Posted on 11/19/2011 3:30:19 AM PST by Kaslin
Why is their no talk about reducing the “Green Credits”, not the guaranteed loans to the Bundlers which are bad in their own right but tax deductions and credits for solar panels.
For example, a solar company calculators for installations in Albany NY shows for a $44,055 installation the Federal Government will provide tax credits of $13,216, and New York state $12,250 in Energy Grants and $5,000 in state income tax credits. Total government (taxpayer) funded offsets $30,466!!!
It is “Green” which is sucking the air out of the room! One can only imagine what kind of Federal tax credits are being provided to the Corporation for going “Green”.
Should have noted that the example provided applied to residential installation in Albany, NY. Sorry.
If the pubbies win the Senate, increase the House count and get the obummer out and then don't fix the problem, it will be time to "go to the mats".
Actions will speak for me, and it won't be on the internet.
The Democrat - Republican game at election time is a farce thrown like scraps to the dogs, by the Ruling Elite. It makes no difference which party wins. They’re all good-ol-boy “Progressives” - statists out to control the people, fleece the sheep and milk the family cow.
We should start with Cutting Baseline By 10% and Permanently eliminating 8% automatic Increase annually!
I think a ten-year drawdown of mortgage interest deductions, and a three-year in state interest, is a good idea, when coupled with an effort to zero-sum the net revenue changes by reducing tax rates.
a non progressive
my candidate is not currently in the race
The Republican House ight have the power to do all this, but you are forgetting that we do not have the majority in the Senate. So until we do, there is no chance. Now kwitcherbitchin
I rarely agree with you but this one time you are correct.
If an individual ends up paying more revenue on the same amount of income, regardless of the rate charged, it is a tax increase.
It happened with the Reagan "tax cuts" in the 80s and it was a tax shift and increase to people with higher incomes, but since most tax payers were not in that group, it lowered their individual payments but it spurred the economy, created 20 million jobs and really increased the number of people that were in the "tax pool" and off of unemployment payments.
I went from no revenue payments to the feds for over 10 years with multiple 6 figure income to paying "my fair share" after the tax rates were reduced but the "exemptions and loop holes" were eliminated.
People can argue about the term "fair" {that's an opinion that depends on what you earn} but regardless of the lower % rate of tax, my tax payments to the feds increased and that wasn't an opinion, it was a fact.
The thing I've never been able to understand, is why the demonRATs, that love to spend, don't want lower rates, which provide more revenue, and they could spend even more.
Intellectually, they have to know that it's true, even if philosophically they oppose the concept of lower rates.
I just don't get that paradox.
Any third party and third party candidate that doesn't have any chance
It takes more than the House to close those agencies. The Senate has to pass it (impossble) and the president must sign the legislation (never will do it). So, what would be needed is a willing senate and a willing president. Only Nov. 2012 can make that happen.
What makes you think he is a RINO? Do you even know what a RINO is?
I am tired of people throwing the word RINO out without knowing what a RINO is. And I don't mean the Republican In Name Only part.
A RINO is someone that votes mostly with the rats. You don't know how Hewitt votes, so you can not call him a RINO
They spend anyway. They want power and control more than more tax revenue. They want more government dependency and the leftist dream of controlling redistribution of wealth.
It would "kill" them by encouraging their populations to migrate to the red states, where they would try to "blue-ify" them.
A more general observation: The home mortgage interest deduction is poor economics, as it artificially inflates home prices; but once you've had it for a couple of generations, you can't take it away without the consequences noted in the article. People have made decisions with a major part of their life's savings based on that deduction--if you take it away, you are destroying those savings. Moreover, it would be nice if the government would make up its mind--if it wants to minimize the banking/GNMA/FNMA/FHA disaster, it shouldn't do things which will place further downward pressure on real estate values!
When one faces a Obama/Pelosi/Reid Death Panel, anyone wonder if their political affiliation will have any bearing on whether or not they get medical care? Anyone out there think it was designed that way?
What the hell does that mean? They are both in Congress...Accredited Grifters might be a more appropriate soubriquet. :)
Nonsense. The Senate and the President can't spend money unless appropriated by the House. Let the House zero out the appropriations for Education, Commerce, Energy, and several other useless departments, then sit there on that position while the Senate and the President huff and puff veto until they're blue in the face. Refuse to budge. SHUT. IT. DOWN.
Sure the media will unleash an unholy assault. They'll do that whatever conservatives do. We have to fight to win.
” When one faces a Obama/Pelosi/Reid Death Panel, anyone wonder if their political affiliation will have any bearing on whether or not they get medical care? Anyone out there think it was designed that way? “
Exactly !
If you don’t understand that hacks like Hewitt are RINOs by now, your ignorance is willful, and there is nothing anyone can say or do that will help you. See ya.
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.