Posted on 10/25/2007 7:20:43 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Actually, deficits had been coming down.
If you increase taxes on the rich, that's not going to happen anymore.
Just for the record, federal revenue has increased from $1.7 trillion per year in 2003 to $2.5 trillion per year in 2007. The federal government is flush with cash. We just need to get spending under control.
Federal revenue is: individual income taxes, corporate taxes, and custom duties.
2007:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0907.txt
2003:
http://fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0903.txt
1998 - 2007 (click SEPTEMBETR, end of fiscal year)
http://fms.treas.gov/mts/backissues.html
When people don’t pay taxes, they don’t care what happens to the money, as long as they get their share.
That’s what the Dims want: A nanny state and nobody but the “rich” care.
Yes, the deficit has been coming down. Fiscal year 2007 it is down to $162 billion. That’s down from the high in 2004 of some $400 billion. Revenue has increased from $1.7 trillion in 2003 (before the tax cuts) to $2.5 trillion in 2007.
If we get spending under control then we’ll be in good shape. The US Treasury is flush with cash.
I like Neal Boortz’s description of the tax plan:
We are going to give away more stuff to people who vote for us, and take stuff from people who do not vote for us so we can give more to our people.
He needs the money for a monument to him. What a conceited arrogant ...
Raise taxes, fund socialism and gun control. What’s so difficult to understand about Democrats?
'Largest individual income tax increase in American history'...
Thanks Charlie. I'm not sure if promises of tax increases have ever gotten anyone elected. It didn't work for GH Bush (promised not to but did anyway), or Kerry, or Dukakis. I'm sure there are plenty more and probably a few exceptions but I'm glad they're saying it now and not in '09.
If I were the Pubs that would be my headline for the election.
Deficit more than halved in 3 years? Quite amazing. And it got only a few headlines a few weeks ago.
MSM is going to increase the economic doomsayer headlines to shift from Iraq now that things are going well there. Also, they don't like this major deficit reduction under Bush so need to hack away at the good news.
Agreed and the Rangle “build my shrine with taxpayer money” plan will mean that after the results of his tax reduces the federal coffers, he will lower the rate for the additional tax.
Then when that fails to cover federal revenues it will be lowered again.
In the end all the rich re: those over 80K must pay for their fat cat status. (Sarcasm off.)
1) How much money did you make?
2) Pease send it in.
Democrats don’t like people to have money. The more money people have, the less control they have over them. Explain why they need all this money.........more pork? If they stop borrowing from China and don’t spend what they don’t have, there would be no problems.
But wait! Thought Democrats had changed their stripes. At least that is what the MSM has been telling me.
You mean to say they still are little more than tax and spenders who will do anything, say anything and steal from anyone so they can buy votes? Say it ain’t so!
A twofer! I love it!
[grabbing ankles...]
HE’S A KOOK WITH POWER. A VERY DANGEROUS COMBO. TAKE HIM SERIOUSLY..........
For one, Rangel wants to lower Corp. Tax Rates.
However from something like 32% down to 30% it is a far cry from the level of the "Celtic Tiger" Ireland of 12.5%.
The bottom line is Rangel is a redistibutionist, and this does nothing but reshuffle the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.
Rangel doesn't have the epistemological fortitude to reinvent the Tax System for the Democratic "Working Man", i.e. either a Flat or Fair Tax. Most likely because like many of his ilk, he is at the "K Street" trough.
The bottom line is he is a Hillary Lackey and this is a trial balloon. In my opinion they are trying to gage the reaction of Wall Street and the Bond Markets to see how much they take before they squeal.
Isn’t it great though, that they think they have power, yet can’t get anything done. Except to drive down their approval numbers.
There are two schools of thought about increasing tax revenues, first is government spending increases economic activity and the economic activity increases Tax revenues.
When we pay taxes, that money doesn’t go into a black hole never to be seen again, it gets recycled back into the economy, equipment and pay for our soldiers, welfare payments, bridges and roads, farm subsidies, etc, etc, and from these sources they buy farm equipment, food, consumer goods, and so forth.
And second we have the supply side which is cutting taxes for everybody, with that extra money, the wealthy invest in businesses, with the extra capital business increase capacity (more workers, more equipment, lower costs) and that drives the economic growth.
Unfortunately, doing both at the same time is like shooting up HGH and steroids.
The AMT needs to be fixed. But then Rangel’s new “soak the rich” tax schemes, just as the AMT, will eventually bite the middle class in the butt.
Hmm...how bout a special tax on people who make the majority of their income from the entertainment industry, professional sports and endorsement deals — a “Celebrity Tax” if you will, adjusted for name recognition and career arc (Certainly not going to tax Gary Coleman the same as Britney Spears). The limo libs in Hollywood surely won’t mind watching their extra Ferrari fund go to Uncle Sam for the good of us regular folks.
HarleyLady 27,
Rangel is nothing more than a marxist race baiting “JAMF.”
This idiot has always been red like his side-kick Ron “Red” Dellums.
These traitors belong in a federal gulag with no chance of parole.
As I See It,
NSNR
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.