Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

 Should they expire?  Make your case here...

by on Oct. 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM
Replies (31-40):
JakeandEmmasMom
by Gold Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:16 AM
2 moms liked this

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.

dilateyourmind
by Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:27 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting dilateyourmind:

I always laugh because the same people complaing about the deficit, don't want to pay  taxes in the first place. So which is it folks? Rolls eyes. I just LOVE those that speculate that Obama will  let them expire this time. Despite the fact that Romney himself said Obama HAS NOT RAISED TAXES.

   We were prosperous under Clinton, until Bush allowed tax cuts for the rich.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/tax-reform/news/2009/12/22/7092/let-the-bush-tax-cuts-on-the-wealthy-expire/

  BUT..I get why people in that tax bracket wouldn't want it. I call them the legit Republicans. Not the lower middle class, that vote repub for pro-life and other fantasy platforms. They do it cause they THINK it makes them a better person internally.

Excuse me....many of us respect the sanctity of human life. We are a voice for the unborn child who depends solely upon us to defend them. Sad, you believe these babies are exposable and the prolife platform is a fantasy. Abortion is very real and kills an unborn child! I am upper middle class and I vote prolife every election season. I don't think anything, I do have inner peace because I vote prolife!

YOU infer I think babies are disposable. It is what makes people LIKE you, and your argument mean nothing. ANYONE who thinks the government will actually do something about abortion is an IDIOT. ( I usually do not call names in debates, but GET REAL. ) Did Bush do anything in his 8 years while they had the chance? hE EVEN FAILED AT LATE TERM ABORTION. WHO IS NOT FOR THAT BAN?  Do you really think Republicans want to deal with a MUCH HIGHER INCREASE in welfare spending and hell being, outnumbered  in the voting pool, if abortion is banned? I didn't say I am pro abortion. I am anti-ignorant people, DUMB ENOUGH to actually think they are voting for that kind of change. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. IT IS A FANTASY. THIS IS A FACT PRO-LIFER REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE.  After YEARS of their party failing to do anything. Yet you believe in it, every time. FOOLISH people believe in words and dismiss lack of action.

 You hit the nail on the head with  my point sista. YOU VOTE PRO-LIFE.  You don't have enough sense to realize what your voting for is FAKE and bravo for you feeling better about yourself cause it is WHY you vote that way. um most Repubs are upper middle class. Which is why they vote to not lose their tax breaks. You are typical and funny. Thank you for validating my point with verocity! Don't you feel better about yourself for doing so? IT IS ALL ABOUT YOU!

jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:30 AM
1 mom liked this

I don't think they should expire either, at least not for the large majority of Americans.  However, congress doesn't want to vote for them to only expire for the wealthy, which means they'll expire for everyone.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.


mommom2000
by Bronze Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:35 AM
1 mom liked this


Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting mommom2000:

 

Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting mommom2000:

Yes, like Obama wants to do it, for anyone making over 200,000.  This didn't create jobs, the only thing these tax cuts did were create a huge deficit.  If conservatives were really worried about the deficit they would also want to see these tax cuts expire.  they were only meant to be temporary.

You raise taxes on the rich { $200,000 or more } as Obama wants to do, this will effect many small businesses. No incentive to hire and expand. More layoffs etc. Small businesses are the financial back bone of America. A ripple effect on the middle class. As Carpy mentioned, the outrageous spending of this admin is the cause of the deficit. Obama has no clue how to restore the economy!

The numbers have been stated many times letting the tax expire fot those making over 200,000 will only effect 3% of small businesses. Among that 3% you have sport stars,movie stars,hedge fund managers, you know the types who aren't job creators. Saying that it will hurt small business is just another way to make sure the people are against it,but it's simply not true.

You are incorrect....

Ernst and Young: Obama's Tax Increase Would Kill 710,000 Jobs

A new study conducted by Ernst and Young proves conclusively that the President's tax increase would be devastating to the economy and jobs.

The study finds that, if Congress misguidedly adopted President Obama's plan to raise taxes on job creators by allowing the Bush-era tax policies to expire for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for married filers), the economy and jobs would suffer terribly:

  • Output in the long run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in today's economy;
  • Employment in the long run would fall by 0.5 percent or, roughly 710,000 fewer jobs, in today's economy;
  • Capital stock and investment in the long run would fall by 1.4 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively; and
  • Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent.

There are almost 13 million Americans out of work today. President Obama's tax increase would needlessly add almost three-quarters of a million people to that already much too large number. Even those with jobs wouldn't escape the pain of President Obama's tax increase, as they would see their wages suffer.

The report validates Heritage's argument that President Obama's tax increase plan would badly hurt job creation because it would fall heaviest on the most successful businesses that employ workers and pay their taxes through the individual income tax (known as flow-through businesses). The study reports:

The concern over higher individual tax rates has also been a focus because of the prominent role played by flow-through businesses-S corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, and sole proprietorships-in the US economy and that a large fraction of flow-through income is subject to the top two individual income tax rates. These businesses employ 54% of the private sector work force and pay 44% of federal business income taxes. The number of workers employed by large flow-through businesses is also significant: more than 20 million workers are employed by flow-through businesses with more than 100 employees. (Emphasis added.)

President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn't impact 97 percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses aren't job creators. They range from people in their basements selling items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.

The businesses that would pay this tax increase are the businesses that hire millions of workers. Higher taxes on these vital job creators could force them to cut back on their existing workforce and would certainly cause them to slow hiring of new workers.

President Obama couches his argument for tax hikes on the rich in terms of fairness. But it would be anything but fair that millions of unemployed Americans desperate to go back to work would find it harder to land a job to provide for their families because of President Obama's misguided class warfare.

There can be no doubt any more that President Obama's Taxmageddon tax increase would devastate jobs. The Ernst and Young study should be the final nail in the coffin for his plan in Congress. It is time for Congress to do what's right and stop all of Taxmageddon today.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/18/ernst-and-young-obamas-tax-increase-would-kill-710000-jobs/

1000,s more added to the unemployment lines.....

Reminder: Obama to Lay Off 80,000 US Soldiers

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/01/10/reminder_obama_to_lay_off_80000_us_soldiers

The study’s estimates are based on policies that are at odds with the President has actually proposed, omit key proposals the President has made and employ flawed assumptions that are at odds with respected independent analysts like the Congressional Budget Office – and even with the findings of the Bush Administration Treasury Department. Relying on analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation, and even Chairman Paul Ryan’s own budget demonstrates that the President’s proposals are good for job growth in both the short and long run.

Below is an analysis by Jason Furman, Principal Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, highlighting the major flaws, errors and misleading statements in the study:

  • The study fallaciously assumes that the tax cuts are used to finance additional spending, ignoring the benefits of what the President actually proposed which was to use the revenue as part of a balanced plan to reduce the deficit and stabilize the debt. The President has proposed to let the high-income tax cuts expire and use the resulting $1 trillion in savings (over 10 years) as part of a balanced plan to reduce deficits and debt and put the nation on a sustainable fiscal course that includes $2.50 of spending cuts for every $1.00 of revenue. But rather than modeling the President’s proposal to reduce the deficit, the headline numbers in the study explicitly assume that the revenue would be used entirely to finance additional spending. In fact, the study explicitly states, “Using the additional revenue to reduce the deficit is not modeled.” [Source: footnote on page 3]
  • The study also leaves out the President’s proposed new tax cuts for business hiring and investment. The President has proposed to cut taxes by $80 billion in 2012 and 2013 by enacting a new 10 percent tax credit for business hiring and wage increases and allowing immediate write-offs of new investment through the end of 2012. Not only are these tax cuts larger in dollar-terms than the near-term tax increase for the top two percent of Americans that would result from letting the high-income tax cuts expire, but they are far better targeted toward boosting jobs and growth. In fact, even Chairman Paul Ryan’s Budget shows that the President supports taxes that are $42 billion lower in 2012 and 2013 than under the Republican plan. [Source]
  • The authors of the new study acknowledge that it has no bearing on the impact of the President’s proposals on the economic recovery and employment in the short-run. In fact, even they acknowledge that the short-run impact of extending the high-income tax cuts will be proportionately less than the impact of the middle-income cuts, noting that a “disproportionate share of the tax change is likely to be channeled through savings for taxpayers facing the top tax rates as compared to other taxpayers.” This is consistent with conclusions of the Congressional Budget Office and other independent analysts. For example, CBO concluded that – compared to extending all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, including those for the highest-income Americans – the President’s proposal to extend just the middle-class tax cuts “would be more cost-effective in boosting output and employment in the short run because the higher-income households that would probably spend a smaller fraction of any increase in their after-tax income would receive a smaller share of the reduction in taxes.” [Source]
  • Even setting aside the fact that the study ignores the effects of the President’s tax proposals on short-term growth and long-term deficit reduction, the conclusions are still dramatically out-of-line with estimates by other analysts, including not only the Congressional Budget Office but also the Bush Administration Treasury Department. The authors’ unrealistic assumptions lead them to find a larger increase in long-run output and about twice as large an effect on employment over the long-run as the Bush Administration Treasury Department found when conducting a similar analysis of extending the high-income tax cuts. [Source] This appears to mostly result from the fact that the study makes highly unrealistic assumptions about the economic impacts of tax cuts. In particular, it assumes a labor supply response to tax rates that is about ten times as large as what the Congressional Budget Office assumes for medium- and high-earners. [Source] The new study is also inconsistent with recent historical experience. Under the President’s plan, income tax rates on high earners would simply return to what they were in the 1990s – when the economy created 23 million jobs.

The truth is that the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation, and other independent analysis have found that letting tax cuts expire and using the resulting revenue for deficit reduction would help the economy over the long-run because it would lead to lower interest rates and higher investment–the opposite of what the industry-financed study concludes. For example, CBO found that output would be higher in 2020 if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire than if they were extended and led to higher deficits. Likewise, a 2005 Joint Committee on Taxation study reached the same conclusion about individual income tax rate cuts. And the President’s additional tax cuts to encourage business job growth and investment would have further benefits as well.

Amy Brundage is the Deputy Press Secretary for the Economy
dilateyourmind
by Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:35 AM

To me the BIGGEST thing about a Democrat and a Republican. Democrats don't pretend to be something they are not. Dems are balls out screw you, this is how we think. Like it or lump it. MOST repubs PRETEND to be conservative. Kudos to repubs that walk the walk. YOU have my respect. I know several. Good thing I am an independant.:)

 I live in the most soncervative county in my state. Please explain all the folks out partying, doing drugs and cheatin on their spouses, Swingers. Oh yeah, as a stylist in my community for 13 years. i know all the dirty little secrets of the fkn hypocrits.

Xlandria
by Bronze Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM


Quoting dilateyourmind:


Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting dilateyourmind:

I always laugh because the same people complaing about the deficit, don't want to pay  taxes in the first place. So which is it folks? Rolls eyes. I just LOVE those that speculate that Obama will  let them expire this time. Despite the fact that Romney himself said Obama HAS NOT RAISED TAXES.

   We were prosperous under Clinton, until Bush allowed tax cuts for the rich.  http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/tax-reform/news/2009/12/22/7092/let-the-bush-tax-cuts-on-the-wealthy-expire/

  BUT..I get why people in that tax bracket wouldn't want it. I call them the legit Republicans. Not the lower middle class, that vote repub for pro-life and other fantasy platforms. They do it cause they THINK it makes them a better person internally.

Excuse me....many of us respect the sanctity of human life. We are a voice for the unborn child who depends solely upon us to defend them. Sad, you believe these babies are exposable and the prolife platform is a fantasy. Abortion is very real and kills an unborn child! I am upper middle class and I vote prolife every election season. I don't think anything, I do have inner peace because I vote prolife!

YOU infer I think babies are disposable. It is what makes people LIKE you, and your argument mean nothing. ANYONE who thinks the government will actually do something about abortion is an IDIOT. ( I usually do not call names in debates, but GET REAL. ) Did Bush do anything in his 8 years while they had the chance? hE EVEN FAILED AT LATE TERM ABORTION. WHO IS NOT FOR THAT BAN?  If I may inject here for a moment, Obama is the one, who only voted "Present" on all other matters, voted AT LEAST TWICE, NOT TO BAN late term abortions. Do you really think Republicans want to deal with a MUCH HIGHER INCREASE in welfare spending and hell being, outnumbered  in the voting pool, if abortion is banned? I didn't say I am pro abortion. I am anti-ignorant people, DUMB ENOUGH to actually think they are voting for that kind of change. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. IT IS A FANTASY. THIS IS A FACT PRO-LIFER REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE.  After YEARS of their party failing to do anything. Yet you believe in it, every time. FOOLISH people believe in words and dismiss lack of action.

 You hit the nail on the head with  my point sista. YOU VOTE PRO-LIFE.  You don't have enough sense to realize what your voting for is FAKE and bravo for you feeling better about yourself cause it is WHY you vote that way. um most Repubs are upper middle class. Which is why they vote to not lose their tax breaks. You are typical and funny. Thank you for validating my point with verocity! Don't you feel better about yourself for doing so? IT IS ALL ABOUT YOU!


JakeandEmmasMom
by Gold Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 10:47 AM

 And to me, that's cutting off our nose to spite our face.

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

I don't think they should expire either, at least not for the large majority of Americans.  However, congress doesn't want to vote for them to only expire for the wealthy, which means they'll expire for everyone.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.

 

 

mommom2000
by Bronze Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 11:34 AM

The middle class and poor are the ones who need money in their pocket to pump it back into the community.  Obama want;s to keep their tax cuts in place.  The people he wants to raise taxes aren't pumping that tax break back into the economy that's why they need to expire,it's only adding to the deficit.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.


JakeandEmmasMom
by Gold Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 11:40 AM

 I agree that the middle class and poor definitely need more money in their pockets.  The reality is, though, that $200,000 a year is still considered middle class.  It's upper middle class, sure, but it's still middle class.  And people who make that much *do* spend much of it in the economy.  I think that threshold is too low for raising taxes. 

Just as I don't think that Romney's plan for tax cuts on businesses would have the effect he's claiming, I don't think that letting the Bush tax cuts expire on those making over $200,000 a year would do anything much to help the deficit.

Quoting mommom2000:

The middle class and poor are the ones who need money in their pocket to pump it back into the community.  Obama want;s to keep their tax cuts in place.  The people he wants to raise taxes aren't pumping that tax break back into the economy that's why they need to expire,it's only adding to the deficit.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.

 

 

jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Oct. 2, 2012 at 11:45 AM
1 mom liked this

Exactly.  the only way to really get the economy going is to generate demand.  Demand is generated when people have disposable income.  And that's when businesses hire - when the demand for their goods is higher than their ability to produce them.

As far as the 200k a year thing - where I live, that's not really upper middle class, that's just middle class.  Our cost of living is much higher.  I do think the region of the earners should be taken into account.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I agree that the middle class and poor definitely need more money in their pockets.  The reality is, though, that $200,000 a year is still considered middle class.  It's upper middle class, sure, but it's still middle class.  And people who make that much *do* spend much of it in the economy.  I think that threshold is too low for raising taxes. 

Just as I don't think that Romney's plan for tax cuts on businesses would have the effect he's claiming, I don't think that letting the Bush tax cuts expire on those making over $200,000 a year would do anything much to help the deficit.

Quoting mommom2000:

The middle class and poor are the ones who need money in their pocket to pump it back into the community.  Obama want;s to keep their tax cuts in place.  The people he wants to raise taxes aren't pumping that tax break back into the economy that's why they need to expire,it's only adding to the deficit.

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 I think that letting the tax cuts expire would be a band-aid, and an ineffective one at that.  What will ultimately solve the deficit problem is the economy expanding, and letting the tax cuts expire will not help to expand the economy.  It will likely cause it to contract even more.  At this point, we need to keep as much money in people's pockets as possible so that they will pump it back into the economy and increase demand, which will increase jobs, etc.


 


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)