Tax Rates And The Presidential Campaign
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-07-10/tax-rates-and-presidential-campaign
President Barack Obama called for a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for those making less than $250,000. Diane and her guests discuss tax rates, sluggish growth in the U.S. economy and the 2012 presidential campaign.
Guests
Jason Furman
assistant to the president for economic policy; principal deputy director of the National Economic Council
David Wessel
economics editor, The Wall Street Journal; author "In Fed We Trust"
Chris Edwards
director, Tax Policy Studies; editor, www.DownsizingGovernment.org, Cato Institute.
Alan S. Blinder
professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton University; former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
You may be right about that ongoing relationship between the DOD and the private sector but if you are then it's a crying shame and may just be our undoing. What sucks is when corporations seek only to steer creative ingenuity toward products they know there's a guaranteed market for. War, conflict and weapons are currently the safest investment around. It's a self-sustaining beast that unless we begin to starve will starve us. Creativity and invention do not depend on the military to thrive and never have. That's a popular delusion. Let's take a look at Egypt recently and the effects of their previous government's prioritization of the military. When the people deviate too far from its interests who ends up calling the shots?
Conversely, what is the first federally funded program to be sacrificed in times of fiscal belt-tightening? The NEA usually gets that honor "cuz lord knows we can do without all those troublesome artsy types". And who revolutionized our access to that internet and began discovering ways it could be used creatively rather than strictly for national defense?
As for my awareness of the absence of actual dollars in that account I keep putting money into? Of course I am... as well as realizing where most of it went: one war started under false pretenses and another ongoing war to fight people we used to arm and support to do battle with the "evil empire".
We're protecting ourselves into extinction. Too bad you didn't "run some numbers" to see how ugly 2008 was gonna be... ah well, but then nobody would've believed you anyway.
ecgberht wrote:
mchaun wrote:
"The Gov't doesn't want your Money, they just want the Income Taxes on the Income to your Heirs when you pass on to your much-deserved reward in Heaven."
"Why? I've already paid taxes on it. So, yeah. They do."
Boy, are you dense!!
The Double Taxation argument is the refuge of the scoundrel. The Income Tax is on the Income to the Heirs!!
Furthermore, as one of the Panel pointed out, THERE IS NO TAX FOR YOU OR THE HEIRS ON ANY UNREALIZED CAPITAL GAINS- GROSSLY UNFAIR!!
Plus, as I said, large yearly Tax Free Gifts to the Heirs.
"But what if the Gov't did take it all? Would you want your kids to be deprived of the satisfaction of struggling to build up an estate like you did or would you have them humiliated by being handed a pile of unearned money like a Welfare Mama??"
That should be up to me, mchaun. Not you. And not my Uncle Sam.
If I don't want them to have it, I can will it to the charity of my choice or to the cat. It's MY DECISION. Get it?
July 10, 2012 - 5:32 pm"
As usual, you are full with Cr_p. An individual, particularly one with a large Estate has very little control over his property after Death.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
john,
I hear where you're coming from with the isolationist view. It's too late. The world has gotten too small in the last century and will be from here on out. Put a half dozen white rats in a 10 foot by 10 foot room and they will mostly mind their own business - especially for the ones in the opposite corner.
Put the same half dozen rats in a 10 inch by 10 inch box and see what happens.
I get the point about spending too much on defense, but who says what is the right amount or the right approach? I'm not saying the current policies are good. But I know I don't want another attack on our soil.
.
The attacks on our soil are largely the result of misguided actions combined with an utter failure to understand the motives of our "enemies", even though they have been widely disseminated. I would recommend the late Chalmers Johnson's book "Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic" for an eye-opening review of the follies of our global military presence in our modern era. A military man himself, Johnson knows whereof he speaks. As for, "...who says what is the right amount or the right approach?" the answer is "We the People..." and not corporations lobbying our corruptible politicians, though now that corporations have been deemed people or at least "persons" I reckon even that's debatable, ha!
I am not an isolationist. I believe we must "win the hearts and minds" which can only begin by demonstrating we have something better than religious fundamentalism or the world's largest military force. As long as our current priorities go unchanged we are doomed to continue the cycle we now find ourselves trapped in.
All I am saying... is give peace a chance.
mchaun wrote:
"When the Chinese and others bring in their mature Bonds for redemption, you can tell them, "Did you know you don't have an "account" with Treasury? Other than some numbers on a piece of paper, that is. There is no money there. There is only a mountain of debt, the actual dollars of which, has been spent by Congress."
First a few facts about Social Security. When the FG takes FICA out of your check each time, most of it goes to pay retiree and disabled monthly stipends.
If there is money left over after all the stipends have been paid, that money goes into a Social Security "trust fund". Then, the General Fund of the Federal Government borrows the cash you pay in, subsitutes it with an IOU (a T-bill) and spends the actual cash. Since the begining of Social Security, that fund has continued to grow. Until now. There is currently about 3T in debt instruments in the TF.
Take a look at these two charts, mchaun. Note what happens between 2008 and 2009, 2009 and 2010, and 2010 and 2011. It will tell you everything you need about how quickly SSA will turn upside down.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a3.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html
REALISTIC estimates now are that will happen in about 4 years as baby boomer retirements accelerate. The economy has moved the timetable up.
Once the TF turns upside down, outflows exceed income and the cash that shows up in a recipients account will come out of the General Fund, i.e., TF will start calling in its IOUs. Those of us who are paying attention know what the future holds, and it is not pretty.
john,
I have had this debate so many times. I am sorry, but unless you insist, I just don't have the energy for it right now. I think your position is naive, and the idea that we have failed to understand the motives of our enemies, is not correct. When you start with a false premise, you end up with a false conclusion.
On the correct amount of spending on defense being determined by "We the People". That's a platitude. Nice thought, not very practical. And then you drift off into CU v FEC - a bit of a non sequitur, but an issue I have written on this board frequently. Also an interesting debate. I believe that SCOTUS could not have decided any other way in that case and have presented the evidence here. Not the time and place.
I am a big proponent for whirrled peas as well, but I recognize that the world is a real and can be an ugly place and that there are some hearts and minds who will never be won.
Since Republicans justify low taxes for the top two percent with the claim that these are job creators, why not submit a bill that enables the rich to achieve their current tax level by directly tying their rate to actual job creation (eg., If you create X jobs, you get a tax deduction of Y)?
to prove whether I'm wrong about our lack of understanding the motivation for the destruction of the WTC ask ten average americans what they think the motive was. If one of those ten is familiar with the three reasons given by OBL in the videotaped statement broadcast by Al Jazeera on Oct. 7th 2001 I'll be very surprised. When you start with a false premise, you end up with a false conclusion... indeed.
"We the People" a platitude? My, my. So, out of curiosity, just what is it you like about America anyway? Because if you're not buying that particular principle I can't imagine what else you'd find appealing about the place... cheeseburgers maybe?
Sorry about the "non-sequitur" wherein I tried to illustrate the influences of corporate America on our political and thereby military policies... nah, on second thought I'm not really sorry. Made sense to me.
You consider me naive, I consider you misled... potato, potatoe, tomato, tomatoe... let's call the whole thing off.
"ecgberht wrote:
mchaun wrote:
"When the Chinese and others bring in their mature Bonds for redemption, you can tell them, "Did you know you don't have an "account" with Treasury? Other than some numbers on a piece of paper, that is. There is no money there. There is only a mountain of debt, the actual dollars of which, has been spent by Congress."
First a few facts about Social Security. When the FG takes FICA out of your check each time, most of it goes to pay retiree and disabled monthly stipends.
If there is money left over after all the stipends have been paid, that money goes into a Social Security "trust fund". Then, the General Fund of the Federal Government borrows the cash you pay in, subsitutes it with an IOU (a T-bill) and spends the actual cash. Since the begining of Social Security, that fund has continued to grow. Until now. There is currently about 3T in debt instruments in the TF.
Take a look at these two charts, mchaun. Note what happens between 2008 and 2009, 2009 and 2010, and 2010 and 2011. It will tell you everything you need about how quickly SSA will turn upside down.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4a3.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html
REALISTIC estimates now are that will happen in about 4 years as baby boomer retirements accelerate. The economy has moved the timetable up.
Once the TF turns upside down, outflows exceed income and the cash that shows up in a recipients account will come out of the General Fund, i.e., TF will start calling in its IOUs. Those of us who are paying attention know what the future holds, and it is not pretty.
July 10, 2012 - 9:15 pm"
WHAT IN GOD'S NAME DOES THIS BLATHER HAVE TO DO WITH REDEEMING SOCIAL SECURITY IOU's WHEN THEY MATURE???
YOU ARE NUTS!!!
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
Shame on you Dianne for not representing a balance of opinions. This panel heavily favors the right wing and Blinder was completely out-gunned here. Please try to offer a true left-wing panelist for every right-wing panelist you host. You are legitimizing the right's distortions by favoring the panel in the way you did. Balanced, you are not.
As a small business owner I can attest that my partners and I are always conscious throughout the year of our income. If we approach $250,000.00 we begin to take more vacations and work shorter days. If our office is open less then our employees work less, leading to lower salaries. We are also provider fewer services to our clients. However, none of the owners are willingly to work more to keep a smaller proportion of earnings. Logically, it doesn't make economic sense. We rather take a little bit of extra time off to spend with our families (we all have small children) than sit in our office for less income. The guests who argue than tax increases don't affect job growth are wrong.
mchaun wrote:
"WHAT IN GOD'S NAME DOES THIS BLATHER HAVE TO DO WITH REDEEMING SOCIAL SECURITY IOU's WHEN THEY MATURE???
YOU ARE NUTS!!!"
I will answer you despite your incessant personal attacks. Why do you feel the need for them, mchaun? Because you are angry? Have self esteem issues? I admit, I can't figure it out. Maybe it's just because you get taken to the woodshed on a regular basis here.
If you can't follow the logic of my post, I feel sorry for you. It's pretty simple really. I explained to you how the trust fund (read: IOUs) grows, why their number will begin to shrink, and how cash must be taken from the GF to pay them off. We owe China less than 1.5T. That's a pittance compared to the unfunded liabilities of MC and SS. I have seen estimates (from the Ron Paul site for example) of 101 to 107T. When all the baby boomers are retired (about 17 years from now), the trust fund will have been long evaporated and we will continue to draw our entire (current) debt to China (approximately 1.5T) every year from the General Fund to pay SS alone. This doesn't even count MC, which will be more. THAT's why this "blather" has to do with redeeming the "IOUs when they come due". You really have no clue, have you, mchaun.
I agree. Personally, I think Mr. Krugman's Nobel Prize was undeserved. Much like Messrs. Barack Obama's and Yasser Arafat 's Nobel Prizes in Peace.
To the Cato Institute, Republicians, Billionaires, and Millionaires, WHERE ARE THE JOBS that tax cuts are supposed to produce? Why is the top 0.01% getting richer while the bottom 50% is getting poorer? How low can the tax rate go down before you're satisfied? Is it 10%, 5%, or 0%?
The truth is the following: We have to raise taxes on everyone and we have to cut spending. If we follow the Simpson-Bowles Federal Deficit Commission, we can solve our financial difficulties without draconian methods. It will mean sacrifice on everyone's part. For some of the rich it will mean sacrificing their extreme sense of entitlement and the mistaken belief that they earned their money on their own. They would not have made it without the tax loopholes and exemptions and deregulation of the financial market. We, also, need to accept the fact that you can't run a country or create jobs without a private-public partnership. If we had created new jobs while outsourcing jobs & given a relatively few number of people , we would have a stronger economy
Thanks, Craig.