Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Compromised - Rumors fly that President Bush may be willing to raise taxes
The Wall Street Journal ^ | November 26, 2006 | Lawrence B. Lindsey

Posted on 11/25/2006 11:04:56 PM PST by Zakeet

During the recent off-year elections, the president repeatedly pointed to the booming economy and noted that his tax cuts were responsible. With growth strong and unemployment low despite the ending of the stock-market bubble, terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq, he had every reason to be proud. Moreover, both economic theory and the actual timing of the economic revival support his claims regarding the tax cuts.

That is why it is so odd that rumors swarm around Washington that the president may be willing to raise taxes as part of a "deal" on entitlement reform. In particular, the rumors suggest the president might be willing to get rid of the provision that caps the income level used to compute Social Security taxes and benefits. These rumors aren't without substance; last year the president would not rule out raising the cap when asked.

Doing so would raise the marginal tax rate on the entrepreneurs that Mr. Bush credits for having led the economic recovery by more than 10 percentage points. The new effective rate would be five percentage points above the level when he took office. Moreover, in 2011, the rate would go up a further 4.3 percentage points to an effective 53% marginal rate on entrepreneurial income. The president would thus be not just raising taxes on entrepreneurs to well above the levels that prevailed in the Clinton administration, but to a rate higher than that which prevailed in the Carter administration. Most of the improved incentives for entrepreneurship and work brought about under Reagan would be repealed.

Should the president do this, he doubtless would be thinking that saving Social Security would be worth the price. He would be wrong.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chickenlittles; economy; firedbushadvisor; increase; socialsecurity; tax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-228 next last
To: OldFriend
Thank you for posting that!

The Bushbashing here has now become incessant and the Reagan mythographers here, either never knew or have completely forgotten what Reagan did ad president! They need to be constantly reminded of what Reagan REALLY did and did NOT do. For them, he is their fairy tale prince, who never did anything but what they delusionally imagine.

161 posted on 11/26/2006 2:21:35 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
There ARE trolls here and some here DO post as though they were on an anti-FR site and/or DU. That is a fact!

There is no way to win those people over; NONE. Facts mean nothing to them and yes, I have tried to just post the facts; which has never worked.

162 posted on 11/26/2006 2:24:24 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Well heck...I've been convinced by all these people and now believe Jorge Bush is the devil who dressed up as a conservative for six long years just so he could undo everything he's done in the past six in the final two. He was hoping for a quagmire in Iraq just for fun and profit, wants to hand control of the US over to Mexico, was trying to enrich his friends in the oil industry, never really wanted tax cuts and was just doing it until Democrats could be elected, hates conservative judges and will now embark on their impeachment, was just giving personal SS accounts lip service....(I'd better stop before my eyes roll so far back in my head they get stuck there.)

Do people know just how stupid and hysterical they're sounding these days? I am embarrassed by this place at the moment.

163 posted on 11/26/2006 2:25:45 PM PST by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Stallone

THE PROBLEM WITH THE ELECTORATE IS THAT AS THE FOUNDING FATHERS SAID, MOST ARE TOO STUPID TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO WISELY VOTE FOR A PRESIDENT!

The above is part of the reason that the FFs instituted the Electoral College and they assumed that even the EC would come up as a tie, so that the Congress would be the tie breaker. And beyond that, the electorate is actually not only too stupid to vote for the president, but far too stupid and LAZY to get off their butts and vote! They also don't pay attention and are easily swayed by the MSM.

164 posted on 11/26/2006 2:29:50 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Spot on!


165 posted on 11/26/2006 2:30:36 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

AMEM !

You tell 'em! Heck, rub their snotty noses in it!

166 posted on 11/26/2006 2:34:10 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Thank you, voice of sanity! A whole Thread of hysteria that what Republicans are left up there are gonna run to raise taxes. I think I'm gonna be sick. Stupid, stupid, STUPID hysteria.






167 posted on 11/26/2006 2:35:53 PM PST by txrangerette ("We are fighting al-Qaeda, NOT Aunt Sadie"...Dick Cheney commenting on the wiretaps!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
Her heinous stated that she didn't see social security funding as a problem. That if we did nothing people would still be getting 70% of their benefits.

Don't believe what they say. First of all, the Dems like to say that the system doesn't go broke until 2042, but that is based on cashing in the IOUs in the SSTF, which means that the USG must come up with the money to redeem these non-market T-bills. There is a reason why almost half of the $9 trillion national debt includes the SSTF, which is listed as intra-governmental holdings. This is another word for liabilities.

SS is a pay as you go system. It starts going negative in 2017, which is why the problem will be addressed no matter who is in the WH or who controls Congress.

168 posted on 11/26/2006 2:35:58 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

In the event this "rumor" is really a trial balloon, let me go on record as being opposed to a tax increase.


169 posted on 11/26/2006 2:37:07 PM PST by tertiary01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
For crying out loud...look at just WHO wrote this piece of filth article! It isn't an "insider" floating something FROM the president!

Lindsey was an economic adviser to the president, who got unceremoniously sacked FOUR YEARS AGO! This is his REVENGE, people. Wake up and open your eyes!

170 posted on 11/26/2006 2:37:42 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The Pres has little to do with the budget--expenditure or revenue. He got his tax cut Bill through, but that isn't likely to happen again.


171 posted on 11/26/2006 2:41:27 PM PST by RightWhale (RTRA DLQS GSCW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VictoryGal
You REALLY need to read CommonTater's post from a few days ago. Therein, he laid out just exactly HOW and WHY the GOP won big in '94 and THE CONTACT WITH AMERICA and Newt were NOT the major reason at all!
172 posted on 11/26/2006 2:41:43 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: kabar

BTTT


173 posted on 11/26/2006 2:42:14 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: DB

At least Bush Jr. never said "Read My Lips...".


174 posted on 11/26/2006 2:43:51 PM PST by rottndog (WOOF!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

I agree with you, and hope this is an unfounded rumor. I'm registering my disgust with the hypothetical, in the off chance it is a trial balloon.

In the past couple of weeks, I've seen Rumsfeld dumped by the side of the road just *days* after the president said he wasn't going anywhere, and ominous noises from the Iraq Baker Group. So please forgive me if I'm a little jumpy about what might or might not be impossible for this administration to contemplate.


175 posted on 11/26/2006 2:53:00 PM PST by VictoryGal (Never give up, never surrender!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

> You REALLY need to read CommonTater's post from a few days ago. Therein, he laid out just exactly HOW and WHY the GOP won big in '94 and THE CONTACT WITH AMERICA and Newt were NOT the major reason at all!

Sounds like a good read. Can I have a link?


176 posted on 11/26/2006 2:54:20 PM PST by VictoryGal (Never give up, never surrender!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: quesney
I agree. I think the effective tax rate is near 2/3 of every dollar. That is why financial manipulation is so profitable. If you want to get rich, don't be productive, be manipulative. At one end welfare at the other end Soros type behavior.
177 posted on 11/26/2006 3:13:06 PM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Evidently ignorance is bliss, but I'm not going to allow those slanders against this President to stand in the face of lies and misrepresentations about Reagan.


178 posted on 11/26/2006 3:48:55 PM PST by OldFriend (FALLEN HERO JEFFREY TOCZYLOWSKI, REST IN PEACE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: SomeCallMeTim
The only real defense I have for the punishing consequences of the progressive tax code is to participate in the "key employee" salary deferral program. The company will simply credit an account instead of paying me. I can draw on the credit when I retire. There is a big potential risk in the deferral...the company might not be solvent to pay what I'm owed. I need to get off my backside and get my investments in gear to generate passive income. Eventually, even that will be attacked by the insatiable appetite of socialist spending programs.

I'm 50 right now. In 12 years I'll be 62...right when the "break even" is predicted. I think it will happen even sooner. The government doesn't really have a handle on the house of cards they've built by enormous taxation levied against a small group of successful people. That 5% of the population could stop earning income overnight and wipe out 90% of the government revenues.

179 posted on 11/26/2006 4:31:27 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Yea... I really believe one of the problems with our tax system is... not enough people are invested in it anymore.

When mean old W gave his "tax cut to the rich", my mother-in-law (who earned ~ $12k per year) was relieved from paying Federal tax at all. She had been paying ~ $1k per year. After Bush's Tax-cut-for-the-rich, she owed NONE. At the time, I was happy for her and thought it a good thing.

But, now.... I wonder if it wouldn't be better if EVERYONE paid SOMETHING. And, not just SS tax. Better that we all have a stake in the system.


180 posted on 11/26/2006 5:53:31 PM PST by SomeCallMeTim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-228 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson