pay taxes, and then we can give them a tax cut. There ya go GOPers I got you a tax cut in there. Happy? I know you guys are already convulsing at my minimum wage idea.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<If revenue to the Government increased why did Reagon and Bush have the highest growth in the deficits?>

They increased spending too much, especially on military. But go look it up, and you'll see I'm right about revenue.

 

Originally Posted By DouglasDubh

<No, you want to stimulate this economy, you need to get more money into the hands of the lowest class.>

That's been tried multiple times. Hasn't worked yet.

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

<< That's been tried multiple times. Hasn't worked yet. >>

Except during the Clinton administration.

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

<< But go look it up, and you'll see I'm right about revenue. >>

What was the inflation rate during the same period. Reagan's tax cuts were accompanied by several years of double digit inflation. Of course tax revenue increased! Bush's tax cuts were accompanied by one of the greatest finanical Ponzi schemes ever inflicted on the American people. Let us know where that increased revenue is now that the scheme has been undone.

 

Originally Posted By vbdad55

<No, you want to stimulate this economy, you need to get more money into the hands of the lowest class. We need to increase the minimum wage to $12/hr for everyone over 21, and $10.50/hr for 16-21.
Hey, then they will pay taxes, and then we can give them a tax cut. There ya go GOPers I got you a tax cut in there. Happy? I know you guys are already convulsing at my minimum wage idea.<

nope just trying to figure out how I'll afford my $20 Big Mac then -- I'd go to the local family owned hamburger stand - but they closed down because they cou'dn't afford to staff it.

now that said, I think there may need to be a differential between part tiem and full time minimum salary. I do realize no one can possibly live on minimum wage - although not sure 10-12 hr will cut it either today -

better yet - why not just make everyone's wages the same - once you turn 16 - you get paid $x$ -- then no matter if you are a rocket scientist or work at Starbucks - we all get the same salary and pay the same taxes. No more rich and poor - all problems solved. No more issues with tax codes- or clips levels for tax cuts....

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***better yet - why not just make everyone's wages the same - once you turn 16 - you get paid $x$ -- then no matter if you are a rocket scientist or work at Starbucks - we all get the same salary and pay the same taxes. No more rich and poor - all problems solved. No more issues with tax codes- or clips levels for tax cuts....***

Understanding the sacrcasm I *hope* was intended here, this goes far beyond the wildest dreams of the most hardcore Marxist imaginable. Isn't there SOME sort of middle ground in between the extremes?

(actually, there is. it's called "Moderate Socialism", they've been trying it out in Europe recently...but don't say it too loud...a True American might here you! )

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

hear

 

Originally Posted By utahjosh

***History. Go read about what happened after JFK's tax cuts, Reagan's tax cuts, or Bush's tax cuts. Economic activity went up, the GDP expanded, and revenue to the government increased. Tax cuts almost never "cost" as much as projected, and tax increases almost never raise the revenue estimated.***

<<I'll take that as a non-answer.

"Go look it up" is pretty weak.>>

Really, X? He gave an answer. He just said "Go look it up" if you don't believe his answer. He cited 4 tax cuts and the results.

Hardly a non-answer. What do you need, X, charts and graphs on the LP board?

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

<< He cited 4 tax cuts and the results. >>

With no context on how those results were actually achieved.

He also neglected to cite the Clinton tax hikes that resulted in revenue gains as well.

 

Originally Posted By utahjosh

I apologize, my post 38 wasn't really called for. It comes off more mean-spirited then I meant it. I do feel it wasn't a non-answer. No "answer" ever posted on these boards was comprehensive on the topic.