The 'Tax Cut, For or Against' thread

[Imran Siddiqui]

The benefits of tax cuts would only really them useful during surpluses.

But that's when they do the least benefit. That might increase inflation more than wanted. Taxes during downturns help in the recovery phase. Deficit spending isn't all bad, and may be necessary in some respects to lessen the effects of recession/depression.

Remember, FDR 'New Deal' had monsterous deficits (even more, as a percentage of GDP than the 80s, 90s, or today). In stagnant growth, deficit could be just what the doctor ordered.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Caligastia


If you give me all your money I promise to spend it wisely.

That's not how it works. Taxes are suppose to be spent to benefit us. If they don't benefit us they aren't spent wisely

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

The benefits of tax cuts would only really them useful during surpluses.

But that's when they do the least benefit. That might increase inflation more than wanted. Taxes during downturns help in the recovery phase. Deficit spending isn't all bad, and may be necessary in some respects to lessen the effects of recession/depression.

Remember, FDR 'New Deal' had monsterous deficits (even more, as a percentage of GDP than the 80s, 90s, or today). In stagnant growth, deficit could be just what the doctor ordered.

A budget surplus pumps money into the economy though the purchase of debt, right? If you cut taxes and balance the budget that would also be an injection into the economy. So either way there is an injection, and I wont bother arguing which injection would be largest.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

The benefits of tax cuts would only really them useful during surpluses.

But that's when they do the least benefit. That might increase inflation more than wanted. Taxes during downturns help in the recovery phase. Deficit spending isn't all bad, and may be necessary in some respects to lessen the effects of recession/depression.

Remember, FDR 'New Deal' had monsterous deficits (even more, as a percentage of GDP than the 80s, 90s, or today). In stagnant growth, deficit could be just what the doctor ordered.

i agree with tax cuts being completely useless during great economic times. wasnt bush advocating tax cuts before the economy became lame as a gimp?

The only other problem i have with tax cuts are they shouldnt be so massive for obvious cyclical downturns in the market. I wouldnt have a problem of say a 250 billion progressive tax cut directed solely at the people who make less than 100k.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That's not how it works. Taxes are suppose to be spent to benefit us. If they don't benefit us they aren't spent wisely

Money you had to earn is a lot more likely to be spent well than money that is given to you no matter how badly you spend it. The government doesn't have to earn tax money, so it's not very likely that it will be spent wisely - and it isn't.

[Imran Siddiqui]

wasnt bush advocating tax cuts before the economy became lame as a gimp?

Yeah, it's a moral position for him. Less taxes are morally right for Bush.

The only other problem i have with tax cuts are they shouldnt be so massive for obvious cyclical downturns in the market.

I'd be inclined to agree with you, but political pressures won't let that happen. The worst thing a President can do during a downturn is nothing.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

wasnt bush advocating tax cuts before the economy became lame as a gimp?

Yeah, it's a moral position for him. Less taxes are morally right for Bush.

For a moment, I thought it was the 'Bush is highly intelligent' thread
Well, we can criticize his dumbness in other threads too

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Money you had to earn is a lot more likely to be spent well than money that is given to you no matter how badly you spend it. The government doesn't have to earn tax money, so it's not very likely that it will be spent wisely - and it isn't.

That's what the political system is for, and for the most part we benefit just as much from the way our taxes are spent as we do from the way we spend the rest of our paycheck.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That's what the political system is for

...spending money unwisely?? The truth comes out.

, and for the most part we benefit just as much from the way our taxes are spent as we do from the way we spend the rest of our paycheck.

I would prefer to spend my money myself thanks.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Spiffor

For a moment, I thought it was the 'Bush is highly intelligent' thread
Well, we can criticize his dumbness in other threads too

Actually, if you look at the poll results you are correct to assume that this is a criticize his dumbness thread

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Caligastia
...spending money unwisely?? The truth comes out.

clever you

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

wasnt bush advocating tax cuts before the economy became lame as a gimp?

Yeah, it's a moral position for him. Less taxes are morally right for Bush.

Quote:

The only other problem i have with tax cuts are they shouldnt be so massive for obvious cyclical downturns in the market.

I'd be inclined to agree with you, but political pressures won't let that happen. The worst thing a President can do during a downturn is nothing.

And thats the problem with taxes in america. I wish an independent body such as the Federal reserve could make macro tax decisions rather than an elected official and a group of elected officials.

If you make tax cuts a moral issue then youre obviously not going to make the right decision at the right time. Youre going to make the same decision good or bad all the time consequences be damned.

and its sad that political pressures are the ones that guide the policies of america rather than the common good of the people.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by MRT144
And thats the problem with taxes in america. I wish an independent body such as the Federal reserve could make macro tax decisions rather than an elected official and a group of elected officials.

That was a troll, right ?
The setting up of the budget is one of the most important decisions still taken by people representing the people's will. If you get rid of it, you can scrap democracy altogether.

For example, if I feel the state spends way too much on military and police, I will obviously vote for someone who makes other fields as its priority. No way I give up such a right.

[Kidicious]

If people could just be smarter.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I wish an independent body such as the Federal reserve could make macro tax decisions rather than an elected official and a group of elected officials.

sad that political pressures are the ones that guide the policies of america rather than the common good of the people.

That is the problem with a democratic government. The people themselves normally don't do what is for the 'common good'. They want to get out of the recession NOW, and get their jobs back and who cares about the future. Westerners are very short sighted about things.

If you take economic decisions out of elected bodies, it would never pass a Constitutional amendment and would be utterly ripped apart. The sad truth is that the people want to be able to make decisions on economics (through their elected reps) and not give it to other people.

Remember, Bush 1 did nothing about the '91 recession (really) and it was extremely short, because he realized that it was merely a cyclical boom and anything he did would make the future consequences worse. He did the smart thing (IMO) but it cost him come election time.

[Ned]

With interest rates this low, now is the time to massively borrow.

Also, the increase in debt should expand the money supply to get us out of this deflation. If the economy begins to grow again, so will tax revenues, automatically shriking the deficit.

Go tax cuts!

[Odin]

We need to raise taxes and increase spending. The Bush tax cut was him just giving back to his campaign sponsors. When the economy is drowning you don't thow it an anchor, government spending is the life preserver of the economy, look at FDR!

[Imran Siddiqui]

We don't need to tank the economy further, Odin (which is what tax increases would do).

government spending is the life preserver of the economy, look at FDR!

*points at the 80s and 90s*

[Odin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
We don't need to tank the economy further, Odin (which is what tax increases would do).

*points at the 80s and 90s*

The corporations were doing good in the 80's, but if you say that the quality of life was good you are a MORON.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Spiffor

That was a troll, right ?
The setting up of the budget is one of the most important decisions still taken by people representing the people's will. If you get rid of it, you can scrap democracy altogether.

For example, if I feel the state spends way too much on military and police, I will obviously vote for someone who makes other fields as its priority. No way I give up such a right.

the idea im aiming for though is changing budgeting from people who make it a political issue, to people who have no reason to use it as a political issue. a board appointed by the representitives of the government every 8 years or so(say 8 elected by congress, 1 appointed by the president), to make budget, economic, etc etc decisions would take the ball out of the court of the dickslaps that campaign on an idea and put into action the ideas that arent the best for the nation.

these same ideas are applied in the federal reserve and supreme court and while they do make some political judgements for the most part that doesnt play an overriding theme in their decisions.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The corporations were doing good in the 80's, but if you say that the quality of life was good you are a MORON.

Nice to know you care .

The quality of life was doing good. Or would you rather prefer the higher tax, bigger government '70s?

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Ned
With interest rates this low, now is the time to massively borrow.

Also, the increase in debt should expand the money supply to get us out of this deflation. If the economy begins to grow again, so will tax revenues, automatically shriking the deficit.

Go tax cuts!

thats if the dolt in office doesnt think "hey we have more tax revenue, lets give people ANOTHER break"

the problem with bush is he would lower taxes no matter what happened economicly. lowering taxes in good times to supposedly give back to the people, and then lowering them again when people are on tough times. At what point do you end the spiral into tax cut madness?

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by MRT144


the idea im aiming for though is changing budgeting from people who make it a political issue, to people who have no reason to use it as a political issue. a board appointed by the representitives of the government every 8 years or so(say 8 elected by congress, 1 appointed by the president), to make budget, economic, etc etc decisions would take the ball out of the court of the dickslaps that campaign on an idea and put into action the ideas that arent the best for the nation.

these same ideas are applied in the federal reserve and supreme court and while they do make some political judgements for the most part that doesnt play an overriding theme in their decisions.

The implementation of such a committee would destroy the justification for our tax system. Now taxes are justified by the benefits they provide. Since each voter has an equal voice in the tax and spend policy it is said that the tax system benefits the people equally. I don't think it would work as well if voters couldn't have a say, even if it did work better.

[Kidicious]

The last\current recession is a good example of the effects of supply-side economics. True, there were no supply-side tax cuts leading up to it. But supply-side tax cuts are suppose to increase business investment. Business investment accelerated in the end of the nineties, while GDP increased at about the same rate as the early nineties. The result was oversupply. In fact there is still so much capacity in the economy that we will need significant demand stimulus to get us out of this hole. Anyone proposing supply-side stimulus at this time isn't paying attention to the current conditions or the recent past.