What? No tax cut discussion????

[normiss 906]

Come on already!

Damn democrats.

[gher 0]

"Psst, hey Guido: Its all so clear to me now. I'm the keeper of the cheese... and you're the lemon merchant, you get it? And he KNOWS it. That's why he's gonna KILL US. So we got to beat it... ya... before he lets loose the marmosets on us! Don't worry little missy... I'LL SAVE YOU!"

-Ren Höek

[Andrewwhyte 1]

It is interesting theatre if incredibly bad policy. By inserting Keystone into it the GOP is dividing the president's labour peeps from his environmentalist peeps. Meanwhile the Dems have the GOP into a corner where they are voting against a tax cut for the middle class after they defended one for the rich.
Of course it is ludicrous to even be thinking about a tax cut when the deficit is where it is, but, it's an election year adn an election is no time to discuss economic policy.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Of course it is ludicrous to even be thinking about a tax cut when the deficit is where it is,

you fix a deficit by cutting spending

you 'pay for' a tax cut by using the cut to motivate a spending reduction somewhere else as a response - you don't just put it off (borrow more), or push the load elsewhere (more taxes elsewhere) - that won't work


since neither party knows how to take down the spending line, then tax cuts are futile - "starve the beast" doesn't work if the beast won't let himself get leaner


neither fixing the deficit, nor tax cuts, will ever by productive (or frankly ever happen long term) without a philosophy of minimal spending

as long as you have two major parties dominated by social issues and the accumulation of power, then that philosophy is just, frankly, impossible.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,132]

>you fix a deficit by cutting spending

You fix a deficit by cutting spending and increasing revenue. Anyone unwilling to acknowledge either side of that equation is contributing to the problem; it is attitudes like that that got us where we are today.

[DougH 270]

There is two ways to increase revenue, increase the tax rate, or increase the tax base. If we would have tackled this economy right from the get go our base would be bigger and we wouldn't be over here trying to imitate Japan's lost decade.

There is only one way to cut spending.

The payroll tax holiday is a lose lose for both parties. They never should have dicked with the social security funding mechanism in the first place.

People are now going to expect this payroll tax decrease. It can't be permanent without further endangering social security. When ever it gets rolled back everyone is going to paint the other side in a bad light instead of being honest, we just can't afford it!

Personally I think the first stimulus should have been way bigger and it should have been purely real heavy duty infrastructure investments.

High speed rail.
Overhaul the highway system.
Build some long lasting assets.

Instead they squandered the money that they did spend on useless shit. I would have been for more money if it was investment, no investment here!

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Come on already!

Damn democrats.

What party is willing pass the stand by it self 'Payroll tax holiday" extension law instead of another "Payroll tax holiday" extension law with a bunch of other shit attached?


It ain't the Republicans.


Your freshman teabag Congressman can take all the credit.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

with a bunch of other shit attached?

Yeah, damn them for putting stuff in there that will create thousands of jobs...

Quote

Your freshman teabag Congressman can take all the credit.

Yup.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,132]

>>with a bunch of other shit attached?

>Yeah, damn them for putting stuff in there that will create thousands of jobs...

I'll remember your support of pork barrel spending the next time you complain about someone else doing it.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>>with a bunch of other shit attached?

>Yeah, damn them for putting stuff in there that will create thousands of jobs...

I'll remember your support of pork barrel spending the next time you complain about someone else doing it.

Keystone XL is pork barrel spending? Interesting view you have, Bill.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DougH 270]

Quote

>>with a bunch of other shit attached?

>Yeah, damn them for putting stuff in there that will create thousands of jobs...

I'll remember your support of pork barrel spending the next time you complain about someone else doing it.

I thought the Keystone XL pipeline project was waiting for approval not funding.

I could be wrong because I haven't looked into it with much detail. Isn't a private company going to be building this?

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[normiss 906]

Thankfully a few do actually understand.

BOTH sides are to blame. Or three, if we're considering them another party now I suppose.

This will continue in every aspect until we fix the system.

NO lifelong benefits for all politicians.
NO Electoral College
NO politician insider trading.
NO to corporations having individual 'person' rights involving any aspect of politics.
NO former politicians allowed to work as lobbyists.
NO corporate campaign contributions.

Until we STOP our own government from being legally able to use their position to line their pockets and fleece ours, we'd just better get used to BOHICA.

[billvon 3,132]

>BOTH sides are to blame.

Agreed. And ultimately we are to blame for electing those politicians.

>NO lifelong benefits for all politicians.

I don't feel strongly either way on that. Benefits for civil servants doesn't seem like a big deal to me, but it's also not a big problem if we discontinue it (and would likely save a little money.)

>NO Electoral College

Agreed - provided we have something to replace it with that isn't pure democratic (i.e. people vote directly on everything.) Purely democratic election of representatives would mean a severe blow to the power of state governments and would enhance the power of the federal government, but that in of itself isn't the end of the world if it meant more likely election of independent candidates.

>NO politician insider trading.

Not sure what this means. They can't trade stock based on substantial non-public information they have concerning that stock? If so agreed.

>NO to corporations having individual 'person' rights involving any aspect of politics.

I'd have to see how that was structured, which rights would be removed and how that would play out in the business world. (I have a feeling you can't 'just' remove political influence from corporate operations.)

>NO former politicians allowed to work as lobbyists.

What's the thinking behind this one?

>NO corporate campaign contributions

Agreed, although that's a pretty easy restriction to get around.

[normiss 906]

I like your points on state rights too - that is a valid concern.

In re: the benefits, they do seem to have a much easier path to a rather fat pension compared to their constituents.

You also got the insider trading issue - seems they have done just that.

Lobbyist after office? I want to lump that in with the benefits and insider trading in general. It creates an environment where the reason for public service becomes a path to wealth as opposed to serving the people of this country with only that in mind. Not what's best for their pockets, but the country and the people.

That IS why they're there isn't it?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

>>with a bunch of other shit attached?

>Yeah, damn them for putting stuff in there that will create thousands of jobs...

I'll remember your support of pork barrel spending the next time you complain about someone else doing it.

I thought the Keystone XL pipeline project was waiting for approval not funding.

I could be wrong because I haven't looked into it with much detail. Isn't a private company going to be building this?

Quote

Resolved, That it is the Sense of the House of Representatives that any final measure to extend the payroll tax holiday, extend Federally funded unemployment insurance benefits, or prevent decreases in reimbursement for physicians who provide care to Medicare beneficiaries--

(1) extend the payroll tax holiday through December 31, 2012;

(2) extend and reform Federally funded unemployment insurance benefits;

(3) eliminate for two years the dramatic cut in reimbursement for physicians who provide care to Medicare beneficiaries;

(4) reduce spending from areas throughout the Federal Government, including a freeze on congressional salaries, in order to protect the Social Security Trust Fund, whose solvency would otherwise be diminished as result of the payroll tax holiday; and

(5) provide immediate job creation through--

(A) final approval of the Keystone XL pipeline;

(B) expensing for capital assets placed in service in 2012; and

(C) drafting new regulations for boilers that are achievable and cost-effective.

Looks like the Dems got the payroll tax cut and unemployment extension they wanted, and the Reps got the XL pipeline jobs and an offset in the impact on SocSec from the payroll tax cut.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[diverborg 0]

Quote

>you fix a deficit by cutting spending

You fix a deficit by cutting spending and increasing revenue. Anyone unwilling to acknowledge either side of that equation is contributing to the problem; it is attitudes like that that got us where we are today.

Personally I would be more than willing to pay this extra amount in taxes, IF, It were coupled with big enough spending cuts to actually come close to balancing the budget.

However, if we aren't going to actually be realistic about our budget woes, then I most certainly don't want to pump one more penny than I have to into a system where it will get swallowed up and not even noticed.

[billvon 3,132]

>Personally I would be more than willing to pay this extra amount in taxes, IF, It were
>coupled with big enough spending cuts to actually come close to balancing the budget.

Agreed - and at this point that's our only hope.

[DougH 270]

Bill,

Is the Keystone pipeline a public project or a private one? What is the dollar amount of public funding if any?

Just trying to get a handle on your comment above that it is a pork project.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

>you fix a deficit by cutting spending

You fix a deficit by cutting spending and increasing revenue. Anyone unwilling to acknowledge either side of that equation is contributing to the problem; it is attitudes like that that got us where we are today.

Even the non-partison GAO said revenue isn't a problem. i even read that here. We need to cut spending first and just let the tax breaks expire (same end result as a tax hike) and close loops holes (same end result as raising taxes).

First - cut foreign aid, second - GOV Employee enticements and Defense (Start with Per-diem), then keep working down the list from biggest to smallist, just like you do at home.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>NO politician insider trading.

Not sure what this means. They can't trade stock based on substantial non-public information they have concerning that stock? If so agreed.

Requiring them to use a blind trust would be the best solution, if the goal is to prevent legislators from acting in their own interest rather than the nation. Short of that, they could get forced to work with the same sort of compliance regulations that any of us working for financials needs to adhere to - 60 or 90 day min holding periods, preclearance of trades, no shorting, and sending of duplicate statements every month to the compliance department.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The payroll tax holiday is a lose lose for both parties. They never should have dicked with the social security funding mechanism in the first place.

People are now going to expect this payroll tax decrease. It can't be permanent without further endangering social security. When ever it gets rolled back everyone is going to paint the other side in a bad light instead of being honest, we just can't afford it!

I'm happy the title of the thread is "tax cut discussion" rather than the take hike that the Obama Administration is trying to frame this as.

This was to be a one year reduction, but unlike the $600 checks mailed out the year before, this required the people to be working. This got the GOP on board. But exactly as you state, it's hard to undo, just like the Bush cuts from 10 years ago are hard to get rid of, even though they had clear sunset provisions.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I've got a better idea. No investing except for broad based index funds.

by itself, that's still gameable on shorts and short duration buy/sells. Just recall the bumps around the credit rating downrating, or if the government actually did default on the debt, even for an hour.

But broad indexes coupled with a 90 day holding period, no shorts (Congress should never be betting on failure), gets the job done.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I thought the Keystone XL pipeline project was waiting for approval not funding.

I could be wrong because I haven't looked into it with much detail. Isn't a private company going to be building this?

It's a private venture waiting for Obama's approval. But Obama does NOT dare approve it before the election and risk pissing off the Hollywood elite who Obama relies on for much of his campaign donations. Obama does not give a rats ass about creating jobs for people to create the Keystone XL pipeline. Obama only cares about saving his own damn job.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[normiss 906]

So if he doesn't dare approve it, why is he all up John Boener's ass to pass the legislation in the first place??

[billvon 3,132]

>First - cut foreign aid, second - GOV Employee enticements and Defense (Start with
>Per-diem), then keep working down the list from biggest to smallist, just like you do at
>home.

Agreed. And to extend the "home finance" analogy, we might also have to work longer hours to make enough to close the gap. Doesn't mean it has to be forever, but it would be a very good idea to get us out of debt.