Government shut down. You worried?
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Debt isn't caused by a drop in revenue. Increasing revenue will not necessarily reduce debt.
Think about it. Say you have a part time job, after school and weekends. They cut your hours because things have slowed. Are you in debt, or further in debt because you aren't bringing as much pay home? Well, it depends on what you spend you money on. If you had been spending a certain amount with the pay that you had been getting, you might not be able to afford the things you were spending your money on. You would have to cut your spending. If you were going out to the mall with your buds every Saturday having Chineese food, your probably going to have to cut that. If you were paying your auto insurance, you might have to take the car off the road and take the bus.
Now, say you have that same part time job. Someone leaves and you get more hours. You get more pay. If you have debt, are you going to pay it off? Perhaps you've been eyeing a new mod for your vehicle. Maybe you've been thinking it's time to upgrade the computer to a faster quad core? Maybe there is this girl you've been thinking about asking out and now you'll have the money to take her out. Even if you have debt, are you really going to use your increase in pay to pay it off quicker? I don't know about you but historicly our government has opted to add spending.
The point is, our government spends too much of our money on things that they should be trimming.
Our founding fathers made it clear what our government was for. Our government is tasked with establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare and securing freedom for all of us and for our future generations.
Think about it. Say you have a part time job, after school and weekends. They cut your hours because things have slowed. Are you in debt, or further in debt because you aren't bringing as much pay home? Well, it depends on what you spend you money on. If you had been spending a certain amount with the pay that you had been getting, you might not be able to afford the things you were spending your money on. You would have to cut your spending. If you were going out to the mall with your buds every Saturday having Chineese food, your probably going to have to cut that. If you were paying your auto insurance, you might have to take the car off the road and take the bus.
Now, say you have that same part time job. Someone leaves and you get more hours. You get more pay. If you have debt, are you going to pay it off? Perhaps you've been eyeing a new mod for your vehicle. Maybe you've been thinking it's time to upgrade the computer to a faster quad core? Maybe there is this girl you've been thinking about asking out and now you'll have the money to take her out. Even if you have debt, are you really going to use your increase in pay to pay it off quicker? I don't know about you but historicly our government has opted to add spending.
The point is, our government spends too much of our money on things that they should be trimming.
Our founding fathers made it clear what our government was for. Our government is tasked with establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare and securing freedom for all of us and for our future generations.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
I know that you want to keep the "poor people" from being hurt. You will soon see that many "poor people" are where they are because they aren't willing to get themselves to a better place.
There are many people who need our help. I believe that if we would weed out the ones taking advantage of the system we could actually reach the people who really need our help.
You are being mislead if you belive that conservatives want to hurt "poor people". Conservatives merely want to assure that our tax dollars are being spent wisely, just like you should be doing with your own money. That means when there are people in line for "free stuff" (paid for with our tax dollars) we make sure that the people in line are truely in need and aren't just there for free stuff.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
It's more than a good way to think about it. Tax cuts DO NOT ADD DEBT. Spending beyond your means does.
I know that you want to keep the "poor people" from being hurt. You will soon see that many "poor people" are where they are because they aren't willing to get themselves to a better place.
There are many people who need our help. I believe that if we would weed out the ones taking advantage of the system we could actually reach the people who really need our help.
You are being mislead if you belive that conservatives want to hurt "poor people". Conservatives merely want to assure that our tax dollars are being spent wisely, just like you should be doing with your own money. That means when there are people in line for "free stuff" (paid for with our tax dollars) we make sure that the people in line are truely in need and aren't just there for free stuff.
I know that you want to keep the "poor people" from being hurt. You will soon see that many "poor people" are where they are because they aren't willing to get themselves to a better place.
There are many people who need our help. I believe that if we would weed out the ones taking advantage of the system we could actually reach the people who really need our help.
You are being mislead if you belive that conservatives want to hurt "poor people". Conservatives merely want to assure that our tax dollars are being spent wisely, just like you should be doing with your own money. That means when there are people in line for "free stuff" (paid for with our tax dollars) we make sure that the people in line are truely in need and aren't just there for free stuff.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 0
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Read this:
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...budget-deficit
The Bush tax cuts were not just 'for the rich.' Eliminating the tax cuts on the rich would have a very small impact on the debt/deficit.
Bottom line is if Washington does not cut spending drastically, YOUR generation is hosed. Like the standard of living you had as a kid? You WILL NOT have that high a standard of living in the future, and your kids will have LESS than you did.
Ever check out www.usdebtclock.org ?
If you intend to have a good job someday, you will be blown away by how much of your money the government has already spent or promised. Essentially, the current debt is $128,xxx per taxpayer and unfunded liabilities are already over $1 million per taxpayer.
If you intend to have a high paying job, your share is much more than the average taxpayer's share of over $1 million listed above. Basically, YOU already owe the government a million dollars, and your share is growing faster than you can earn it!
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...budget-deficit
The Bush tax cuts were not just 'for the rich.' Eliminating the tax cuts on the rich would have a very small impact on the debt/deficit.
Bottom line is if Washington does not cut spending drastically, YOUR generation is hosed. Like the standard of living you had as a kid? You WILL NOT have that high a standard of living in the future, and your kids will have LESS than you did.
Ever check out www.usdebtclock.org ?
If you intend to have a good job someday, you will be blown away by how much of your money the government has already spent or promised. Essentially, the current debt is $128,xxx per taxpayer and unfunded liabilities are already over $1 million per taxpayer.
If you intend to have a high paying job, your share is much more than the average taxpayer's share of over $1 million listed above. Basically, YOU already owe the government a million dollars, and your share is growing faster than you can earn it!
Last edited by dirt bike dave; Apr 13, 2011 at 07:41 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
Tax cuts don't have to be paid. Who would they be paid by? A tax cut is a reduction in the amount of tax that is paid by a tax payer. Debt is accrued by spending. A tax cut doesn't remove any revenue that the government has collected through taxes.
If you have a cut in your pay, it doesn't create debt. If you finance an F150, you accrue debt.
It is true that if the taxpayer gets a cut in taxes, the government gets a cut in "pay", or revenue generated. (The government doesn't actually earn "pay" like we the people do, they just collect our money and spend it on things that they think we need or want.) It is what the government spends our money on that accrues debt. If you or I get a cut in pay, we must reduce our spending accordingly. The same holds true for the government.
A tax cut reduces the burden on the tax payer. It does at the same time increase the burden on our government to balance the budget. The issue with the budget isn't that there isn't enough taxes being paid. The issue is that our government is spending more than it should reasonably collect. That is why it is critically important for our government to make sure that the money it is spending is only for people and programs that have genuine need.
If you have a cut in your pay, it doesn't create debt. If you finance an F150, you accrue debt.
It is true that if the taxpayer gets a cut in taxes, the government gets a cut in "pay", or revenue generated. (The government doesn't actually earn "pay" like we the people do, they just collect our money and spend it on things that they think we need or want.) It is what the government spends our money on that accrues debt. If you or I get a cut in pay, we must reduce our spending accordingly. The same holds true for the government.
A tax cut reduces the burden on the tax payer. It does at the same time increase the burden on our government to balance the budget. The issue with the budget isn't that there isn't enough taxes being paid. The issue is that our government is spending more than it should reasonably collect. That is why it is critically important for our government to make sure that the money it is spending is only for people and programs that have genuine need.
Last edited by wittom; Apr 13, 2011 at 07:40 PM.
Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: Hill Country, TX
If you live in Michigan, try to figure out why there are no jobs. The companies left!
Companies should not be paying taxes, consumers should. The poor consume just like middle class and wealthy.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
i still think it adds to the deficit. first, yes cutting spending is very important it has to be done, but the tax cuts do add to the deficit, by 860 million
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/07/news...bama/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/07/news...bama/index.htm
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
From: Memphis
positives in my eyes are increased revenue so we can reduce the debt, sorry but the bush tax cuts were made in good times when we had a surplus. Now that we extended the cuts it just put us more into debt and that sucks.
tax rates under clinton were higher and we were doing just fine, Im not sure about the number but I believe that it was 22 million jobs created under him
negatives would be higher prices because it leaves less money to pay people and over paid ceo's so you have to make up for it with charging a higher price for final products.
there might be a decrease in hiring.
My main argument is just that why did they get extended even though were in major debt? when the bush tax cuts first took place we had a SURPLUS! now like I said were in debt. I didnt see a dying economy or stalled hiring during clinton era taxes.
just remember im young and still have to learn more obviously but if were serious about the debt we got to explore every option
tax rates under clinton were higher and we were doing just fine, Im not sure about the number but I believe that it was 22 million jobs created under him
negatives would be higher prices because it leaves less money to pay people and over paid ceo's so you have to make up for it with charging a higher price for final products.
there might be a decrease in hiring.
My main argument is just that why did they get extended even though were in major debt? when the bush tax cuts first took place we had a SURPLUS! now like I said were in debt. I didnt see a dying economy or stalled hiring during clinton era taxes.
just remember im young and still have to learn more obviously but if were serious about the debt we got to explore every option
There was no 'surplus' after Clinton if you are talking about the debt.
Don't exclude what was happening in the private market economically during the 90's to say that taxes were high and things were good. Many good things happened in the 90's inside the private market that increased government's revenue. A good economy is what increases revenue, not tax increases.
Would you(government) rather tax me 90% and throw me in the ditch due to low production. Or otherwise, tax me at 10% and let me succeed while you still get tax revenue. Overtime as I grow bigger and better, you get more and more.
Tax increases do one thing, get people dependent on the government and people that are dependent on the government vote democrat.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2579...conomic-growth
If you live in Michigan, try to figure out why there are no jobs. The companies left!
Companies should not be paying taxes, consumers should. The poor consume just like middle class and wealthy.
If you live in Michigan, try to figure out why there are no jobs. The companies left!
Companies should not be paying taxes, consumers should. The poor consume just like middle class and wealthy.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
When our government decides what they are going to spend our money on and how much, they predict how much they will collect from us. They've predicted wrong and come up short. Extending the Bush tax cuts doesn't cost anyone, it just causes the government to once again come up short. Cutting spending isn't just very important, it's the only realistic way to reduce the federal debt.
Tax cut= government taking less of our money to fund the programs that they choose. The tax cut didn't increase the debt, their spending habits did.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
The tax cuts didn't increase the deficit. Tax cuts cannot do that. There was no money removed from what the government collected from us. They didn't borrow money and give it to people getting tax cuts. Money was not spent on tax cuts. The reason articals like the one you linked to say that tax cuts add to the debt is because the level of spending our government is doing assumes that they will collect more of our money. They can either take more of our money through taxes, which will cost us all more, or they can revise thier spending to coinside whith what they are actually collecting.
When our government decides what they are going to spend our money on and how much, they predict how much they will collect from us. They've predicted wrong and come up short. Extending the Bush tax cuts doesn't cost anyone, it just causes the government to once again come up short. Cutting spending isn't just very important, it's the only realistic way to reduce the federal debt.
Tax cut= government taking less of our money to fund the programs that they choose. The tax cut didn't increase the debt, their spending habits did.
When our government decides what they are going to spend our money on and how much, they predict how much they will collect from us. They've predicted wrong and come up short. Extending the Bush tax cuts doesn't cost anyone, it just causes the government to once again come up short. Cutting spending isn't just very important, it's the only realistic way to reduce the federal debt.
Tax cut= government taking less of our money to fund the programs that they choose. The tax cut didn't increase the debt, their spending habits did.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,511
Likes: 10
From: Under the flightpath of old ORD 22R
This is basically what the 1996 JEC report published.
Conversely when Ronnie R lowered taxes, the tax revenues went up, and this was in a bad economic environment.
You need to stop thinking in terms of how you spend money, and think of how the gov spends money, without thinking.
.....<snip>.... keep the bush rates but at least get rid if crazy loopholes. when tax cuts happen, the money the government expects to have gets reduced and that translates into debt if we dont cut it out of the budget for the years the tax cuts are active. so yes cut, but dont even expect to have the things we were accustomed to like a massive military, theres money to be cut there, the ryan plan dosent touch it.
It is submitted in FEB of the year it goes into action. At that time, the amount of taxes from the previous TY have not even been paid in ( APR ).
The 3rd quarterly estimates are paid just prior to the start of the FY, so only for part of the tax base do they have any kind of clue, and it can change in a moment, for Q4 of that TY ( which are paid in JAN the next calender year ).
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 691
Likes: 1
From: Gulf Coast
Raising taxes has the effect of slowing the economy. What do you think would have been the right thing to do with tax rates this year? (Hint: raising taxes slow the economy and our economy is fragile at best.)
Last edited by 1depd; Apr 13, 2011 at 09:11 PM.