Posted on 06/01/2011 2:00:01 PM PDT by lowbridge
"All I know is, whenever you have any type of a problem and the problem is one that you spend more than you are actually bringing in then you have to bring in more and spend less. It just makes so much sense, Judge, it's all we have to do," Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY) told FOX Business this evening
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I’m going to have to agree with Rangel here................we need to spend less and tax more
Let’s start with the 42 % of Americans who pay NO FEDERAL TAXES AT ALL
When it comes to all things economic, liberals are one trick ponies - spend.
Did Charlie ever pay his taxes?
Ask a leftist how to discourage something, like smoking and their second response will be to increase taxes on it (the first will probably be imprisonment). So somewhere in the echo chamber of their heads, leftists realize that when you increase taxes on an activity, that activity will decrease.
Yet at the same time, they believe that if they increase taxes on an activity, the increase in revenues will be proportional to the rate of increase. Then they're surprised when the revenues are far less than they projected, and in some cased, less than they were taking in before the increase.
Heck, even Obama has admitted that he knows that reducing taxes will increase revenues to the government, but he is against it for "fairness."
The best example I ever heard was when a state (I believe it was Illinois) decided to increase the tax rates on casinos. It was "progressive" so as the casinos made more, they paid an increasing tax rate. The casinos realized that if they made more than a certain amount, the higher tax rates made operations less than profitable. So they cut back on the hours that the casinos were operating. Since the entire tax scale had increased, the state did take in a bit more money, though far less than projected... However that was more than offset by the number of people who were laid off or had their hours cut by the casino. The actual revenues to the state were less than before the tax increase.
Mark
NAMT
The “No Alternative Maximum Tax”
You make, we take it.
bttt
I’m wondering whatever happened to those 4 rent controlled apartments he had. As I understood it, when it comes to rent controlled apartments, youre only allowed one to a family. And that family has to be poor (Rangel is a millionaire). Plus he was using one of those apartments as a political campaign office (also illegal)
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.