Tax cuts for all.

dahermit

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
1,916
In regard to the impending expiring tax cuts for all, it has been said that if the more than $250,000 income people continue with their cuts, it will help stimulate business and help the economy.

However, that does not agree with what I have observed in manufacturing and other businesses. For instance, I have observed that manufacturers do not normally hire more workers without orders for products. Even when there are more than usual orders, over time for existing workers is instituted or expanded before new hires because it is much cheaper (ridiculously cheaper due to the fact that new hires would require benefits, where as overtime workers already have their benefits).
With the current poor economy, if a manufacture had a windfall in the form of a tax cut, they are not likely to hire because there is no increase in the demand for their products.

On the other hand, it would seem logical that if the public had a wind fall in the form of cash from his income tax return (tax cut for those under $250,000), they would spend it creating orders in manufacturing.

If this is not the way it is, please explain it to me. Otherwise, I will continue to think that a tax cut for the plus $250,000 will more likely only go for increased bonuses for the chairman of the board.
 
Werbung:
The Wealthy should not get breaks. They can afford to pay their fair share. Stop adding taxes on the poor and middle class. Like Sales Taxes And Gas Taxes. Start adding Luxery Taxes,Business Taxes and CEO taxes.
 
In regard to the impending expiring tax cuts for all, it has been said that if the more than $250,000 income people continue with their cuts, it will help stimulate business and help the economy.

However, that does not agree with what I have observed in manufacturing and other businesses. For instance, I have observed that manufacturers do not normally hire more workers without orders for products. Even when there are more than usual orders, over time for existing workers is instituted or expanded before new hires because it is much cheaper (ridiculously cheaper due to the fact that new hires would require benefits, where as overtime workers already have their benefits).
With the current poor economy, if a manufacture had a windfall in the form of a tax cut, they are not likely to hire because there is no increase in the demand for their products.

On the other hand, it would seem logical that if the public had a wind fall in the form of cash from his income tax return (tax cut for those under $250,000), they would spend it creating orders in manufacturing.

If this is not the way it is, please explain it to me. Otherwise, I will continue to think that a tax cut for the plus $250,000 will more likely only go for increased bonuses for the chairman of the board.

What manufacturing products are you talking about? I don't know of anyone who makes (for example) $50,000 a year and will decide they want to order a windmill or something of the sort.

I just don't quite get the argument that tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 per year are good, but tax cuts for those making more than that are bad... where did this number even come from? It appears to have been simply plucked out of the sky...

If tax cuts are good, then they are good for everyone... why is it that you seem to indicate that a windfall in cash for the public would be good, but then exclude those making more than some arbitrary number from that public?
 
...where did this number even come from? It appears to have been simply plucked out of the sky...
You must not get out much. This has been in the news frequently. The Obama administration wants to continue the tax cuts for everyone under $250,000 a year and eliminate the tax cut for those over. The Republicans want to continue it for everyone. Have you been out of the country or something?
 
You must not get out much. This has been in the news frequently. The Obama administration wants to continue the tax cuts for everyone under $250,000 a year and eliminate the tax cut for those over. The Republicans want to continue it for everyone. Have you been out of the country or something?

Obviously I know that is the number they are harping on... my question is how did they arrive at that number? Surely there is not economic data to suggest that a tax cut for someone making $249,999 a year is good, while a tax cut for someone making $250,001 is not needed.

My question is how did the Obama Administration arrive at that number?
 
Obviously I know that is the number they are harping on... my question is how did they arrive at that number? Surely there is not economic data to suggest that a tax cut for someone making $249,999 a year is good, while a tax cut for someone making $250,001 is not needed.

My question is how did the Obama Administration arrive at that number?

how did bush set his tax change ? Clinton? Bush I, Reagan....

also the idea that if you make more then 250,000 your bad, less your good? Its simply about the fact that if you want to get the econ going, and pay down the debt...you can't keep cutting taxes for the people who least need them , and least would spend because of them.

We have historically low taxes right now for modern times, and a huge debt...is tax cuts for the well off really the best use of that money? Its a more or less a political fact, that they are not going to cut spending enough to pay down the debt much anytime soon..both parties...and that leaves bring in more money...aka raise some taxes, or better...close major loopholes.

also lets keep in mind, if you make 500,000 a year...you still get a tax cut...on the first 250,000 of it...
 
how did bush set his tax change ? Clinton? Bush I, Reagan....

Bush cut everyone's taxes...

also the idea that if you make more then 250,000 your bad, less your good? Its simply about the fact that if you want to get the econ going, and pay down the debt...you can't keep cutting taxes for the people who least need them , and least would spend because of them.

We have historically low taxes right now for modern times, and a huge debt...is tax cuts for the well off really the best use of that money? Its a more or less a political fact, that they are not going to cut spending enough to pay down the debt much anytime soon..both parties...and that leaves bring in more money...aka raise some taxes, or better...close major loopholes.

Regardless of tax rates, the government had brought in pretty much the same percentage of GDP in revenue for years.

That aside, my question is, who says someone who makes $249,999 is more in need of a tax cut than someone who makes $250,001? Where is the economic data to support such an assertion?

also lets keep in mind, if you make 500,000 a year...you still get a tax cut...on the first 250,000 of it...

True, but that cut will more or less be negated with the higher rates that you are paying in the other brackets. (with some exceptions depending on income)
 
Tax Cuts only for People making under $500,000. Im Tired of the wealthy think they cant afford it. People have to make a budget the Rich doesnt. I say the wealthy dont need Private Yachts or Jets. I say take a commerical airline like everyone else. They dont need limos i say call a cab or Drive a caddy or a towncar. They dont need Mansions they can live in a condo. So theyre the ones need to make the sacrifices the Poor, Middle class and Upper Class doesnt.
 
...my question is, who says someone who makes $249,999 is more in need of a tax cut than someone who makes $250,001? Where is the economic data to support such an assertion?...
The point being pushed in Congress by the Republicans is that a tax cut for those making over 250,000 is some how going to stimulate the economy, not that a tax cut is going to benefit the people getting it. And the point I was making in the original post is that cutting the tax for the people making over $250,000/year will not have a positive effect on the economy. The figure was admittedly arbitary...However, those making the "magical" quarter of a million a year are not likely to miss a few thousand where as those making very much less (almost everyone else), will feel the bite in the quality of their lives.

Where is the data from the Republicans that taxing those making over a quarter of a million will help end the recession?
 
The point being pushed in Congress by the Republicans is that a tax cut for those making over 250,000 is some how going to stimulate the economy, not that a tax cut is going to benefit the people getting it.

The argument I seem to be getting from the Republicans in Congress is that tax cuts for all income levels (ie a continuation of the Bush tax cuts) is what will help the economy.

And the point I was making in the original post is that cutting the tax for the people making over $250,000/year will not have a positive effect on the economy. The figure was admittedly arbitary...However, those making the "magical" quarter of a million a year are not likely to miss a few thousand where as those making very much less (almost everyone else), will feel the bite in the quality of their lives.

It does not matter who can afford it, it should be applied in a fair manner. People are not entitled to the "quality of life" that they want, they are entitled to the quality of life that they earn.

Where is the data from the Republicans that taxing those making over a quarter of a million will help end the recession?

Look at the performance of the economy following the 2003 Bush tax cuts:

- GDP grew at an annual rate of just 1.7 percent in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the six quarters following the tax cuts, the growth rate was 4.1 percent.

- Non-residential fixed investment declined for 13 consecutive quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. Since then, it expanded for 13 consecutive quarters.

- The S&P 500 dropped 18 percent in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts but increased by 32 percent over the next six quarters. Dividend payouts increased as well.

- The economy lost 267,000 jobs in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the next six quarters, it added 307,000 jobs, followed by 5 million jobs in the next seven quarters.
 
At this point tax cuts do not make fiscal sense we need to start bringing in a surplus to start paying of this damn debt. Also these tax cuts only help us when there is massive cuts in spending and I do not see that happening under the rule of either party.
 
At this point tax cuts do not make fiscal sense we need to start bringing in a surplus to start paying of this damn debt. Also these tax cuts only help us when there is massive cuts in spending and I do not see that happening under the rule of either party.

The only real way to bring in a surplus of revenue is to increase the overall GDP in my opinion.

This of course would need to be coupled with spending cuts.
 
Everyone loves tax cuts, balanced budgets, and hates spending cuts.

Well, spending cuts are OK, so long as they don't cut my favorite.

So, the politicians have to come up with magical way to give the voters what they want.

The conservatives love the idea that cutting taxes magically increases revenue.

The liberals understand that taxes have to be paid by someone, just so it isn't them. They want the rich to pay more, and don't expect them to find ways of getting out of those increased taxes. More magic.

When are our leaders going to face reality? The magic fairy dust doesn't seem to be working so well.
 
Firstly, these are not cuts, it's what has been the rate for years so what you really have is tax increases or no tax increases. If you pull those new taxes out oc the economy, it WILL hurt. So the real question is do you aim for the status quo or a dagger in the heart ?

Now is not the time to raise taxes.

Then to spur things you put a pause on payroll taxes for 6 monhs, you can use the remaining "stimulus" for that to achieve some real stimulus. Not quite enough ? Roll back obamacare. Nothing gets batter untill govt spending is cut dramatically.
 
Werbung:
This whole issue is a joke. Promoted once again by the left to deceive the public and continue their cherished class warfare.

How could any American believe giving more revenue to the feds will help the economy and reduce the deficit? How dumb must one be to believe this? The fed gov has gotten us in this mess with outrageous deficit spending and a huge increase in the size of government.

Secondly, do you really believe taxing only the rich will generate significant revenue? If so, you are a complete fool and of course, a liberal. The revenue generated is minuscule.


Sure, everyone's taxes are different, and the U.S. tax code is so horrendously Byzantine that the moment you say anything you run into a thicket of caveats. But let's run some numbers. And let's take a very broad brush approach to this. Let's assume you're a typical filer, you take the standard deduction, and let's just look at the biggest tax issues.

Right now people pay income taxes on a sliding scale from 10% up to 35%. The old 2000 rates started at 15% and went up to 39.6%.

For most people, these higher rates are moot. They only apply to the highest of flyers. Fewer than 1% currently pay the 35% rate and fewer than 4% even pay 33%, says the IRS. As for the old 39.6% rate: Adjusted for inflation, you'd only pay that now on any income over $363,000 a year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703977004575393483572603148.html
 
Back
Top