CBO on tax cuts

[Lucky... 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews_excl/ynews_excl_pl3604

But isn’t it bad to raise taxes in a recession?

If stimulating the economy is the goal, there are more effective ways of doing so. Extending all of the Bush tax cuts would have a small bang for the buck in terms of stimulus, the equivalent of a 10- to 40-cent increase in Gross Domestic Product for every dollar spent, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Why? As the CBO notes, most Bush-tax-cut dollars go to higher-income households, and these top earners don't spend as much of their income as lower earners.

The CBO recently examined 11 potential stimulus policies; of those, extending all of the Bush tax cuts tied for the lowest bang for the buck. Letting the high-income tax cuts expire and using the money for aid to the states, extending unemployment insurance benefits, and tax credits that aid job creation all scored higher. Dollar for dollar, each of these measures would have about three times the impact on GDP as continuing the Bush tax cuts.

So much for the rich spending money and stimulating the economy; we knew all along that was BS.

Will raising the top tax rates hurt small business?

One of the most common objections to letting the cuts expire for those in the highest tax brackets is that it would hurt small businesses. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) recently said that allowing the cuts to lapse would amount to "a job-killing tax hike on small business during tough economic times."

This claim is debatable. Less than 3 percent of tax returns reporting small-business income are filed by taxpayers who fit Obama’s definition of a “high-income” taxpayer.

According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, small-business income makes up a majority of the income for about 40 percent of households in the top bracket and a third of households in the second-highest bracket. Based on this analysis, if the objective is to help small businesses, continuing the Bush tax cuts on high-income taxpayers isn't the way to go.

Moreover, much small-business income is taxed at low or zero rates right now. Small business also fully deduct wage payments, so a higher tax rate should not impact their choice of hiring people.


As well, Greenspan has already said that tax cuts don't pay for themselves and that they s/b reserved once the economy improves.

As I wrote and cited in another thread, the CBO establishes capital gains taxation at 2-3% of all federal tax revenues.

So is the CBO, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Greenspan all wrong? Is this a misinformation conspiracy? Come on, kids.

As an added note, let's look at the Great Depression, Hoover did nothing for 2 1/2 years after Black Tuesday, finally he raised income taxes 260% in one act as well as doubled other taxes and the healing began. So to all the people who claim that tax hikes in bad times are a bad idea, history is not your friend.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

As an added note, let's look at the Great Depression, Hoover did nothing for 2 1/2 years after Black Tuesday, finally he raised income taxes 260% in one act as well as doubled other taxes and the healing began. So to all the people who claim that tax hikes in bad times are a bad idea, history is not your friend.

what exactly is your evidence here that it worked?

I remember him as a one term President and Hoovervilles are not beach front condos. If his action was so successful, why didn't he get reelected?

[scruffy 0]

The CBO uses a static, not dynamic method of scoring.

Not really going to argue this with you, I'm going to be pissed about anything tax related from either party until tax reform is taken seriously in Washington.

Just saying anything they say is irrelevant. Good day.

Peace, love and hoppiness

[Kennedy 0]

For fuck's sake, how many threads are you going to start on the same issue? Can't you just keep adding all these "sources" and all your "evidence" into one thread?

Even Rhys is considerate enough to keep his shit limited to one thread at a time.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

As an added note, let's look at the Great Depression, Hoover did nothing for 2 1/2 years after Black Tuesday, finally he raised income taxes 260% in one act as well as doubled other taxes and the healing began. So to all the people who claim that tax hikes in bad times are a bad idea, history is not your friend.

Quote

what exactly is your evidence here that it worked?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gdp20-40.jpg

GDP hit the toilet in 1929; Black Tuesday. GDP started fell at an almost horizontal rate in mid 32 as Hoover signed the big tax increase and opened programs. GDP rose dramatically as FDR opened new programs; New Deal, raised taxes again, etc. A 4-year straight gain persiod of massive, consecutive gains under his New Deals and tax increases.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1528.html

Unemployment lags as it tanks and in recovery, so you see here it started to repair after the tax increases and New Deals.

DJIA tanked and then recovered as the tax increase was signed http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EDJI+Interactive#chart1:symbol=^dji;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

Quote

I remember him as a one term President ...

My, you are old.

Quote

...and Hoovervilles are not beach front condos. If his action was so successful, why didn't he get reelected?

He did too little too little, too late. The Bonus Army, Hoovervilles; he was regarded as a lame duck for letting it fix itself as the neo-cons now want. Of course it intensified in severity until he raised taxes and started programs, but the people had decided he let it get too bad and tossed him. Ironically Garner, FDR's VP candidate, called Hoover a Socialist for raising taxes. That's just politics as usual, but FDR did the right thing from the start and Hoover did the wrong thing until the end, kinda like MLK vs Malcolm X.

FDR never gave up 100 electoral votes in all 4 election wins and is now considered the #1 pres of all time. Teddy Roosevelt is #2, I guess the Siena Group weighs heavily on consumer protection and holding corporations accountable, both these gems were the anti-Reagan and honorable presidents from oppossing parties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

In summary, his actions at the end weren't realized as successful until he was long gone and he did wait too long to do the right thing, which equates to doing the wrong thing.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

For fuck's sake, how many threads are you going to start on the same issue? Can't you just keep adding all these "sources" and all your "evidence" into one thread?

Even Rhys is considerate enough to keep his shit limited to one thread at a time.

LOL, pised because I'm inundating you with the painful truth?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

In summary, his actions at the end weren't realized as successful until he was long gone and he did wait too long to do the right thing, which equates to doing the wrong thing.

Or maybe Hoover's tax hike had nothing to do with the "recovery" that came when FDR took office.

Might want to look up the word "evidence" before you start your next thread.

[Kennedy 0]

Nope. Annoyed because you're inundating us with the same shit in eighteen different threads. You're not important enough to piss me off. And on case you haven't noticed, you're not much more convincing than Rhys. Just more posts in more threads.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

The CBO uses a static, not dynamic method of scoring.

OK and all of political science, which fed taxes are, are a bastard science since you can't run the test over and over again, testing one inependent variable at a time. But it's all we have and to throw our arms in the air and say, 'who the fuck knows, my diddy said to cut taxes so let's do it' is just ridiculous. We take the best data we can and interpret what we can. When we see repeating trends we then draw conclusions and all I see is that bad economic times are preceeded by tax cuts, better eco times are preceeded by tax increases.

Quote

Not really going to argue this with you, I'm going to be pissed about anything tax related from either party until tax reform is taken seriously in Washington.

WHat's tax reform to you, tax cuts and spending cuts for all but the programs you want? Face it, we will have massive military and social spending all our lives; get used to it. What we need to do is balance the budget by raising taxes and making the uber rich reinvest their money or lose it.

Quote

Just saying anything they say is irrelevant. Good day.

Who's they? The CBO, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center and Greenspan? They have more experince than all the Lush Rimjobs in the world. To just say, 'I'm mad as hell and I can't take it anymore' is lame. We take objective experts, all the data we can muster and draw conclusions/ get advisement and move from there. We have to use some data/advice, so what's wrong with these? Who's better? HAnnity? Heritage Foundation?

Let's be imperical about it, address some issues; apathy and corruption got us here, let's not dig deeper with more of the same.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

In summary, his actions at the end weren't realized as successful until he was long gone and he did wait too long to do the right thing, which equates to doing the wrong thing.

Or maybe Hoover's tax hike had nothing to do with the "recovery" that came when FDR took office.

Might want to look up the word "evidence" before you start your next thread.

Might wanna look up, 'cut-n-run' to desccribe your protocol. See, sweetpea, there is no mountain of evidence that can make you see the light, esp when you don't bother addressing any of it. Just pure coincidence that these data repaired as these tax increases/deals came into pay....yea . Just coincidence when the dirty, fascist, corrupt pig Reagan chopped taxes Harding-style thatthe debt ran thru teh roof....yea.

Yet you offer no contrary data/ev. At least lawrocket and Mike try the .24%er route. It was desperate, but at least they try. You just run-run-do-run-run away.

[scruffy 0]

All's I'm trying to say is I get you're doing your whole tax cut rant in a few threads here. That's cool. But understand the CBO serves one purpose, and that's providing a static view of the economy so congress can decide budgetary matters.

Figuring out whether or not tax cuts are effective is better left to people who don't have their hands tied to the bottom line of how much is this going to cost the government as written.

I agree with you whole-heartedly the status quo won't stand, but someone who clearly researches this topic should know the silly nature of quoting the CBO as it actually affects the economy.

Peace, love and hoppiness

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Nope. Annoyed because you're inundating us with the same shit in eighteen different threads. You're not important enough to piss me off. And on case you haven't noticed, you're not much more convincing than Rhys. Just more posts in more threads.

You've just become as relevant as skipbelt. Just drop a few words not pertinent to the thread and run your ass off. There's a ton of data, I'll take your running as an aquiescence.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

All's I'm trying to say is I get you're doing your whole tax cut rant in a few threads here. That's cool. But understand the CBO serves one purpose, and that's providing a static view of the economy so congress can decide budgetary matters.

OK and that is completely irrelevant? You don't like what they say, so you ignore them as irrelvant? That makes no sense. Why not post counter data from a real realiable, dynamic source then? Not RW fringe site in disguise.

Quote

Figuring out whether or not tax cuts are effective is better left to people who don't have their hands tied to the bottom line of how much is this going to cost the government as written.

Right, the Heritage Foundation. WHo's more objective in a mater like that? You might find teh data errant, but not biased, so show me their errors.

Quote

I agree with you whole-heartedly the status quo won't stand, but someone who clearly researches this topic should know the silly nature of quoting the CBO as it actually affects the economy.

I've read you drag on for posts now about who is wrong, so whois right? Is it your favorite RW rag? Or perhaps you can extrapolate raw data. Love to read it.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

You're not important enough to piss me off.

I stopped reading anything Lucky posted a long time ago. There are not enough hours in the day to bother trying to read any of it. Scrolling through his posts and ignoring everything he writes is the way to go.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

You're not important enough to piss me off.

I stopped ready anything Lucky posted a long time ago. There are not enough hours in the day to bother trying to read any of it. Scrolling through his posts and ignoring everything he writes is the way to go.

And yet another who is unable to address the issues. How does it feel to acquiesce? Thx for contributing and cheerleading the other guy that can't address.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Dude you are so far out in left field, you make Lenin look like a capitalist. Newsflash, I am not interested in your government controlled society. Now if you don't mind I have better things to do with my time than to read the drivel you post day in and day out.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[skipbelt 0]

Quote

Dude you are so far out in left field, you make Lenin look like a capitalist. Newsflash, I am not interested in your government controlled society. Now if you don't mind I have better things to do with my time than to read the drivel you post day in and day out.

concur . lucky needs purer and purer drivel to drive the drivel away ! how's that for relevance ? - spelling yank -

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I'll take your running as an aquiescence.

Or you could take it that SOME of us need to sleep because we have work in the morning.

Please do try to understand that people ignoring you is very different from people agreeing with you.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[mirage62 0]

+1

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

You're not important enough to piss me off.

I stopped reading anything Lucky posted a long time ago. There are not enough hours in the day to bother trying to read any of it. Scrolling through his posts and ignoring everything he writes is the way to go.

As did most of those here.

Quit replying and he will go away.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun