Bush's Tax Cuts - What To Do???

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,284
Reaction score
142
The lingering Bush legacy: What to do about those tax cuts
WASHINGTON — In the back of every Washington politician's mind is this sobering fact: Unless Congress acts, the temporary tax cuts it passed when George W. Bush was president will expire at the end of next year.

If the Democrats who control Congress do nothing and let the tax rates on the highest income brackets return to their pre-2001 levels, their Republican rivals and many Americans will slam them as tax hikers.

If they prevent the legislation from expiring, however, they and any Republicans who support this approach will add $2 trillion to the already-growing federal budget deficit over the next decade. The news media and influential watchdog organizations will slam them for that.


The 2001 and 2003 tax reductions are the big gorilla in the room that everyone's ignoring. By the end of 2010, a year of midterm congressional elections, Congress must address this key economic issue, though.

"I think the easier course for both sides of the aisle to take is to extend at least most of the Bush tax cuts before you get to the end of 2010," said Diane Lim Rogers, the chief economist for the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan budget watchdog group.

By passing a temporary extension of temporary tax reductions, the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress can buy time, she said, and the likely outcome is the formation of a study group to examine the kinds of extensive tax revisions that many experts argue are needed.

"There's not enough time to do serious tax reform before the Bush tax cuts expire," Lim Rogers said, adding that lawmakers are likely to be too bruised from the health care battle to pursue significant tax restructuring next year.

President Barack Obama has said that he expects to retain most of the Bush tax reductions, letting them expire only for individuals or couples who earn more than $250,000 annually in taxable income. This would apply to income taxes and to capital gains on investments, making Bush's tax cuts Obama's tax cuts.

Under Obama's plan, high earners no longer would fall into a 35 percent top tax bracket, but into new 36 percent or 39.6 percent brackets. Capital gains taxes would rise from the current 15 percent to 20 percent for long-term investments, and up to 39.6 percent for gains from short-term investments.

Businesses would like an early signal from lawmakers and the administration about what might happen, but they're not expecting one.

"That would be the best thing to do, but they're not going to do that. They've got way too much on their plate," said Martin Regalia, the chief economist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "They will talk about tax reform, but I don't see them getting around to doing tax reform in an election year. They'd have to do it before March."

As part of the economic recovery efforts, Obama created a panel to look into ways that tax restructuring could boost the economy. However, the panel failed to issue a planned report in December, Lim Rogers said, and was given very little room to work. It was prevented from recommending tax increases for individuals or couples who earn less than $250,000 annually.

'There's not a very meaningful goal for that advisory panel," she said, expecting lawmakers to begin looking at a more fundamental revamp of the tax system in 2011.

like what ya'all said - whatever Obama does, he still gets blamed anyway :lol:
 
damn if president did, damn if president didn't it appears that it pays to get blamed. Every US presidents gets paid for just assuming the blame,. The truth, no matter how noble president were, they are paid to get blamed at.
 
damn if president did, damn if president didn't it appears that it pays to get blamed. Every US presidents gets paid for just assuming the blame,. The truth, no matter how noble president were, they are paid to get blamed at.

2zzovex.jpg
 
The Investors

Before the Bush years I never heard the words the investors are nervous so (for no freaking reason at all) the price of oil just went up. These investor groups have become a driving force in the destruction of our economy I would like them to take a nice big kick in the nuts from all of us who been so needlessly effected by their whims. There was a time that efforts were made to keep things going smooth. Smooth was good. Well it is still good. These yahoos have been on quite a roll, unfortunately it has been one that takes money out of our economy and on out of our country. They can threaten and whine holler and yell but they are greedy traitors to America who have been the final driving force behind the great exodus of jobs. If it was up to me they would be guilloitined.
 
I was just reading

Just read another one where a Republican Senator from Kentucky and that puke Joe Leiberman were blaming President Obama for what happened in Detroit.
More attack dog posturing but how useful? Obstructionist politics pursuing an agenda that is not about good government. They are working on the fill the air with smoke business so they can say the President is the fire.

What happened in Detroit is a learning experience for our security system and it will produce some needed improvements. Obama had zero to do with it.

It is not that distant of memory that the Republicans in power were using those security lists to hassle leading Democrats like Ted Kennedy at the airport.

I have no respect for them at all.
 
One thing is certain. We can't wage war without more taxes.
 
And those tax cuts have worked so well to keep things moving....er...oops....
 
Repealing tax cuts (or letting them expire) is the same as raising taxes. Just one of the numerous ways this administration is raising taxes on us all (low, middle and high income inconclusively) in contradiction to their promises that got them elected.
 
The difference is Bush cut taxes in the wrong places.

He cut taxes for the upper classes. Problem is that they're just going to pocket the money, rather than spending it. If he cut taxes for the lower or lower middle classes, they're not going to pocket it since they're too poor to afford putting the money away for a rainy day-- they're going to spend it on perishable goods and other items that help drive the economy.

However on the other hand, the more money one get to keep, the more money they get to spend, the more money that is being spent, the prices increase to match the "increased" net income which lead to inflations.

So that's the tricky thing with taxes. Taxes help prevent or slow down inflation, but if we tax too much... it comes at a stall and no one can afford to buy anything.
 
This thread inspired my new slogan: It's the spending, stupid!
(And no, I'm not calling anyone stupid.)
 
This thread inspired my new slogan: It's the spending, stupid!
(And no, I'm not calling anyone stupid.)
Funny thing; Bush sent us into a deficit as well. And please, don't start comparing Bush to Obama. We know things are worse now. Difference is, Obama is trying to fix a mess he inherited. Bush inherited a booming economy, and still spent us deeper in debt. Let he who is without deficit throw the first stone.

He also put us in a war that is draining our resources; a war we will never win.

Admit it-Bush lowered his own taxes for his own gain. I see no trickle down effect here, unless you mean the fat cats that are pissing on the rest of us.
 
And please, don't start comparing Bush to Obama. We know things are worse now. Difference is, Obama is trying to fix a mess he inherited.
So he's trying to fix it by making it worse? I'm missing you there.

Bush inherited a booming economy, and still spent us deeper in debt.
The economy was in recession when Bush took office.

Let he who is without deficit throw the first stone.
sayeth he who throwest stones at the guy who no longer matters. But what I said is simply a matter of fact and not directed at any one person or party specifically. The revenue that can be raised through taxation is limited and historically has been around 18 to 19 percent of GDP regardless of the marginal tax rates. With spending, the sky is the limit. The reason conservatives gave up on Bush and the GOP is because they spent too much.

Admit it-Bush lowered his own taxes for his own gain. I see no trickle down effect here, unless you mean the fat cats that are pissing on the rest of us.
Those tax cuts were across the board and IRS data shows that high-income earners paid a greater share of the taxes after the cuts than before. Also, the only way any fat cat can piss on you without your permission is through breaking the law or colluding with government. Without lawlessness or political clout, even a billionaire can't coerce you or take away any of your options. People with political power can. In my view, political elites are far more dangerous than economic elites.
 
So he's trying to fix it by making it worse? I'm missing you there.
Not trying to fix it = Bush. No need to stimulate the economy when you don't care. Leave it for the Dems, then point out that they are spending money.


The economy was in recession when Bush took office.
It was??? I could not work enough hours, and I had job offers pouring in.
So, you are saying Bush failed to correct it in 8 years. And you are ok with that? And you are restless with Obama?



Those tax cuts were across the board and IRS data shows that high-income earners paid a greater share of the taxes after the cuts than before. Also, the only way any fat cat can piss on you without your permission is through breaking the law or colluding with government.
Well, the pissing comment was not actual, but an implied situation. People that like being pissed on are usually in a high power situation, and they pay for the service.
My taxes were certainly reduced, but that is the usual end result of joblessness. Too bad my creditors did not reduce my debts!
Thing is, from my personal perspective, I am working right now. A year ago, I had nothing except hope. I do not love Obama, and I am no fan of deficits. I only hope things improve, and they have begun to do so.
 
The difference is Bush cut taxes in the wrong places.

He cut taxes for the upper classes. Problem is that they're just going to pocket the money, rather than spending it. If he cut taxes for the lower or lower middle classes, they're not going to pocket it since they're too poor to afford putting the money away for a rainy day-- they're going to spend it on perishable goods and other items that help drive the economy.



Actually it wrong.

I know lot friends of mine is 30-70 years old. They pay $50,000-300,000 taxes every years. They are struggle now. They lay off all employer they have for help landscape or clean house or fix their stuff.

They buy new cars every 2-3 years. My Uncle try but Michigan tax crap out him.
 
Not trying to fix it = Bush. No need to stimulate the economy when you don't care. Leave it for the Dems, then point out that they are spending money.
Bush enacted two stimulus packages- one in 2001 and another in 2008. He also pushed for the $700 billion TARP. Agree with it or not, you can't say he sat back and did nothing. As for last year's $787 billion monstrosity, there's a school of thought that it would be an ineffective waste of money. Nearly a year later, that school of thought has been validated.

It was??? I could not work enough hours, and I had job offers pouring in.
Yes, it was. A recession is not defined by how well one person is doing. It is defined based on growth and contraction of the economy as a whole.

So, you are saying Bush failed to correct it in 8 years. And you are ok with that? And you are restless with Obama?
No. The economy did eventually come out of recession and had several years of growth until the housing bubble busted. The recession of 2008 (which technically started December 2007) is a different recession.

I'm of the belief that there's not really much the government can do to end a recession other than withdraw its influence from the private sector- i.e. relieving the tax burden, loosening regulations that hurt small businesses, etc. We've had one recession (actually a depression) that lasted around a decade and that involved a whole lot of the government "doing something". It was so long and painful, it earned the name The Great Depression. In retrospect, all that "doing something" only seems to have made things worse.

Well, the pissing comment was not actual, but an implied situation. People that like being pissed on are usually in a high power situation, and they pay for the service.
I was using it metaphorically also. You can only get in a situation where some fat cat can piss on you if you sign a contract with terms unfavorable to you, in which case, you've really just pissed on yourself. Otherwise, to piss on you, he has to break the law or collude with politicians.

My taxes were certainly reduced, but that is the usual end result of joblessness. Too bad my creditors did not reduce my debts!
Thing is, from my personal perspective, I am working right now. A year ago, I had nothing except hope. I do not love Obama, and I am no fan of deficits. I only hope things improve, and they have begun to do so.
Glad things worked out for you! If your job is in the private sector, it's a good thing that some rich guy had enough capital left over after taxes to invest it in job creation. Best of luck to you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top