Posted on 01/10/2009 8:56:24 AM PST by SeekAndFind
“How much would it “cost” to eliminate personal income tax and payroll taxes for one year?”
Good question. I am guessing that it is in the $1.8 trillion range or so, give ro take a few hundred billion dollars (my guess).
Rep Louis Gohmert asked that question and realized the answer meant we could have a ‘tax holiday’ for 2 months that would cost far less than these bailouts and giveaways. That would probably be the cleanest and easiest way to pump up the economy short-term.
Of course that begs the question of whether a short-term pumping is the best or right thing. Maybe we need to get concerned about LONG-TERM economic growth. Rather than a tax holiday, the best thing to do would be pro-growth long-term permanent tax rate reductions.
Obama has learned early teh Clinton trick of abusing language to sell his programs.
A government giveaway that is run via the IRS to people too poor to pay income taxes is “a tax cut for working families”.
Obama-socialism is now marketed like Reaganomics, even though its the exact opposite. (The key is that Reagan cut marginal tax rates, while this increases marginal tax rates).
Reagan is rolling in his grave.
I'll take the $500 and buy some more ammo with it.
Good old big caliber, Made-In-The-USA brass case, re-loadable.
None of that Commie Bloc steel case, dirty powder surplus.
Only a few years ago the same amount of ammo cost about $100.
After THE OBAMA COLLAPSE it'll be $25 a round, but there won't be any for sale.
This tax cut is just welfare. Tax cuts are for those paying taxes. Payroll taxes have specified uses (retirement income and health care). The EITC already refunds a large part of payroll taxes for low wage earners. The rats want to rebate even more payroll taxes for low wage earners. Government retirement benefits are already highly skewed to low wage earners. High wage earners barely receive any more benefits than low wage earners.
These tax cuts will be a disaster. These tax cuts will substantially increase the idea that only the rich should pay taxes. The productive part of society will produce less, leading to a much deeper economic crisis.
The federal government had tax revenues of 1.16 trillion in personal income taxes in 2007 along with 870 billion in social security taxes and 370 billion in corporate taxes. Eliminating those three for a year would be around 2.5 trillion which is about the same cost as all the bailouts and proposed stimulus packages.
The federal government had tax revenues of 1.16 trillion in personal income taxes in 2007 along with 870 billion in social security taxes and 370 billion in corporate taxes. Eliminating those three for a year would be around 2.5 trillion which is about the same cost as all the bailouts and proposed stimulus packages.
My hand is sticking wide out.
In the meantime, I presume that I, a working and productive American, will pay less taxes.
I’ll take it.
Pelosi was bragging about how that was a winning issue for them. At the time I knew it wouldn't fly. Why? Bush was running huge deficits and purposefully convinced the country national debt is good, that Obama will use now. The other problem is interest rates. (I have been watching Peter Schiff) Aside from massive government deficit spending the monetary policy was print-print-print meaning savings interest rates were low while we had phony stock market and housing booms that were just paper values. So in a climate like that even honest hard working people , everybody, is likely to get sucked in and burned. And we were. Thanks to GWB we will never have privatized SS.
Yes, Obama and Pelosi are our worst nightmare. But they have power because GWB was completely clueless. And fitting the crash happened before he got out.
Are you nuts? I am a conservative-—never turn down a tax cut...they are just giving us some of our money back. This is always a good thing. Couple will get back $1000.00-income up to 250,000 last I heard.
Tax cuts are always welcome in my household. Before we feel too sorry for the truly rich-consider this...they have any army of accountants who make sure they don’t pay much in taxes. The ones who really get screwed are those between say 250 and 400,00 depending where you live-—the upper middle class-not enough to take advantage of the many tax loop-holes the rich enjoy. They always include these people when they say the top 1% pay however much of the total taxes (don’t remember)...as Warren Buffet noted, he paid less in taxes then did his secretary.
I figure you would have made your mind up on that by now.;)
I am a conservative-—never turn down a tax cut...
I never said I would turn it down, but only that it won't stimulate our economy. Maybe some other nation's who builds the stuff we'll end up buying, but not ours.
they are just giving us some of our money back.
It will probably be more Chinese money. Great deal for the Chinese. They get most of it back when we buy things that are made in China, and again when we pay the loans back.
RE :And after Pelosi got in?
I was warning freepers 2 years ago that republicans were the ones to pay for congress low approval ratings 07-08, and democrats would benefit in a second election 08 from it. So democrats had an incentive to screw things up, but GWB apparently thought he could go down with republicans, since he was re-elected, and somehow look good. The public doesnt even know it was a dem congress. winning strategy was BUSH-BUSH-BUSH and dont do much. So republicans had everything to lose, and did.
The lesser of two evils argument was not going to work again with GWB 8 years and republican congress 5-6 years.
Only one of the candidates even mentioned that the meltdown happened over the past two years, and that was Obama himself. During some of his radio messages played in the blue area I was in, he said something like “Don't ask if you are better off than you were fours years ago, but if you will be better off.” He understood the implications. Too bad McCain didn't.
I didn't say things went bad at the end of the GOP majority, but after about nine months with the Democrat majority.
“Vote Republican because the economy didn't go bad until a whole 9 months, after 5-6 years of us (+GWB) running all three branches”
I wouldn't run on that, and McCain realized he couldn't either. Unfortunately McCain had nothing to run on so he changed messages every few days. Moral? you need something positive with the negative messages.
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.