Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Time for Liberals To Keep Promise

October 25, 2013

Earlier this month, President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other top liberals were insisting they’d love to talk about critical issues including health care and the national......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(18)

WVEXPAT

Oct-27-13 1:40 PM

If we held budget spending increases to 2% a year we would balance the budget in a few years time. However the left would be screaming that such a budget would cause old people to be flung off the nearest cliff, children to starve and puppies to be tortured!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Oct-27-13 12:17 PM

Boweltransplant, the TRUTH:

OBama spent over a $1 Trillion to stimulate the economy.

Bush spent NOTHING. The population of the country has increased over 10 million in 57 months yet there is not ONE DAY of the Obama administration where more people are working than under BUSH.

COMPLETE ABJECT FAILURE.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Oct-27-13 12:25 AM

Even if the businesses just declare huge dividends, the Feds win. Corporate income tax, then dividend tax, plus that money will be saved or spent, and both cause more turnovers that are taxed.

But this is poison to Democrats. It undercuts their class envy argument so it can’t be allowed.

Ever wonder about that? Do you know who owns Exxon Mobil, for example? Odds are you do. If you have a pension, mutual funds in an IRA or 401k, or have mutual insurance on your home or car or life. Way over half of the oil stocks are owned by insurance companies, mutual funds and pension funds. In other words, widows and orphans. It's a matter of public record who owns big blocks of big companies. Not a Wall Street biggie or Scrooge McDuck to be seen.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Oct-27-13 12:18 AM

A simple proposal: if you use Dem math, cutting the corporate tax rate in half would mean half the money collected. But the total Treasury expects to bring in is 278 billion. They expect 1.309 trillion from working stiffs, and 2.7 trill total. So 50% would mean a loss of 139 billion. That’s less than some recent MONTHLY deficits this year. So what’s the harm in experimenting? Plenty. Kennedy cut corporate rates, collections went up, a LOT. Reagan did the same, with the same result. So did George. If you keep more, you grow with what you keep. Despite what some socialists want to believe, companies want to grow, not spend it on luxury jets and dividends. That’s how Gates and Buffet, both good Democrats, got so wealthy. And with more growth you get more tax dollars collected. Dems whine about trillions of profits overseas they can’t tax. Cut the rate, it will show up. Cash is useless unless it’s working, so those companies will plow it into new ventures.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Oct-27-13 12:05 AM

Very interesting stuff. Bush had wars and a recession, but in four years we had positive growth. Five years under Obama, we still are not back to GWB's fourth year, and we have at least 8% inflation on top of it.

What recovery

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Oct-26-13 11:55 PM

Very important point to consider: the US has the highest corporate tax rate on earth, 35%. You would think that would bring in a significant part of the total collected, right?

Bear in mind, the amount paid by companies is a pretty good reflection of economic prospects. If sales grow, profit grows. If profits grow, companies expand to be able to sell more. That means more investment, and more jobs.

Back to the taxes collected... Since we are in a "growth" period (recession ended in 2009, right?) you would expect to see lots of corporate tax. Surprise, it's only about 15% of the total income tax collected. If you count everything like gas, liquor, offshore leases, etc, it's barely 8%. And it still hasn't come close to what was collected 2005-8.

What recovery?

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldsteelmaker

Oct-26-13 11:40 PM

Where to start... braintransplant: just a minor point, the deficit was shrinking, and tax revenue was growing by old George's fourth year, and continued to do so in spite of Iraq through 2007. What happened then?

Pelosi and Reid. Deficit spending ballooned. And since all spending is controlled by Congress, more fair to say Obama inherited a mess from them.

If you want some eye opening figures, go to the source. FMS. Treas. Gov is a website for data from the Treasury. Search for Monthly Treasury Statement or MTS. They have a link to a spreadsheet showing collections, spending and deficit by month for three decades.

Very interesting stuff. Bush had wars and a recession, but in four years we had positive growth. Five years under Obama, we still are not back to GWB's fourth year, and we have at least 8% inflation on top of it.

What recovery?

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Oct-26-13 8:02 PM

caltrans “Obama inherited an economic crisis in "09 that was the worst since the 1930s”

So maybe you could explain why there are now TWICE as many Americans surviving on Obama food stamps now?

Oh, yeah, I forgot. “But BUUUUUUUSH!” The universal Democrit excuse... Derrrrr.....

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Oct-26-13 8:00 PM

wvhoopie “Why we spend $650 billion annually for defense when we are not at war is lunacy.”

Maybe you need to have a stern word with your Choomer in Chief about that. He’s supposedly responsible for the Defense Department. Maybe you forgot...

And no surprise a Democrit forgot we’re STILL in combat in Afghanistan. No wonder your Democrit Choomer in Chief FAILED to support the families of American servicemen killed in action during the Democrit Government Shutdown. Derrrrr......

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TrollSlayer

Oct-26-13 7:56 PM

wvhoopie “It seems to me that conservatives believe that "sitting down to negotiate" means getting your way!”

...said the sycophant of Harry “No Negotiations, No Vote” Reid and Barry “No Compromise” Obankrupter. But of course in the minds of loony leftists it’s minority Republicans’ fault we’re another TRILLION in Obamadebt when Republicans finally pay the ransom so your Democrit extortionists will release America Held Hostage. Pathetic leadership, Democrits.

No wonder we’re in such sad shape. The Democrit President and Democrit Senate shout the Democrit Battle Cry “no compromise, no negotiations,” and then blame the Republican House for not negotiating or compromising. Derrrrr....

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

caltransplant

Oct-26-13 4:33 PM

Lie #1...they're not talking. Yes they are. Lie#2, the worst economy in decades...Obama inherited an economic crisis in "09 that was the worst since the 1930s. Lie#3...the ACA is a "Critical threat" to America. It's a critical threat to the republican't party!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

wvhoopie

Oct-26-13 10:37 AM

It seems to me that conservatives believe that "sitting down to negotiate" means getting your way! If conservatives refuse to increase revenue to help reduce the deficit then there is nothing to talk about. Liberals never said that they would sit down and give in to conservative demands. Why we spend $650 billion annually for defense when we are not at war is lunacy. Hold your ground liberals. No need to give in to conservatives when we can see the House going blue in next year elections.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

thetruthforonce

Oct-26-13 8:20 AM

Let's look at the Congressional Calendar for the remainder of 2013.Humm. McKinley and crew are scheduled for an arduous workload of a whopping 8 days in session through the end of the year. No wonder they don't get any talking done. Kind of tough to talk when there's no one to talk to.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVEXPAT

Oct-25-13 8:23 PM

NON-ISSUES to liberals;

$17 Trillion debt

Record # of Americans on Food Stamps

Highest % of Americans NOT working in 30 years

Badly implementing another entitlement while the others go broke

Increasing income inequality

NSA, Benghazi, IRS, AP

ISSUES for liberals;

extremely extreme extremists (i.e. everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders)

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

WVEXPAT

Oct-25-13 8:11 PM

Charlie Brown, Lucy, football

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Gooseman

Oct-25-13 2:48 PM

"More than a week ago, they allowed passage of the "clean" spending bill and debt ceiling increase.

After hearing pledges by Obama and Reid during the shutdown, one might have expected them to begin meeting immediately with conservative leaders to hash out policy on various issues. But no. Liberal leaders have been mum on such talks."

Seriously, its been a whole week since Repubs agreed to end something they started?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Gooseman

Oct-25-13 2:44 PM

Oh silly, you just got your hair all on fire again, about what?

There hasnt been any progress on "critical issues"....???

Well, seems a certain minority in Congress have been diverting most discussion and time with NON-ISSUES, so just be patient. You will be given a chance to bring up "your critical issues". And I assume you have some solutions? Could you tell us what solutions you would suggest be passed to "your critical issues"?

Didnt think so.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SpankysLastDance

Oct-25-13 11:09 AM

You would expect the divider in chief to keep his word and sit down for a talk? Ha!

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 18 of 18 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: