Election Aftermath Thread (1 Viewer)

[Saint by the Bay]

You may disagree as a liberal, but most tax cuts don't benefit the rich.
Check out the results of the latests tax cut measure. It increased the EIC significantly, also the %'s were in favor of the poor.

Check out the raw money the rich pay in taxes.

I'm a liberal?

That's actually pretty funny. I always say I'm doing something right since half the people I know call me too conservative and half call me too liberal.

No, I'm not talking about tax cuts but your assertion the economy is booming. The tax cuts were a good thing though not large enough and should have been matched with spending cuts. Also, more targetted cuts toward domestic manufacturing companies would have been nice.

 

[RebSaint]

You may disagree as a liberal, but most tax cuts don't benefit the rich.
Check out the results of the latests tax cut measure. It increased the EIC significantly, also the %'s were in favor of the poor.

Check out the raw money the rich pay in taxes.

Not speaking for SBTB, but I don't think he's not a liberal.Not all people are neatly divided into red/blue and "conservative," and "liberal" camps.

And tax cuts DO benefit the rich, because most taxes are paid for by the rich.

But cutting taxes just to improve the economy presumes one important thing: that the rich or middle class will reinvest that money from the tax cuts for economic growth (to trickle down) which helps the middle class and the poor.

Sometimes it doesn't happen.

 

[Wombat]

The economy may be booming, but I seriously doubt it has anything to do with such a modest, almost meaningless tax cut.

The Reagan tax cuts worked because everybody's taxes were too high, and it actually helped bring in revenues to the treasury.

I think this tax cut, along with out-of-control spending has allowed the deficit to skyrocket.

Republicans--fiscally irresponsible.

It isn't meaningless. Play with the calculator about midway down the page.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

See what you'll get now and then change the date to 2000 to see what you get when the Democrats let the cuts expire.

Also, recently the budget deficit has been declining more rapidly than projected thanks to increased revenue to the Feds secondary to the tax cuts.

Federal deficit now lowest in 4 years

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

The federal budget deficit, helped by a gusher of tax revenues, fell to $247.7 billion in 2006, the smallest amount of red ink in four years.

The deficit for the budget year that ended Sept. 30 was 22 percent lower than the $318.7 billion imbalance for 2005, handing President Bush an economic bragging point as Republicans go into the final four weeks of a battle for control of Congress.

Both spending and tax revenues climbed to all-time highs. The sharp narrowing of the deficit reflected the fact that revenues climbed by 11.7 percent, outpacing the 7.3 percent increase in spending.

 

[SaintJ]

I'm a liberal?

That's actually pretty funny. I always say I'm doing something right since half the people I know call me too conservative and half call me too liberal.

No, I'm not talking about tax cuts but your assertion the economy is booming. The tax cuts were a good thing though not large enough and should have been matched with spending cuts. Also, more targetted cuts toward domestic manufacturing companies would have been nice.

Of course you're a liberal. Look at that picture: your wife doesn't wear a ton of makeup.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Of course you're a liberal. Look at that picture: your wife doesn't wear a ton of makeup.

Or have that cheesy fake "outside the church after service" smile.

 

[SaintJ]

What ever effect, if any, the Republican taxing (or not) and spending policies are having on the economy, there is a staggering perception right now that whatever economy results therefrom dumps an imbalance of benefits on its wealthier members. Like it or not, there is a social compact involved (read The Wealth of Nations sometimes instead of Ayn Rand's misguided reductios ad absurdam about the free market), and when the game gets a little out of whack, people react.

For instance, there's no natural law that says we've got to have artificially created limited liability entities like corporations, but we do. We all agreed on it (sort of). Underlying that agreement is that the game won't get too far out of whack. When it does, there's a reaction. While it may be counterintuitive, sometimes the crowd would rather have it where each has less, shared more evenly, than more, shared in greater disproportion.

It's a bit of a cousin to Warren Buffett's observation that it's not greed that drives behavior, it's envy. Maybe there's a biological and cultural underpinning to it when it operates on a macro basis.

 

[SaintJ]

Or have that cheesy fake "outside the church after service" smile.

Not to mention the carefully blow-dried and combed hair and the eyeglasses with just-too-large-to-be-stylish goldish frames.

 

[RebSaint]

It isn't meaningless. Play with the calculator about midway down the page.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

See what you'll get now and then change the date to 2000 to see what you get when the Democrats let the cuts expire.

Also, recently the budget deficit has been declining more rapidly than projected thanks to increased revenue to the Feds secondary to the tax cuts.

Federal deficit now lowest in 4 years

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

The federal budget deficit, helped by a gusher of tax revenues, fell to $247.7 billion in 2006, the smallest amount of red ink in four years.

The deficit for the budget year that ended Sept. 30 was 22 percent lower than the $318.7 billion imbalance for 2005, handing President Bush an economic bragging point as Republicans go into the final four weeks of a battle for control of Congress.

Both spending and tax revenues climbed to all-time highs. The sharp narrowing of the deficit reflected the fact that revenues climbed by 11.7 percent, outpacing the 7.3 percent increase in spending.

Again, what are people DOING with these tax cuts? If they're paying off outstanding debts, it doesn't make much difference in the economy. If the windfall, or average middle class "cut" is a couple thousand dollars--it isn't enough to make a real difference in the economy if a lot of that money is going to pay outstanding debts (credit card, car payments, etc.)

If taxes are low to begin with, the government can't cut them that much--which was my point to begin with. The Laffer Curve, which is what supply-side economics is based on--justifies cutting taxes when taxes are uncecessarily high and not enough money is going into the private sector.

If the government gives a modest tax cut it may be good for individuals to help pay off loans, but as a structural boost to the economy, it's rather meaningless because most people aren't getting allowed to keep much more of their money to make a neglibible difference.

The tax cuts need to be substantive to give people more spending power, and the tax cuts need to be enough so it leaves small business owners enough to invest more capital in a business.

Getting $3000 back might be enough to pay some debts, but it's not enough to sustain or facilitate a boom in the economy.

Moreover, tax cuts are meaningless if wages remain flat, or interest rates or inflation is high--or energy prices are higher than average.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Again, what are people DOING with these tax cuts?

Buying gas....

The average gas prices have jumped so much in 6 years that the tax cut for the average American is only slightly more than the increase in their average yearly fuel and utility costs as a result.

Note: I have no statistics to back this up, just crunched some quick numbers in my head for my own situation and I'm in one of the upper tax brackets.

 

[BullDawg]

Buying gas....

The average gas prices have jumped so much in 6 years that the tax cut for the average American is only slightly more than the increase in their average yearly fuel and utility costs as a result.

Note: I have no statistics to back this up, just crunched some quick numbers in my head for my own situation and I'm in one of the upper tax brackets.

Hush up with your statistics you pinko-commie-liberal.

 

[DadsDream]

Tuesday Night November 7
Jay Leno

Today was Election Day. The vote went quick here in L.A. They now have a quicker, faster separate lane for all the illegal immigrants.

I’m not sure about some of these ballot initiatives. For example, here we had 127 which was about notifying the parents of a middle school student if their teacher became pregnant after having sex. I’m not sure what that is all about.

Some of the initiatives are just frivolous. Like 102 – is it ok for someone to eat just the top half of a muffin.

The GOP is concerned about Republican voter turnout. Right now instead they have a congressman and a preacher that are coming out instead of turning out.

Dick Cheney went hunting today. I didn’t realize it was lawyer season already.

Pastor Ted Haggard has stepped down from his position. He was thought to be a George Bush Republican. Instead it turned out he was a George Michael Republican.

Saddam Hussein was found guilty in Iraq and sentenced to death. Saddam should have taken my advice. I told him to get a good Jewish lawyer but he wouldn’t listen.

On this day in 1860 Abraham Lincoln was elected in a three way race. President Bush today said that he admired Lincoln. Because of inventing the penny. The Lincoln Town Car. And of course because of Lincoln Logs.

 

[DadsDream]

Wait..wait...wait, this is too good to leave out:

Friday Night November 3
Jay Leno

There was a huge accident today. Apparently a bunch of Republican candidates trying to distance themselves from President Bush ran into a bunch of Democrat candidates trying to distance themselves from John Kerry. They just collided in the middle. It was gruesome.

 

[DadsDream]

Daryl Cagle, MSNBC.com

 

[DadsDream]

Mike Lane, Baltimore, Maryland

 

[DadsDream]

Milt Priggee, Seattle (WA)