Magox Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 I completely agree with Greenspan on this one. Greenspan Says Congress Should Let Bush's Tax Cuts Lapse I had this discussion with another person just two days ago. I've been conflicted on this issue, and recently I came to the conclusion that we should allow the Bush Tax cuts to expire. My argument was that it would indeed slow economic growth, but the risks of our National Debt outweigh our growth concerns. Allowing the Bush tax cuts would trim close to $2 Trillion off of the projected path of our Debt over the next 10 years. I am definitely not a tax advocate, but as I have mentioned before, our national debt is a huge problem and there is going to have to be give and take from both sides if we want to have any chance of avoiding a US debt crisis. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, whose endorsement of George W. Bush’s 2001 tax cuts helped persuade Congress to pass them, said lawmakers should allow the cuts to expire at the end of the year. “They should follow the law and let them lapse,” Greenspan said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Conversations with Judy Woodruff,” citing a need for the tax revenue to reduce the federal budget deficit. Greenspan’s comments, to be broadcast tomorrow and over the weekend, place him in the middle of an election-year struggle over extending trillions of dollars of tax cuts enacted under Bush. Ending the cuts “probably will” slow growth, Greenspan, 84, said in the TV interview. The risk posed by inaction on the deficit is greater, he said. “Unless we start to come to grips with this long-term outlook, we are going to have major problems,” said Greenspan, who led the U.S. central bank from 1987 to 2006. “I think we misunderstand the momentum of this deficit going forward.” Greenspan said reducing the deficit is “going to be far more difficult than anybody imagines” after “a decade of major increases in federal spending and major tax cuts.”
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 I completely agree with Greenspan on this one. Greenspan Says Congress Should Let Bush's Tax Cuts Lapse I had this discussion with another person just two days ago. I've been conflicted on this issue, and recently I came to the conclusion that we should allow the Bush Tax cuts to expire. My argument was that it would indeed slow economic growth, but the risks of our National Debt outweigh our growth concerns. Allowing the Bush tax cuts would trim close to $2 Trillion off of the projected path of our Debt over the next 10 years. I am definitely not a tax advocate, but as I have mentioned before, our national debt is a huge problem and there is going to have to be give and take from both sides if we want to have any chance of avoiding a US debt crisis. Allow them all to lapse, or just for those making over $250K? I can't imagine the WH letting them lapse for everyone.
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Yes, we should let them lapse -- for everyone. And then we should cut the federal budget by at least 25%.
keepthefaith Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Allow them all to lapse, or just for those making over $250K? I can't imagine the WH letting them lapse for everyone. WH wants $250K+ or so and up to get increase while others stay at Bush levels. It'll be very tough to get a divided Congress to agree on anything. The entire Fed tax code needs revision IMO. All income levels should pay Fed income tax, everyone needs to have skin in the game. I would not be opposed to paying a higher rate of taxation for a few years to help with defecit reduction but ONLY if the Fed makes big meaningful spending cuts that will allow for balanced budget and debt reduction.
keepthefaith Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Yes, we should let them lapse -- for everyone. And then we should cut the federal budget by at least 25%. 33% or more IMO.
Magox Posted July 15, 2010 Author Posted July 15, 2010 Allow them all to lapse, or just for those making over $250K? I can't imagine the WH letting them lapse for everyone. The W.H most likely won't let them all lapse, since he campaigned on that promise. I know I know, he hasn't followed through on everything that he has said, but this would be a biggie. In regards to what I believe we should do? That's a tough one. I would probably say that they should all lapse. Except maybe a few provisions, like allowing the single woman and elderly tax cuts, The child tax credits and the No double taxation of dividends. Other than that, they should allow the rest to expire. What they could do, which in my view would make alot of sense would be to lower the Corporate tax code. That would be definitely news to the business community.
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 WH wants $250K+ or so and up to get increase while others stay at Bush levels. So....should we presume that 'staying at Bush levels' is the "tax cut for 95% of Americans" that we were promised? Except maybe a few provisions, like allowing the single woman
EC-Bills Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 (edited) So....should we presume that 'staying at Bush levels' is the "tax cut for 95% of Americans" that we were promised? My guess is he was referring to single moms, but only if they are hotties. Edited July 15, 2010 by EC-Bills
Magox Posted July 15, 2010 Author Posted July 15, 2010 So....should we presume that 'staying at Bush levels' is the "tax cut for 95% of Americans" that we were promised? Ya dude, just for the hotties No, all kidding aside, EC corrected me, for single moms.
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Ya dude, just for the hotties No, all kidding aside, EC corrected me, for single moms. Ok, but only if they are strippers.
LeviF Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Ok, but only if they are strippers. http://www.tshirtmonger.com/wordpress/wp-c...09/08/issm1.gif
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Ok, but only if they are strippers. I believe that's fine. I hear the strippers along the Gulf coast are already getting BP money since their business has fallen off because of the spill. They need all the help they can get.
Magox Posted July 15, 2010 Author Posted July 15, 2010 http://www.tshirtmonger.com/wordpress/wp-c...09/08/issm1.gif That's what I'm talkin bout
Rob's House Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Taking over 35% of anyone's income is criminal.
DrFishfinder Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 If someone can prove to me that this would kick the economy into gear, put people back to work and get banks to start making loans to small-mid sized businesses again, I'm all for it. ......waiting........ ...........
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 If someone can prove to me that this would kick the economy into gear, put people back to work and get banks to start making loans to small-mid sized businesses again, I'm all for it. ......waiting........ ........... How about if we use it to hire thousands of new gubmint employees to shuffle all the paperwork that new regulations enacted by this "not anti-business" administration will require from those small businesses?
DrFishfinder Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 How about if we use it to hire thousands of new gubmint employees to shuffle all the paperwork that new regulations enacted by this "not anti-business" administration will require from those small businesses? Hell, lets just rehire the census takers to do a recount & pad the numbers again.
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 Hell, lets just rehire the census takers to do a recount & pad the numbers again. If that doesn't work, maybe we'll get lucky and a bunch of people will just stop looking for work. That always gets that unemployment down.
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2010 Posted July 15, 2010 If that doesn't work, maybe we'll get lucky and a bunch of people will just stop looking for work. That always gets that unemployment down. But make sure you don't "pull the rug out" by ending unemployement benefits for those people who have stopped looking for a job.
Magox Posted July 15, 2010 Author Posted July 15, 2010 Taking over 35% of anyone's income is criminal. That would be your definition of "criminal". We lived without those cuts for many years, and what most people don't realize is that WE ARE ABOUT TO HAVE A !@#$ING DEBT CRISIS It will require a combination of tax increases and massive cuts in spending in order for us to have any chance at avoiding this. It's time to put aside the partisan talking points and solve this problem. I honestly don't believe that our elected leaders will be able to do this. GOP will say no to any sort of meaningful tax hikes, Democrats won't want to any sort of meaningful cuts in spending. Gridlock. Unfortunately, we will wait until the bond vigilantes hold us accountable, and by that time, economic carnage will have transpired.
Recommended Posts