Skip to comments.Expiring Tax Zots: Big Business
Posted on 11/10/2010 3:20:26 PM PST by joethevoter
click here to read article
“those huge deficit busting cuts again”
Under those tax cuts the Federal revenue, in dollar terms and as a % of total income tax revenue and as a % of GDP, in the highest tax brackets rose.
In shear economic terms, they did not produce a rise in the deficit.
The problem was not on the revenue side. The problem was that even though revenue increased, spending increased by an even greater degree.
Shove it up your .... Well you are all Azz so there probably isn’t a logical starting point.
Devil Worshipin’, Satanic Inspired, Communist!
Maybe joe can tell us what the gubmint means by “middle class”. I read, analyze and listen to what the MSM, gubmint and academics say, and all I can make out is the middle class is those who make less than $30,000 so those people make no tax payment at all if they are a family of four.
“Those extra cuts are ONLY for those making more than a quarter million a year.”
One of the largest groups of individuals in that category are single-owner small business people who, in site of being a business have business income low enough that they can file their income as an “individual”.
That amount, the income, may be $250,000 or even more, but it is not their “wages”, it is the revenue from the business, often out of which they have not only paid general costs but even employees as well.
They, as a group, are one of the biggest beneficiaries of those cuts, and while the big corporations have the largest level of ongoing, year-to-year employees, it is small businesses that generate the largest level of new hires.
You are so stupid you have created your own black hole. Not even light can escape your stupidity.
I just got here and the party is over?
(hangs head, shuffles feet)
“These cuts were designed by the Republicans to expire to avoid blowing a hole in our deficit of about $700 billion dollars. It was THEIR IDEA that they should and MUST expire in 2010 because they knew we could not afford them.”
How wrong you are. Congressional politics, deal making, bartering and “bi-partisan” appeals that RINOS accepted from the Dims, left the expiration of the cuts in, for political reasons and political reasons alone.
Are you the original poster of this? LOL
I have been using it and various parts for the last year and I forgot who the original poster was.
If you want to be added to the Undead Thread ping list, FReepmail sionnsar or Monkey Face.
We move once a month, and are always looking for a new troll to pave. This is a VERY low ping list ~~ normally, twice a month ~~ when we move at the first of the month and mid-month, as a reminder.
We took the original ZOT! thread (jj_fate will live forever!) and went to the end of the Internet...
WE, however, continued in the Flying Castle...because we CAN! Join us!
You’re out of place here, Friend. You surely don’t understand how taxes work. It is the duty of each and every American citizen to keep their tax liability as low as possible. It is the only way to curtail the ambitions of a Federal Government hell bent on full bore ‘central planning’. The only thing stopping them is their inability to pay for their programs. It is the power we exercise. Even if the Fed raises rates, the historic level of revenue is roughly 19% GDP because that action causes us to change our behavior.
The supreme court has said “the legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted. (U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sutherland, Gregory vs. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465, 1965.
“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as
possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the
treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes.
Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister
in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone
does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any
public duty to pay more than the law demands.”
Source: in the case of Gregory v. Helvering 69 F.2d 809, 810 (2d Cir. 1934), aff’d, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935)
If you want to address income ‘inequality’ go after the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve. Their action only helps the quick and the rich. (like now)
Inflation is the cruelest tax of all.
But I take no comfort, and see considerable risk, in conducting monetary policy that has the consequence of transferring income from the poor and the worker and the saver to the rich. Senior citizens and others who saved and played by the rules are earning nothing on their savings, while big debtors and too-big-to-fail oligopoly banks benefit from their subsidy.
Richard W Fisher Dallas Fed.
May the feral attack zombie deer visit you next.
“That is what wiped out the Clinton surplus Bush inherited. That and two wars.”
The so-called “Clinton surplus” was NEVER the Clinton surplus.
That surplus was the result of tax and spending changes the post-1994-election Congress FORCED into the budgets. In the final stage of that force, parts of the Federal apparatus in Washington were left unfunded and temporarily shut down, with only temporary funding for other operations passed until Clinton agreed to the changes - the changes the GOP in Congress forced on him, the changes that resulted in the so-called “Clinton surplus”.
Stupid is as stupid does, and yinz is stupid.
Now that's funny.
Signed, Controls Engineer
“When Bloomberg magazine polled wealthy investors only 24% considered investing in America while the rest cited China, India and Brazil. When the rich get extra cash ( tax cuts ) they invest it. They will take the cut and send that money to China, India and Brazil.”
“Wealthy investors” represent a class of investors, and not the bulk of domestic capital investment in the U.S. which comes from the investment of institutions - pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds and the like.
They, wealthy individual investors, also take bigger risks than institutional investors, since it is their money they are risking, they can afford to; and emerging markets that are growing rapidly have more opportunities to take higher risks - for higher returns; which comes back to their accounts, which adds to their taxable income - here in the U.S. Big deal.
LOL! May he reign!
You didn’t tell us about the feral attack zombie deer...how do they interact with the Dustbunnies, Zombies and Dwarves? Are they in the Lower Levels?
Do we need a “special place” for them? Will they obey your commands? Or do we need to place a basilisk in charge of them?
Answer on the UT. I’m sure I’m not the only denizen who is concerned. What will they do to the kudzu?
Those jobs are never coming home.
if the corporations and their congressional stooges get their way .
Public schools closed tomorrow for Veteran's Day, he gets to stay up late.
Can I use/stealz ur piture???
“To top that off these same wealthy corporate owners closed about 40,000 US factories and sent them over seas between 2001 and 2008. They did use those cuts to create new jobs...for Chinese and Indian workers.”
There is no direct economic or financial correlation between the tax cuts under GWBush and the growth of overseas production or operations facilities for U.S. companies.
That growth has more to do with global trends that differ from one industry to the next, more than any specific tax cuts, and the level of that kind of change varies as well between the industries most involved.
One of the biggest global-wide trends that have been part of the reduction in manufacturing jobs, GLOBALLY, is the huge additions of computer technology and robotics to manufacturing. The impact of that change has been bigger in some places outside the U.S. than in the U.S. In spite of how much foreigners have set up manufacturing sites in China, “modernization” has resulted in a bigger drop in the number of workers and as a % of the workforce, in manufacturing, in China in the last 20 years than it has in the U.S. Why? They had a large amount of “catch up” to do and its actually still going on (huge useless, wasteful, old factories required to keep operating).
Lastly, foreign companies investing in the U.S. as well as the many building their own operations in the U.S. (just think automobiles for instance) have ADDED as many jobs here as U.S. jobs transferred or “outsourced” overseas.
Its a global marketplace.
I know. I grabbed a shopping cart the other day, and it was too big to push.
Yep. Any picture I post you can use or abuse in any way you wish. ;0)
Many economic facts are missing from that story line.
The problem with the "income" figures is that they (1)do not represent TOTAL compensation and (2)leave out the benefits (welfare, food stamps, medicaid and income in the form of tax "refunds") received by the lower income sectors.
The "stagnation" in "wage growth" was NOT stagnation in total compensation as it occurred at the same time while compensation in form of health insurance benefits was skyrocketing, with some of that having been forced on the national statistics by Liberal-promoted state mandates adding tons of new mandatory coverages, and Liberal supported and promoted increases to state employees non-wage benefits.
When total compensation is considered, there was no stagnation; just a lot more compensation going to benefits.
Notice that while the Liberals were the first to yell how much health insurance costs were going up, and how much wages were not, they were the biggest promoters of policies that contributed to that result.
“Americans were fooled again”
So says one of the real fools.
I haz a hungeer iz teh zot reedai?
Got my vote!
Got my vote!
Keep your day job. You’ll never make it as a troll.
Yeah, we should tax everyone at a 100% rate for all the money that they have (earn and established) over $250K. Then your buddy Soros would be SOL and your paycheck from him would dry up!
Walken bitch slap ping
This is quintessential “ Undead Thread” material ;-)
You know they’ve got Freeze Pops in some pretty awesome tropical flavors now.
Looks like it to me, too!!
The Dems said they would block the tax cuts if they were made permanent. A position that hasn't changed.