CNN
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Congressional Budget Office is projecting that this election-year's federal deficit will reach $422 billion, congressional aides said Tuesday, the highest ever, yet a smaller shortfall than analysts predicted earlier this year.
The government is expected to spend about $2.3 trillion this year, which means it will be borrowing about one of every five dollars it spends.
Looks like we need another tax cut to get out of this mess.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- More Record Deficits! Weeeee
More Record Deficits! WeeeeeFollow
Sorry, I couldn't read your post.
I'm still reading Bush Sr.'s lips.
I'm still reading Bush Sr.'s lips.
I'm sure varus will come back with something he read on drudge about how deficits are good. At least Reagan's deficits actually fixed the economy somewhat.
I've only got a quarter. Could I get a hand job using just the thumb and forefinger?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Lubi,
You seem to be enamored with the idea that tax cuts are bad. Why is that? I've always been of the opinion that the more that I earn the more I should be able to keep to do with what I will. Why do you find that a bad thing? Also do you believe that each citizen should pay an equal percentage to the government? These are questions you know how I will answer maybe you should decide how and why you can answer them.
Varus
You seem to be enamored with the idea that tax cuts are bad. Why is that? I've always been of the opinion that the more that I earn the more I should be able to keep to do with what I will. Why do you find that a bad thing? Also do you believe that each citizen should pay an equal percentage to the government? These are questions you know how I will answer maybe you should decide how and why you can answer them.
Varus
You seem to be enamored with the idea that tax cuts are bad. Why is that?
Maybe because every time in the history of the country that we've cut taxes it was on the very wealthy and led to massive deficits which crippled the economy and led to taxes being raised on the middle class?
Golly, could that be it?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smashed,
So if tax cuts are bad then are you for a tax increase?
You do realize that the wealthy by far pay the majority of taxes don't you? So then it wouldn't be a stretch to say the wealthy are receiving the biggest breaks because they're the ones, by far, paying the most.
Varus
So if tax cuts are bad then are you for a tax increase?
You do realize that the wealthy by far pay the majority of taxes don't you? So then it wouldn't be a stretch to say the wealthy are receiving the biggest breaks because they're the ones, by far, paying the most.
Varus
I am 100% for easing taxes on the rich !!!! ....
.... once we figure out how to do that, and keep the budget balanced, and make sure that at least every child and elderly person has access to quality health care, and we can make sure that children and the elderly don't freeze to death during the winter (thousands every year), and have high quality educations in our public schools.
.... once we figure out how to do that, and keep the budget balanced, and make sure that at least every child and elderly person has access to quality health care, and we can make sure that children and the elderly don't freeze to death during the winter (thousands every year), and have high quality educations in our public schools.
You do realize that the wealthy by far pay the majority of taxes don't you? So then it wouldn't be a stretch to say the wealthy are receiving the biggest breaks because they're the ones, by far, paying the most.
The wealthy don't pay nearly as much now as they did during the Eisenhower administration, which strangely, had a healthy ecnonomy.
The wealthy don't pay nearly as much now as they did during the Eisenhower administration, which strangely, had a healthy ecnonomy.
Lubi
I don't accept the premise that allowing people to keep what they earn isn't allowing for one to obtain health care, homes for the homeless, and public indoctrination. Who's to say that given more money people won't buy that health insurance they previously couldn't afford? Or that one can't use their own money to pay for the education of their child. Or that a group of individuals can't get together to fund housing for the homeless. The point is we each should be responsible for all of these things, it's not the govn's role or responsibility to do any of these. Granted with public education there might be an argument, but even then you have a govn raising your child instead of a stay at home mom. My whole point is why should I be forced to pay for someone elses health care as well as my own? Pay for someone elses housing as well as my own? Pay for someone elses education as well as my own? There's no way around it when you take something from someone and give to someone else without the first persons consent it's stealing. Now I know to the irrelgious that doesn't mean much but to me stealing is wrong and immoral.
Varus
Quote:
once we figure out how to do that, and keep the budget balanced, and make sure that at least every child and elderly person has access to quality health care, and we can make sure that children and the elderly don't freeze to death during the winter (thousands every year), and have high quality educations in our public schools.
I don't accept the premise that allowing people to keep what they earn isn't allowing for one to obtain health care, homes for the homeless, and public indoctrination. Who's to say that given more money people won't buy that health insurance they previously couldn't afford? Or that one can't use their own money to pay for the education of their child. Or that a group of individuals can't get together to fund housing for the homeless. The point is we each should be responsible for all of these things, it's not the govn's role or responsibility to do any of these. Granted with public education there might be an argument, but even then you have a govn raising your child instead of a stay at home mom. My whole point is why should I be forced to pay for someone elses health care as well as my own? Pay for someone elses housing as well as my own? Pay for someone elses education as well as my own? There's no way around it when you take something from someone and give to someone else without the first persons consent it's stealing. Now I know to the irrelgious that doesn't mean much but to me stealing is wrong and immoral.
Varus
Varus Greenspan wrote:
You do realize that the wealthy by far pay the majority of taxes don't you?
In most Western economies (I'm assuming this applies to USA too), the vast proportion of Tax Revenue from earnings is generated by the middle-income workers who, by force of their sheer numbers, contribute a greater net amount than the small proportion of the population who are very wealthy.
Or to put it in other words, you don't appear to have the most pitiful inkling of a hint of a smidgeon of an iota of understanding about how democratic capitalism works.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Well, as long as we are clear on the fact that you are just greedy, then cool.
Let the poor freeze and starve. Keep the poor kids out of schools and hospitals. Yeah, historically thats always been great. "Let them eat cake." Is that what you are saying? I bet you are all for the government having a strong police force to keep the rioters at bay when things really start to get bad.
Let the poor freeze and starve. Keep the poor kids out of schools and hospitals. Yeah, historically thats always been great. "Let them eat cake." Is that what you are saying? I bet you are all for the government having a strong police force to keep the rioters at bay when things really start to get bad.
Quote:
Now I know to the irrelgious that doesn't mean much but to me stealing is wrong and immoral.
Matthew, 22:17 wrote:
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Huh. You know Peter from the Bible? He was one of the disciples. At the end of the Gospels, Jesus tells Peter that he wants Peter to lead the Church here on earth because Jesus will be leaving. "That which you do here on earth will be done in Heaven," that whole thing. Basicly, Jesus is telling Peter that the rules and strictures he sets up in the formation of the new Church will be the rules and strictures required to enter heaven.
So, anyway, what's one of the very first actions of the new Church? Economic communism. All the disciples sell what they own and give it all freely to the Church which in turn distributes it among the people so that no one is in need.
You're not much of a Christian, are you?
So, anyway, what's one of the very first actions of the new Church? Economic communism. All the disciples sell what they own and give it all freely to the Church which in turn distributes it among the people so that no one is in need.
Quote:
My whole point is why should I be forced to pay for someone elses health care as well as my own? Pay for someone elses housing as well as my own? Pay for someone elses education as well as my own? There's no way around it when you take something from someone and give to someone else without the first persons consent it's stealing
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
You're not much of a Christian, are you?
Jophed
You must be one of those gay baby killers. I am too christian.
Varus
^^?
Mebbe pointing to an arm protruding from an *****
Heh.. I hope Lub was just playing and not a sockpuppet.
Not because I care really about Lub being a sockpuppet (and it would reinforce the fact that Varrus is playing an act) but because it'd be sad, even for Varrus, if the best argument he can come up with for following such a decidedly non-Christian economic mindset was "You're a gay baby killer".
Not because I care really about Lub being a sockpuppet (and it would reinforce the fact that Varrus is playing an act) but because it'd be sad, even for Varrus, if the best argument he can come up with for following such a decidedly non-Christian economic mindset was "You're a gay baby killer".
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Who says I don't cite...
Varus
Quote:
http://www.crummer.rollins.edu/journal/articles/2004_1_Taxes.pdf
Varus
I say you don't cite correctly.
You satanist.
You satanist.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Joph wrote:
I say you don't quote or cite correctly.
Fixed...
god loves me god loves you...thank you all have a good night and god bless =)
Varus
Varus
I have an even better idea:
How about the gvt learns to live within their means. I have to, you have to, we all do. But the Gvt can deficit spend and raise taxes as they need more. Boy I wish I could go and buy a $5000 laptop and say it is deficit spending, letting someone else pick up the tab.
As long as we as a whole let that continue, the entire discussion is moot.
How about the gvt learns to live within their means. I have to, you have to, we all do. But the Gvt can deficit spend and raise taxes as they need more. Boy I wish I could go and buy a $5000 laptop and say it is deficit spending, letting someone else pick up the tab.
As long as we as a whole let that continue, the entire discussion is moot.
Quote:
thank you all have a good night and god bless
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Tax burden shifts to the middle
Quote:
Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families, the Congressional Budget Office has found
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.
The CBO study, due to be released today, found that the wealthiest 20 percent, whose incomes averaged $182,700 in 2001, saw their share of federal taxes drop from 64.4 percent of total tax payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year. The top 1 percent, earning $1.1 million, saw their share fall to 20.1 percent of the total, from 22.2 percent.
Over that same period, taxpayers with incomes from around $51,500 to around $75,600 saw their share of federal tax payments increase. Households earning around $75,600 saw their tax burden jump the most, from 18.7 percent of all taxes to 19.5 percent.
More information is available at http://www.cbo.gov
About the source:
Quote:
But the conclusions have heightened significance because of their source, a nonpartisan government agency headed by a former senior economist from the Bush White House, Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
"CBO is nonpartisan, it's independent, and right now it works for a Republican Congress with a former Bush economist at its head," said Jason Furman, economic director of the presidential campaign of Sen. John F. Kerry. "There's no higher authority on the subject."
"The CBO answers the questions they are asked," said Terry Holt, a Bush campaign spokesman. "To the extent the questions are shaded to receive a certain response, that's often the response you get."
"CBO is nonpartisan, it's independent, and right now it works for a Republican Congress with a former Bush economist at its head," said Jason Furman, economic director of the presidential campaign of Sen. John F. Kerry. "There's no higher authority on the subject."
"The CBO answers the questions they are asked," said Terry Holt, a Bush campaign spokesman. "To the extent the questions are shaded to receive a certain response, that's often the response you get."
Quote:
Who says I don't cite...
The article fails to answer the question. It does not identify the net value of contributions (All the figures add up to several hundred percent. Find one that shows a pie chart of the proportion of net national revenue that totals 100% and you'll find that the biggest slice is collected from the middle classes, not the high-rollers.
And this nice, impartial, objective piece of 'research' ends with a rally-cry to lobby for republican tax policies. Once again, varus, you've fallen for pseudo-scientific political propaganda masquerading as research.
More confirmation that academia has been devalued by sh[/i]it like this. I'd be sending this straight back to the student with a copy of the 'Manual Worker Vacancies' page of the local newspaper. With this level of sh[i]ite, its no wonder that many employers now say MBA stands for 'Mediocre, But Arrogant'
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Recent Visitors: 299
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (299)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- More Record Deficits! Weeeee
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC