User Tag List

Results 1 to 7 of 7

  1. #1
    Meat Tornado DiscoBiscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009

    Default The big ol' Deficit thread

    Obama made his first speech today about deficit reduction at George Washington Uni.

    In lieu of all the recent threads concerning the fiscal health of the country and our economy, I thought I would make one thread were all the related issues could be discussed.

    In DC the battle over budget cuts and reducing the deficit is just beginning, and is only going to get more heated as the year progresses.

    Here's my opening salvo for all those of you who think just taxing the rich is the answer to all our problems.

    Tax the rich! OK, but then what, Mr. President?

    By Jeanne Sahadi, senior writerApril 13, 2011: 7:15 AM ET

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- For years, President Obama has been clear about his preferred tax policy: Tax the rich more and protect households that make less than $250,000 from higher taxes.

    It's not clear what he'll say about taxes on Wednesday when he lays out his ideas for how to tackle the country's long-term debt. If history holds, he'll stick to his guns.

    Certainly, continuing to promise low taxes for 98% of the country will help his newly launched 2012 re-election campaign. But it wouldn't be a great path to reining in debt. (Sorry GOP: Tax revenue has to go up)

    Relying solely on tax increases for the rich to aid in deficit reduction -- even when paired with significant spending cuts -- doesn't cut it for two reasons, said Tax Policy Center senior fellow Roberton Williams.

    First, the income of the top 2% of taxpayers is typically more volatile than that of taxpayers lower down the income scale, so when the economy sours, so often do those high-end income streams. That means less revenue than expected will flow into federal coffers.

    Second, even if that weren't true, there just aren't enough rich people to generate the kind of revenue needed to substantially reduce deficits.

    To show the disparity, consider some recent calculations by the Congressional Budget Office. Raising all six income tax rates by 1 percentage point would yield an additional $480 billion over 10 years. By contrast, raising the top two rates by 1 percentage point would yield just $115 billion.

    What Obama has said: In his most recent budget request, the president proposed letting the top two income tax rates revert to 39.6% and 36%, up from 35% and 33% today. He also called for an increase in the capital gains and dividend rates to 20% that high-income households pay, up from 15% today. And he would reduce the value of their itemized deductions and personal exemptions.

    All told, [B]those proposals -- which would affect individuals making at least $200,000 and couples making $250,000 and up -- would reduce deficits by just under $1 trillion over 10 years.

    That's only about a third of the deficit reduction that would occur if lawmakers just let all of the Bush-era tax cuts expire.

    And it's just a tenth of the $1.1 trillion a year that could be saved if the tax code were stripped of the byzantine mess of tax breaks
    , many of which disproportionately benefit the rich but also benefit those lower down the income scale.

    Of course, if one wants more revenue from the $250,000-plus set, why not just raise rates and constrain tax breaks even more than the president has proposed so far?

    "You'd have to raise rates an awful lot on the wealthy," Williams said. And by that he meant to heights that would be neither politically nor possibly even economically feasible.

    The higher tax rates are, the more likely they are to affect economic behavior by increasing tax avoidance and discouraging otherwise growth-spurring investments. And that, in turn, can reduce the revenue raised.

    Tax reform in order: That's why Williams and other tax experts hope that the president will take a cue from his own bipartisan debt commission, which recommended comprehensive tax reform.

    The commission report laid a few paths to tax reform. One -- called the "Zero Plan" -- would eliminate all tax breaks. Doing so would raise more than $1 trillion a year, the bulk of which would be used to pay for a steep reduction in individual and corporate rates.

    Under that scenario, the commission would reduce the number of tax brackets for individuals from six to three and set income tax rates at 8%, 14% and at 23% -- a 12 percentage point drop from today's top rate.

    The commission then offered two other, less extreme versions of the Zero Plan -- each of which adds back some tax breaks. In one case, they restore the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit, both of which benefit lower income households. Under that scenario, income tax rates would be 9%, 15% and 24%.

    When they add back still more -- this time including limited versions of popular tax breaks on mortgage interest, health insurance, retirement savings and charitable giving -- the rates would still be lower than they are today, but notably higher (12%, 22% and 28%) than under the most extreme Zero Plan.

    In all cases, Williams said, the commission offered up the kind of fundamental tax reform that "can generate a simpler, fairer and more efficient tax code and still bring in more money."
    Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.
    - Edmund Burke

    8w9 sx/so

  2. #2
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008


    We created a debt, one way or another, and we need to fix that debt. I'm all down for that. I'm not one to ignore the elephant.. but. We need to make sure the barn door is closed first, otherwise another elephant will eventually sneak in.

    There are some fundamental problems that NEED to be addressed before we start paying back our debts -- Like how to finally handle healthcare in a way that will give Americans the best coverage possible, while maintaining competitive pharm companies and allowing them to grow as well, that doesn't throw us into debt. We have some brilliant people out there, that spend their whole lives studying these things.. Budgeting the military properly (For example.. I don't understand how we allow people to be recruited for the army when we are over strength.. while people currently in the army are undeployable, unreliable, medically crippled.. Reducing those numbers with retirement incentives (so people in 15-18 years aren't up a river) and medical discharges).. There are some HUGE issues that make the costs rack up for us. I know for a fact the military pays way too much for things they don't need to pay money for. I know the government buys shit it doesn't need.

    I'd like to see the government do the following two things: 1. Come up with a plan that not everyone will agree with, but overall it will be the best thing for america. 2. Make sure that plan doesn't put us in debt. and then 3. Implement it.. Then, when we're sure the debt will not rack up anymore than it is.. I'd be all down for tax plans that help actually pay off the debt in our country.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  3. #3
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007


    To DiscoBiscuit:

    What are the exemptions that would be eliminated (let's assume the third and least radical of those propsals) and how do they add up to more than a tax on income by themselves? And what rate of economic growth is assumed over the next decade while making these calculations? Finally, what are the proposed corporate and capital gains tax rates under this scenario?

  4. #4
    Meat Tornado DiscoBiscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009


    I'm sorry lowtech, but I don't really have any of those figures.

    I'm certain if you searched the zero plan from the bipartisan debt commission you could find out.

    I can try to figure out those numbers this weekend if I can get some time.

    Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.
    Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.
    - Edmund Burke

    8w9 sx/so

  5. #5
    Uniqueorn William K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009


    Who creates more wealth/jobs for the economy - 1 billionaire or 10 ppl with 100 million each?
    4w5, Fi>Ne>Ti>Si>Ni>Fe>Te>Se, sp > so > sx

    appreciates being appreciated, conflicted over conflicts, afraid of being afraid, bad at being bad, predictably unpredictable, consistently inconsistent, remarkably unremarkable...

    I may not agree with what you are feeling, but I will defend to death your right to have a good cry over it

    The whole problem with the world is that fools & fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. ~ Bertrand Russell

  6. #6
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    One sx/sp


    1% isn't nearly as high of a raise as I'd like, whereas the raise I'd like would be crushing to the lower income groups... Hence, taxing the wealthy a lot more than the others.

    Of course I know there need to be cuts. We can cut defense. We can replace all of our medical crap with a far more efficient. singular, universal health care system. I do support the idea of taking torch and scythe to the tax breaks and exemptions. We can save some money by that war on drugs stuff, but that's probably the least politically viable of all my ideas.

    At any rate, there's no reason to not mix those cuts with a big tax hike. Of course lowering spending is the most obvious way to maintain revenue, but next to that, taxation is the most powerful tool available.
    Go to sleep, iguana.

    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009


    One could try to tackle the inflation tax, as that hurts everyone without a voucher for more money from the fed

Similar Threads

  1. The Big Bang Theory
    By MerkW in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 123
    Last Post: 07-11-2016, 10:33 PM
  2. The Big Interview Thread
    By Codex in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-01-2015, 10:13 AM
  3. [Enne] The big ol' bowl of Enneagram
    By Magic Poriferan in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 12-19-2010, 02:07 AM
  4. [ISTJ] The Official ISTJ Fanclub Thread
    By RansomedbyFire in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 07-03-2009, 11:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO