AndyP
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 12:28 PM
Original message |
|
How does Bush plan to pay for his tax cuts. I need serious answers please. I have a paper due on Monday and just finished explaining Kerry's tax plans, which are pretty easy to understand- especially where he is going to get the money to pay for them:)
But, Bush is a different story, he plans plenty of tax cuts for all and doesn't really say how he's going to pay for them. I going to assume that he actually plans to pay for them *somehow*.
I was thinking that he assumes they are going to be paid for by the new jobs that would be created, which would equal tax revenues. Unfortunately tax revenues are down :( Thanks for all your help peeps. :yourock:
|
wurzel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 12:31 PM
Response to Original message |
1. If you are still in school YOU will pay for them. |
|
He is taking money from Social Security. The rest he is borrowing. Either way you pay.
|
unblock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message |
2. republicans plan on letting democrats raise taxes |
|
that's the plan.
seriously.
they will not pay for anything, because they cannot take the political hit. look at what they did to bush 41.
eventually, a democrat becomes president and raises taxes and that's how stuff gets paid for. and republicans scream and moan and run on that for the next decade or too.
republicans are the most shameless, irresponsible, power-mad bunch since, well, um, they complain when i make THAT comparison....
|
gmoney
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message |
3. clearly, he's NOT paying for them |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-09-04 12:38 PM by gmoney
they subscribe to the voodoo economics "Laffer Curve" (sp?) as detailed by Ben Stein in 'Ferris Bueller's Day Off'
The 'theory' is that if you cut taxes far enough, the resulting prosperity will create such HUGE levels of new income that, when taxed at the lower rate, will actually generate MORE revenue than higher taxes on a lower amount of income.
Simplified, would you rather collect 40% of $100 or 15% of $300?
Of course, it ignores the time that you have to starve the government while collecting 15% on $100, HOPING that income will triple.
Bush Sr. called it Voodoo economics when he was running against Reagan in the 1980 primaries. Bush Jr. might call it "faith based" economics. Either way, it's based on wishful thinking and heavily favors those who can weather an economic storm and don't mind the rest of society going to hell in the meantime.
|
oscar111
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. reaganomics: wages lower now: homelessness up |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-09-04 01:21 PM by oscar111
Wages lower now than when reaganomics began {adjusted for inflation}
$1,500 drop in middle class income during these bush years... PBS interview Sept. 6 '04 8pm.
Homelessness just keeps increasing. New bush proposed Budget will toss another 250 000 out to live on a piece of sidewalk.
24 years is long enough to test reaganomics. Total failure, that killed 84 000 homeless/year, due to cold, heat, crime, disease {rat bites}.
Reaganomics is a trick, to get tax cuts for the rich. Under this bush, about $270 B total. Yet, $16 billion would end all homelessness and hunger. 4 for homelessness end, 12 for end of all hunger.
'52, time of prosperity, rich tax was 90%... now a third.. 35%. Small wonder there is no money for hunger or homelessness or state asylums.. thus heinous crimes on tv... or for pothole repair, or for bridge repair... or for enough cops to keep crime down. Republicans bring disaster to our country, and outright death to the poor.
|
unblock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. exactly, they never show you the math that proves it's unworkable |
|
cut a tax rate from 33% to 30% and you need TEN PERCENT growth ABOVE AND BEYOND what you'd have gotten anyway in taxable income just to break even on revenues.
|
Robert Oak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-09-04 04:10 PM
Response to Original message |
6. cutting our social security any safety net, dismantle new deal |
|
ruining our public education by cutting funding so the public system fails, then turn around and promote his "religious schools" or vouchers, i.e. privatization of our government services and educational system. Privatization of social security, further reduction in medicaid, privatization of the military. http://www.counterpunch.org/freeman05302003.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18876-2004Sep13.htmlhttp://www.aflcio.org/issuespolitics/ns01312002.cfmhttp://www.uswa.org/uswa/program/content/1016.php
|
German-Lefty
(568 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Oct-12-04 04:49 AM
Response to Original message |
7. He says he's going to cut the deficit and taxes |
|
It's faith based econ. If you want to know how they think it'll work, ask some Freepers. Basically they think they can just borrow money forever.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 10th 2024, 08:11 PM
Response to Original message |