Running on empty

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://www.nydailynews.com/opi.../editorials/index.html

President Bush's sunny declaration that "we're gonna be just fine" if Congress passes an economic stimulus package that speeds money to Americans was one of the more hollow claims of his presidency.

As welcome as tax rebates will be, getting the U.S. economy back onto a sure upward trajectory is going to take a lot more than encouraging the public to keep going to the mall.

If only life were that simple and that pleasant.

Behind Bush's smile is a President who is facing a stunningly sudden economic train wreck. Lacking fresh ideas and loath to talk straight about the perils ahead, he's buying time and hoping for the best.

Bush's determination to move quickly in cooperation with congressional Democrats is powerful evidence that he's a worried man.

So, too, his readiness to tackle tax policy without battling the Dems over extending his insanely deep tax cuts, which helped get America into this mess in the first place.

With job growth and consumer spending slowing, fears are rising that the country will slip into recession, meaning the economy will stop growing. To avert a slowdown, policymakers typically make it easier for people to spend money, by either reducing interest rates or putting cash in their pockets.

That's what Bush's $150 billion proposal is all about. In amounts yet to be determined, the public gets money, spends it and the economic wheels keep turning. The Treasury Department projects that such a program would finance a half-million jobs.

But the jolt comes and goes. When spending declines, we'll be back in trouble. But maybe by then the clouds will have parted and the sun will shine and we'll all be on Easy Street.

Don't bet on it.

America needs to come to grips with the fact that the country is not going through a cyclical downturn. We are suffering from two severe, self-inflicted wounds: the subprime mortgage debacle and our eagerness to go into hock to spend, spend and spend some more.

We rode the spending to stock market highs, and now we're getting hammered. Retirement savings accounts are bleeding value. We acted as if our homes would endlessly rise in value, and now foreclosures are mushrooming across the country.

The pillars of American finance have had to take huge infusions of cash from foreign government-related entities and have yet to figure out the value, if there is one, of vast holdings in mortgage-backed securities.

Bush's remedy for now is to send out checks. The Democratic presidential candidates are trying to outbid him, while the Republican field, astonishingly, is offering next to no short-term solutions. They do so at their political peril. Bush's checks are better than nothing.







For those who don't know this is in Mort Zuckermans New York Daily News. Mort also owns and is editor in chief of the U.S. News and World Report.
Mort is a traditional Republican.

It's time to face facts. The Republicans have screwed America with their "insanely" deep tax cuts. The "supposed" huge stimulus giving more than half the tax cut to just a few Americans has been proven false. Turns out the rich don't build factories if consumers don't have money to buy things. And if they do build them them they don't build them in the United States.

In fact, tax cuts to the middle and lower classes are far better for the economy. Not only does this increase demand, it allows these classes to get better educated, start small businesses, etc.

As of this moment the US national debt is a tad over 9 trillion dollars.
Over the last 6 years of the Bush "insanely" deep tax cuts, the richest 3 percent, who recieved 50 percent of the tax cut, were given over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS. YES, AND THATS AT THE RATE BACK WHEN THE TAX CUTS WERE PASSED (175 MILLION A YEAR FOR THE SUPER RICH). WITH INFLATION AND THE FACT THAT THE RICH HAVE INCREASED THEIR INCOME FASTER THAN THE REST OF US, THIS NUMBER IS EASILY 1.5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

At one trillion dollars thats 1/9 of the ENTIRE US NATIONAL DEBT. At 1.5 trillion that 1/6 of the entire US national debt.


SHORT VERSION:
THE BUSH TAX CUTS GIVEN TO THE RICHEST 3 PERCENT OF AMERICANS OVER THE LAST 6 YEARS IS BETWEEN 1/6TH AND 1/9TH OF THE ENTIRE U.S. NATIONAL DEBT. (BETWEEN 1 AND 1.5 TRILLION DOLLARS)
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
It's like you have no sense of history. Everything seems to start today for you.

Bush's "insanely deep" tax cuts were nothing but returning the tax rates to where they were before Clinton raised them, they are actually higher today than before Clinton took office.

Tax rates by year
In 1992 the marginal tax rates were 15%, 28% and 31%

Clinton changed this in 1993 to 15%, 28%, 31% 36% 39.6%

In 2002 Bush changed them to 10% 15% 27% 30% 35% 38.6%
and then in 2003 they went to 10% 15% 25% 28% 33% 35%

So Clinton raised the top rate from 31% to 39.6% and Bush then lowered that rate back to 35%

If a 4% drop in rate is 'insanely deep' then what would you call the 9% increase Clinton pushed on people?

You also seem to ignore the fact that despite this 'insanely deep tax cut' the rich are paying a larger percentage of total income taxes than EVER!
In 2005 the top 1% paid 39% of all income taxes that compares to the 37% they paid under Clinton.

If you expand that to the top 5% you find that they are paying 60% of ALL income taxes compared to 56% in 2000.

Meanwhile the bottom 50% of the country are paying a total of 3.1% of income taxes compared to the 4% they paid in 2000.

So under Bush the rich are paying a larger amount of overall income taxes than ever!
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
So bush doing it is a farce; yet Hillary;s attempt to buy votes is valid?

Does not compute.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
So bush doing it is a farce; yet Hillary;s attempt to buy votes is valid?

Does not compute.


There is a difference between the size of tax cuts and the recipients of tax cuts.
The author is saying the Bush tax cuts were insanely large, and I added they went to the wrong people.
The author is also saying we must do something now to keep a fiscal catastrophe from occurring and I agree.
For the longer term we must roll back some of the tax cuts, mainly from the rich, give some of that money to the lower classes and use some the rest to balance the budget and to actually reduce debt.
I know moderation is out of favor but its worked pretty good for hundred years, up til Bush.
Oh yeah, I am ignoring Prof Johns ridiculous spin like the rich are paying more now than ever before. Yeah, because the rich have gotten proportionately richer so their taxes are more and also due to inflation.
Plus he only looks at income taxes not fixed, non progressive taxes. So he's just spinning for the rich whom he idolizes.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
So bush doing it is a farce; yet Hillary;s attempt to buy votes is valid?

Does not compute.


There is a difference between the size of tax cuts and the recipients of tax cuts.
The author is saying the Bush tax cuts were insanely large, and I added they went to the wrong people.
The author is also saying we must do something now to keep a fiscal catastrophe from occurring and I agree.
For the longer term we must roll back some of the tax cuts, mainly from the rich, give some of that money to the lower classes and use some the rest to balance the budget and to actually reduce debt.
I know moderation is out of favor but its worked pretty good for hundred years, up til Bush.
Oh yeah, I am ignoring Prof Johns ridiculous spin like the rich are paying more now than ever before. Yeah, because the rich have gotten proportionately richer so their taxes are more and also due to inflation.
Plus he only looks at income taxes not fixed, non progressive taxes. So he's just spinning for the rich whom he idolizes.
I'd like to see you respond, thoroughly, to each of the numbers in PJ's post above. Thank you ahead of time.
 

Mxylplyx

Diamond Member
Mar 21, 2007
4,197
101
106
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
So bush doing it is a farce; yet Hillary;s attempt to buy votes is valid?

Does not compute.


There is a difference between the size of tax cuts and the recipients of tax cuts.
The author is saying the Bush tax cuts were insanely large, and I added they went to the wrong people.
The author is also saying we must do something now to keep a fiscal catastrophe from occurring and I agree.
For the longer term we must roll back some of the tax cuts, mainly from the rich, give some of that money to the lower classes and use some the rest to balance the budget and to actually reduce debt.
I know moderation is out of favor but its worked pretty good for hundred years, up til Bush.
Oh yeah, I am ignoring Prof Johns ridiculous spin like the rich are paying more now than ever before. Yeah, because the rich have gotten proportionately richer so their taxes are more and also due to inflation.
Plus he only looks at income taxes not fixed, non progressive taxes. So he's just spinning for the rich whom he idolizes.

Wouldnt it stand to reason that if a small minority (the rich) pay a disproportionate amount of tax, any across the board tax cut will benefit them more? When people talk of cutting taxes for the poor, do they really mean sending them free money in the mail, considering they pay no taxes to begin with?

 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
^ he forgets that percentage wise the poor tended to do better under Bush?s tax cut.

In pure money terms of course a guy making million will get a bigger share of the pie, because he pays more in taxes than a ?poor? person makes. But when a person making say $15,000 a year goes from paying $1000 in taxes under Clinton to nothing under Bush then they really benefited more.

And the number of people who pay NO income tax at all has increased greatly under Bush.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
lol -- Johnnie invents a new stratergery and tactics to defend tax cuts for the uber-wealthy :shocked:

Voodoo Economics does not work!

Increases In Federal Debt By Year

2007 - - $556 Billion
2006 - - $574 Billion
2005 - - $554 Billion
2004 - - $596 Billion
2003 - - $555 Billion
2002 - - $421 Billion
2001 - - $133 Billion
2000 - - $18 Billion


Interest Paid on the Federal Debt Since Supply-Side (VOODOO) Economics

7,541 Trillion Dollars
(Does not include FY 2007)

That's right. Voodoo Economics has heapeda total $9 trillion in debt on America. And since Republucan Voodoo Economics has taken hold we have paid 7,541 Trillion Dollars in interest.

Because of the huge Federal debt, by 2011 we will be paying over $400 billion a year in interest on the Federal debt each fiscal year for the foreseeable future.

Now, Republicans claim in Supply-side Voodoo economics that economic growth can be most effectively created cutting income tax and capital gains tax rates.

Let's take a close look at the contention that Voodoo Economics (Tax Cuts! Tax Cuts!) leads to increased economic growth.

Nominal GDP Growth In The United States (in billions of dollars)

1995 - - - $7,397.7
1996 - - - $7,816.9
1997 - - - $8,304.3
1998 - - - $8,747.0
1999 - - - $9,268.4
2000 - - - $9,817.0

2001 - - - $10,128.0
2002 - - - $10,469.6
2003 - - - $10,960.8
2004 - - - $11,685.9
2005 - - - $12,433.9
2006 - - - $13,194.7

% Increase in Nominal GDP - Presidential Term

32.72% - Last six years of Bill Clinton
30.28% - First Six Years of George Bush

Dang Those Pesky Facts!
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

I haven't confirmed the following, but I assume they mean the worst for this period in January - not the worst, period. There have been some big drops at other times.

PJ is just posting falsehoods, sadly. I'm not going to bother - it takes too long, hours to collect data to properly answer a false allegation he can make in two minute - with a detailed response. But one common sense note - isn't it odd that Bush's tax cuts did nothing but repeal the Clinton tax increase, when Bush's tax cuts 'were for everyone', they said (even if for tens of Millions of Americans they averaged about $4, it allowed the misleading talking point), while Clinton's tax increases were for the top 2%?

Any person who reviews the facts knows Bush's tax cuts were weighted to the wealthy; there's a certain amount of propaganda that might try to spin it otherwise, PJ buying it.

All that's happening is the predictable next steps as the most wealth push their ever-increasing power to take more and more, squeezing harder.

Either things will get worse, or the public will vote in another direction - though I'm concerned that Kucinich and Edwards are falling behind, and that it's possible that a faux-change candidate who will continue the same policies in large part will be elected, showing that the system is so broken we just can't elect a real change politician at this time.

Do any of us really understand Obama's agenda, other than marketing his own charisma and riding the phrase 'uniting' to power? He apparently has the same corporate backers.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

uh

In the last month the DJIA high was 13,500. The low was 12,100. thats a 1,400 difference, or 10.5% difference.

Maybe you forgot about Black Monday in October 1987? 22.5%. But, it wasnt just us. Hong Kong was, if I remember, close to 50% drop. Black Monday was the largest drop in market history, including the drop that started the great depression. That certainly falls with the last 70 years, no?

Between 2000 and 2002 the market had lost 30%. But that was over 2 years. There have many 10% drops in the market. Really not that big of a deal.

Chill out man.
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

:laugh:
As if one person could fix any of this...


 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

:laugh:
As if one person could fix any of this...

As if it were true
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

What a world you live in. Only a die hard black and white douche can sit back and still think the Democrats will deliver a miracle.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?

That's your opinion, I don't see a big eagerness in the population for the repeal of Social Security, and even Republicans expanded Medicare. Now we just need to expand it to cover everyone.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,235
28,949
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It's like you have no sense of history. Everything seems to start today for you.

Bush's "insanely deep" tax cuts were nothing but returning the tax rates to where they were before Clinton raised them, they are actually higher today than before Clinton took office.

.... snipped good stuff on rates .....

Good stuff on rates. The problem with that analysis of tax rates is that the ultra rich don't pay those rates. They pay the capital gains rate of 20%.

The rich pay a higher percentage of the total income tax bill because they have more of the total income. When you look at the far lower tax rate they pay (20%) then it becomes apparent that they hold a lot more of the total income.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,235
28,949
136
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?

That's your opinion, I don't see a big eagerness in the population for the repeal of Social Security, and even Republicans expanded Medicare. Now we just need to expand it to cover everyone.

And raise the taxes needed to pay for it so future generations don't get screwed.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?

That's your opinion, I don't see a big eagerness in the population for the repeal of Social Security, and even Republicans expanded Medicare. Now we just need to expand it to cover everyone.
Trust me, there is plenty of eagerness to eliminate SS altogether, or reform it to allow for individual control of the invested dollars, but nobody is listening.

The SS program was a mistake from day one.

As for healthcare, AFAIC, everyone between the ages of 18 and 65 should take care of themselves with privatized healthcare, or elect not to. Period.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?

That's your opinion, I don't see a big eagerness in the population for the repeal of Social Security, and even Republicans expanded Medicare. Now we just need to expand it to cover everyone.

And raise the taxes needed to pay for it so future generations don't get screwed.

How about cutting all the programs that dip into it instead?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: senseamp
We need New Deal 2.0 to finish what we started.

And what would that be? Saddle generations of people to enslavement by the federal govt?

That's your opinion, I don't see a big eagerness in the population for the repeal of Social Security, and even Republicans expanded Medicare. Now we just need to expand it to cover everyone.

And raise the taxes needed to pay for it so future generations don't get screwed.

How about cutting all the programs that dip into it instead?
that would be a great start!
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

uh

In the last month the DJIA high was 13,500. The low was 12,100. thats a 1,400 difference, or 10.5% difference.

Maybe you forgot about Black Monday in October 1987? 22.5%. But, it wasnt just us. Hong Kong was, if I remember, close to 50% drop. Black Monday was the largest drop in market history, including the drop that started the great depression. That certainly falls with the last 70 years, no?

Between 2000 and 2002 the market had lost 30%. But that was over 2 years. There have many 10% drops in the market. Really not that big of a deal.

Chill out man.

*crickets*

come on techs. I really dont think youre THAT dumb. At least admit this was at the very least a drive-by troll....
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
I just heard on the news the stock market drop this month was the greatest in 70 years.
I guess the neo-cons are about to get their wish of destroying the American economy and bringing about another Great Depression.
I guess it will take another Democrat to fix things.

What a world you live in. Only a die hard black and white douche can sit back and still think the Democrats will deliver a miracle.

Said some guy in 1932, about the upcoming election and FDR...

Kucinich could have done great things. Maybe Edwards too.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |