As I stated in a recent opinion column, every good liberal will tell you that low tax rates cause tax revenues to drop, hurt the economy, benefit only the wealthy and cause skyrocketing budget deficits. A recent Wall Street Journal article blew a hole in those liberal lies. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The Journal reported that federal tax revenues for the first five months of fiscal year 2006 are up 10.3 percent from the same period a year ago. The 2006 revenue growth adds to a 15 percent tax revenue increase from 2004 to 2005. This good fortune for U.S. Treasury coffers is attributed to the steady and growing economy, which is largely a product of the 2003 cuts in income, dividend and capital gains tax rates.

Please take a few minutes right now to contact your members of Congress, and remind them to stay focused on keeping the economy strong and growing by first making the 2003 tax cuts permanent. Then, ask your members of Congress to co-sponsor HR 25 or S 25, The FairTax Act. You can use this short and effective message:

_Please help keep our economy growing by making the 2003 tax cuts permanent, and co-sponsoring HR 25 or S 25, The FairTax Act._



If you do not know the names and contact information for your members of Congress, you can find them at the Economic Freedom Coalition website: www.economicfreedomcoalition.org Just one more thing _ please ask your family members and friends to contact their members of Congress too. The more constituents they hear from, the faster they will change the status quo in Washington, D.C.


Now more than ever we must turn up the heat on our members of Congress. We must remind them that our votes in November will depend on them co-sponsoring legislation that keeps our economy growing and lifts the burden of taxation from our backs and the backs of future generations.

Herman Cain

_When They Feel The Heat, They Will See The Light_

When W took office in 2000 the S+P was at 1500, the Dow was at almost 12,0000 and the Nasdaq was at 4,500. Wake me up when any of those averages reach the level when Numbnuts took office. If that's all we get from the added stimulus of 2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS in deficit spending, then I would say we've been robbed.

LOL, you cant be serious. Are you saaying tax increases are the way to make the stock market grow?

The Journal reported that federal tax revenues for the first five months of fiscal year 2006 are up 10.3 percent from the same period a year ago. The 2006 revenue growth adds to a 15 percent tax revenue increase from 2004 to 2005.
Your information is skewed. The 10 and 15 percent increases are taken from the top periods of growth and do not accurately portray the situation. This is almost as bad as just lying. You should be smarter than to accept these figures as facts.

Overall - Clinton experienced 6.5 percent growth of tax revenues per year
Bush experienced 5 percent growth of tax revenues per year


Here is the raw information
(http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/qtax/table1.pdf)

Secondly, if you have tax cuts in one year you can not claim that growth in tax revenues that occurs 3 years later can be attributed to those cuts. Hell, using that logic you could claim that if we have a economic boom in 20 years it was because of the 2003 cuts. Realistically you should look at the period DIRECTLY after the cuts in comparison to the period the cuts were put in place. That is when the largest increase should occur.
Instead there was a 5% decrease, but regardless of whether there was a decrease or increase, our economic situation is being supported by putting our nation further in debt. A huge amount of debt too.

Tax Cuts are working They sure are. Other nations will tremble with fear when they see how big and awesome our national debt is!!!!

how come you never answer when I ask you what a national debt means to anybody but politicians? It wont stop our military or our entitlement handouts, it wont do anything but grow. Give me a worst case scenario of what will happen when our debt reaches whatever imaginary number you can think of, and how it will affect your life directly.

Anyone smart would know that the Clintax economy was a fake economy.

We had Enron and World com lying about profits and cooking the books.

That is why the stock market was higher.

This all came crashing down in W's term.

Then we had 9-11. 9-11 probably would have been prevented if the Clinton

admin would have let the pentagon share intel with the CIA and FBI.

(See able danger)

Any economist would tell you that it takes a few years for you to feel the

true effects of economic decisions.


Your information is skewed. The 10 and 15 percent increases are taken from the top periods of growth and do not accurately portray the situation. This is almost as bad as just lying. You should be smarter than to accept these figures as facts.

Overall - Clinton experienced 6.5 percent growth of tax revenues per year
Bush experienced 5 percent growth of tax revenues per year


Here is the raw information
(http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/qtax/table1.pdf)

Secondly, if you have tax cuts in one year you can not claim that growth in tax revenues that occurs 3 years later can be attributed to those cuts. Hell, using that logic you could claim that if we have a economic boom in 20 years it was because of the 2003 cuts. Realistically you should look at the period DIRECTLY after the cuts in comparison to the period the cuts were put in place. That is when the largest increase should occur.
Instead there was a 5% decrease, but regardless of whether there was a decrease or increase, our economic situation is being supported by putting our nation further in debt. A huge amount of debt too.

Yes Please do.


how come you never answer when I ask you what a national debt means to anybody but politicians? It wont stop our military or our entitlement handouts, it wont do anything but grow. Give me a worst case scenario of what will happen when our debt reaches whatever imaginary number you can think of, and how it will affect your life directly.

Look,

If you lower taxes, people spend more of thir own money. Then companies make more money. Then they are able to hire more people.

Then tax revenue is increased.

Anyone smart would know that the Clintax economy was a fake economy.


It must be admitted....there are few human beings who possess your particular brand of "smarts".

....the Clintax economy was a fake economy......9-11 probably would have been prevented if the Clinton admin would have let the pentagon share intel with the CIA and FBI.

Wow.

The only way you could suck in any more of the Reichwing's fucking Kool-Aid is if you were a black hole.

If you lower taxes, people spend more of thir own money. Then companies make more money. Then they are able to hire more people.
Then tax revenue is increased. That is wildly simplistic. Clinton's economy created 22 million job after a tax hike. Want a real laugh? Read this dire warning written in 1994 by the Heritage Foundation (of over-educated morons): http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg998.cfm (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg998.cfm) Just as the economy was blasting off like a rocket.

The fact is that business investment can either create or eliminate jobs. Business' only purpose is to maximize shareholder value. Period. The role of government is to guide and direct business through tax incentives and laws to maximize job creation.

Anyone smart would know that the Clintax economy was a fake economy.We had Enron and World com lying about profits and cooking the books.
That is why the stock market was higher.
This all came crashing down in W's term.
Fraud has been occuring for ages and still is happening even during Bush's terms.

Anyone smart would look at the numbers involved though.
You're claiming that Enron and World com are responsible for the economy in Bush's term? Enron investors claimed to have lost 25 billion. Worldcom cheated a couple billion max.

30 billionish would not change the figures much at all, and that is assuming that no comparable fraud occured in Bush's terms

Then we had 9-11. 9-11 probably would have been prevented if the Clinton admin would have let the pentagon share intel with the CIA and FBI.

"probably would have been prevented"

Please back this up, cuz it sounds like a load of crap to me.

Despite that I don't think we could have prevented it, why would this be Clintons fault? Why couldn't Bush fix this issue in the year he had before this happened? Are you claiming that Bush is not competent enough?

Any economist would tell you that it takes a few years for you to feel the true effects of economic decisions.
I believe that any economist would shoot himself for reading this.

That is just wrong. Putting 550,000,000,000 dollars out of the government into the hands of the public will have an IMMEDIATE effect on the economy.

The problem was also in how the money was distributed. If you want the economy to improve, then put the money into the hands of those who are going to DO something with their money.
The very rich do not enter the same % of their capital into business ventures as the middle class do, so putting more money into their hands did not have the desired effect.

Don't you know that the Clinton admin had policies in effect that said we could not share intel between departments.

The pentagon knew Atta was here, they could not share the info with the FBI or the CIA.

Gorelic, Clintax policies..........smart



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167130,00.html

Give me a worst case scenario of what will happen when our debt reaches whatever imaginary number you can think of, and how it will affect your life directly.

Give your teenage daughter a credit card with an unlimited credit line and let that be your answer. I assume you would endorse paying interest on all our debt. Do you have any idea how much or our spending is going to go simply to pay interest? These are real tax dollars. They could be better used paying for education, or health care, or homeland security.

Worst case: China, a country that holds trillions of US debt, decides to sell it, or merely threatens to sell it, in the open market. Make sure you don't have any money in the stock market the day that happens.

Legacy of the party that brought you the Balanced Budget Amendment (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm)

...
The Journal reported that federal tax revenues for the first five months of fiscal year 2006 are up 10.3 percent from the same period a year ago. The 2006 revenue growth adds to a 15 percent tax revenue increase from 2004 to 2005. This good fortune for U.S. Treasury coffers is attributed to the steady and growing economy, which is largely a product of the 2003 cuts in income, dividend and capital gains tax rates ...


Tax revenues are up because Bush re-funded the IRS collections department... LOL.

Or have you forgotten that Clinton totally de-nutted that department as a result of the congressional hearings into the IRS heavy-handed tactics against working america?

Give your teenage daughter a credit card with an unlimited credit line and let that be your answer. I assume you would endorse paying interest on all our debt. Do you have any idea how much or our spending is going to go simply to pay interest? These are real tax dollars. They could be better used paying for education, or health care, or homeland security.

Worst case: China, a country that holds trillions of US debt, decides to sell it, or merely threatens to sell it, in the open market. Make sure you don't have any money in the stock market the day that happens.

Legacy of the party that brought you the Balanced Budget Amendment (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm)

the thing is, even if a country like China could put the screws to us with the debt, the question is, why would they? they would be equally or even more screwed themselves. You see, a country would have to be suicidal to drop the hammer on us. So as long as China didnt care about losing their ass along with ours, you are right. But china needs us as much as we need them, if not more so. So for them to bankrupt us or somehow destroy our economy wouldnt do them much good would it?

I think you overestimate the extent to which other countries rely on the US.

how come you never answer when I ask you what a national debt means to anybody but politicians? It wont stop our military or our entitlement handouts, it wont do anything but grow. Give me a worst case scenario of what will happen when our debt reaches whatever imaginary number you can think of, and how it will affect your life directly.

it's simple. The higher the debt the higher the interest payments. Interest comes directly out of tax dollars each year. The higher that goes the less tax dollars available to spend. The debt amounts to a tax you pay tommorrow. It's obscenely high - the interest in 2005 was 350 billion $ - that alone is more than the cost of the war in Iraq.

It's obscenely high - the interest in 2005 was 350 billion $ - that alone is more than the cost of the war in Iraq.

Maybe you shouldn't put it that way, Drew. If we were to pay off the debt, maybe the government would use it as an excuse to start more wars!

there is never not enough noney for anything, never will be. The day a welfare check doesnt get mailed because of the debt let me know

As I stated in a recent opinion column, every good liberal will tell you that low tax rates cause tax revenues to drop, hurt the economy, benefit only the wealthy and cause skyrocketing budget deficits. A recent Wall Street Journal article blew a hole in those liberal lies. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The Journal reported that federal tax revenues for the first five months of fiscal year 2006 are up 10.3 percent from the same period a year ago. The 2006 revenue growth adds to a 15 percent tax revenue increase from 2004 to 2005. This good fortune for U.S. Treasury coffers is attributed to the steady and growing economy, which is largely a product of the 2003 cuts in income, dividend and capital gains tax rates.

Please take a few minutes right now to contact your members of Congress, and remind them to stay focused on keeping the economy strong and growing by first making the 2003 tax cuts permanent. Then, ask your members of Congress to co-sponsor HR 25 or S 25, The FairTax Act. You can use this short and effective message:

_Please help keep our economy growing by making the 2003 tax cuts permanent, and co-sponsoring HR 25 or S 25, The FairTax Act._



If you do not know the names and contact information for your members of Congress, you can find them at the Economic Freedom Coalition website: www.economicfreedomcoalition.org Just one more thing _ please ask your family members and friends to contact their members of Congress too. The more constituents they hear from, the faster they will change the status quo in Washington, D.C.


Now more than ever we must turn up the heat on our members of Congress. We must remind them that our votes in November will depend on them co-sponsoring legislation that keeps our economy growing and lifts the burden of taxation from our backs and the backs of future generations.

Herman Cain

_When They Feel The Heat, They Will See The Light_

I think lower taxes (and lower spending) are a good thing, but people are incorrect when they say that the main reason people (and businesses) have more money to spend is because of tax cuts. The main thing that saved people money to help get them through the "recession" was the record low interest rates we've had for the last few years. Almost everyone has refinanced their home, and that alone probably saved the average homeowner a few thousand dollars per year (and even more if you have an expensive house)...thats much more than we've saved from tax cuts. We've also been paying less through lower credit card rates, student loan rates (I locked mine in at under 3%), and business and personal loans.

there is never not enough noney for anything, never will be. The day a welfare check doesnt get mailed because of the debt let me know

Welfare programs have been continually scaled back since the Great Depression. Now, the US's primary method of poverty reduction is the Earned Income Tax Credit, which isn't really welfare at all. That, supplemented by Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which is a heavily scaled back version of Aid to Families with Dependent Children, passed by President Clinton, is all that is left of America's welfare state, excluding small state-run outfits. States received a total of $16.5 billion annually through TANF. The number hasn't been adjusted for inflation since the program's inception in 1997.

there is never not enough noney for anything, never will be. The day a welfare check doesnt get mailed because of the debt let me know

yes because we'll keep borrowing ourself into a hole - eventually the debt will consume every tax dollar just to pay the interest. Already 20% of every dollar you earn and then pay in taxes goes to pay interest on the debt. You seem flippantly oblivious to how serious that is.

We can only borrow like this because of the strength of the US dollar. If something happened to change that - we'd be in a bunch of shit without a paddle.

Of course the US has easily enough money to pay off the debt but that would involve higher taxation which would hurt the economy.

It's our children that will have to pay this back - there is no way around it - you cannot borrow forever & think it doesn't matter.

Actually, I don't think our debt really means as much as budget hawks scream it does. National debt is typically given as an absolute number, when it is far more accurately depicted as a percentage of GDP. Viewed in this way, America is quite average. See the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._national_debt

thats a very interesting link - especially the part 'Consequences of foreign ownership of U.S. debt'

Don't you know that the Clinton admin had policies in effect that said we could not share intel between departments.

The pentagon knew Atta was here, they could not share the info with the FBI or the CIA.
Ok....

When you 'back something up', give proof. Give me something I can look at besides you just telling me it's so. Telling me that there were some 'policies in effect' that caused 9-11 proves nothing.

You also didn't answer my question. Why couldn't Bush fix this issue in the year he had before this happened? If a common person like yourself (no offense intended) is able to grasp this major fault of the presidency, why wouldn't our current president fix it in the year he had?

But china needs us as much as we need them, if not more so. So for them to bankrupt us or somehow destroy our economy wouldnt do them much good would it?

Travh, regardless of if your response is true or not; us giving China a means to screw us over is not in our best interest.

A second point brought up by Drew is that we pay a percentage on our debts simply for having them. I would agree that we should go even further into debt if our gain for doing so was greater than the amount of money that we paid out because of the debt that we incurred, but that is not the case.

It is very bad to incur a great debt. Oh, and Napster, that information you showed us from wikipedia is wriggling with biased statistics, many opinions, and information that is contradictory to your claims.
Regardless of whether the US is average or not, the debt we hold does not help us...

Just to be clear:
I usually respect wikipedia as a valid source, but this particular page had quite a few areas where biases simply stood out. I can only imagine that the author could not contain himself.

Also, wikipedia put a large warning on the page as well stating that the page contained "information that has not been verified and thus might not be reliable"

China and the rotw is dependent on the US economy. The US has been very effective thru the years of using the soft power of economic relationships to tie people's interests together and thus ensuring that everyone has a stake. The current admin continues to follow that policy.

China economy is very dependent on exports to the US. They already have an unemployment issue that would be severely compounded if the US fell into recession. The USD received from trade with the US gets re-invested in US securities. A massive selling of US bonds would have multiple effects. A depreciated dollar would make Chinese goods less competitive in the US. It would knock the US economy for a loop which would lessen US demand for Chinese goods. It would destroy the value of Chinese holding in USD ( its not like they could sell them all at once).

The debt is a concern. There are too many unfunded liabilities out there that should be addressed. Tax cuts are not the problem. Spending is the problem. Tax revenue continues to rise, spending continues to rise and at a faster rate. Spending needs to be aligned with revenue.

I am not saying the debt is a good thing, or that it benefits us in anyway, I am saying that it is not what it is made out to be by the opposing party of whoever happens to be in control of the government at that time.

Windwip, so what? Only one section contained the warning, and not the one I used in my post. Or Drew for that matter.

Actually, I don't think our debt really means as much as budget hawks scream it does. National debt is typically given as an absolute number, when it is far more accurately depicted as a percentage of GDP. Oh I get it...When you say average you mean like comparing our suppossedly economically great nation on par with the likes of the starved and impoverished Ethiopia or Sudan...

Umm, did you read that statement before you hit post? We're talking about national debt here, not GDP.

Spending needs to be aligned with revenue.I agree 100%. The absolute level of taxation/spending is not as important as keeping them in balance.
National debt is typically given as an absolute number, when it is far more accurately depicted as a percentage of GDP. Nappy, I think it's important to keep Federal gov't borrowing in context of the larger picture. Not only are the Feds borrowing, but states and cities as well. And the average credit card balance for the average American is something like $9,000. Then there's the huge unfunded liabilities like Medicare, SS, and the pensions for all the airline workers, auto workers and all the others that we the taxpayers guarantee (and will soon own). There's got to be a point where too much is too much; we just can't tell where it is.