Republicans have agreed to $150 bln-$200 bln in increased tax revenues in budget talks: Senator Kyl

http://www.reuters.com/ ^

[Windy City Conservative]

Republicans have agreed to $150 bln-$200 bln in increased tax revenues in budget talks: Senator Kyl

[Uncle Miltie]

This is approximately the shape of the Laffer Curve, according to many economic studies I've seen.

When our cummulative government spending (which, as Milton Friedman showed is what government total taxation by all means is) is around 40-45% of GDP, raising any more revenue by increasing tax rates is impossible.

Look at the damned curve!

[Uncle Miltie]

Therefore, any tax rate increases agreed to by Republicans will have two effects:

1) Lower economic growth, AND

2) Less tax revenue to the government.

This is economically stupid two ways. Plus it is politically stupid.

Deeply Stupid. Count on the RINOs to cave in to stupid.

[Czar]

Names of all Republicans (RINOs) who vote “Yes” on such nonsense. ID them for the TeaParty treatment...

[Cementjungle]

The article refers to fees for government services. This might be real taxes, if so, the Pubics have sold us out. But it might not be. The devil’s in the details

They'll probably start a new "breathing fee". Of course the "poor" will be exempt.

[familyop]

It’s a little late, but here’s a good link. ...seems there’s a bit of a propaganda fight here and there over this news. ...told you all that they’d be sneaky.

Republicans agree to revenue increases: Senator Kyl
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/06/us-usa-debt-idUSTRE7646S620110706

[rintense]

There is no way you can justify ‘increasing revenue’, yes, taxes, and then go after budget cuts. The spineless elites caved ONCE AGAIN.

[Vermont Lt]

OK, what about the millions of Americans that make 40,000 and pay NO income taxes? You willing to have them taxed. At least a little?

[andyk]

Over what period, 10 years? I hate how they use so many different time frames.

And those time frames are very, very rarely included in stories by the MSM. Okay, pretty much never. I see a trillion in cuts, and I get excited - too bad it's over 10 years.

[Always Independent]

Actually, I would exclude the little old ladies that live off the dividends they receive. But I would apply the income tax to all. I paid it when I made less than 40K.