None of our usual suspects can defend the GOP on this. None of them. Not without looking like idiots.

Good. The payroll cut doesn't need to be extended.

Thank you Republicans, for trying to raise my taxes

And yet millions of middle- and working-class Americans will vote GOP

Is there no way to convince these idiots that Republicans don't give a shiat about them? In fact, they appear to hate them.

Lionel Mandrake: And yet millions of middle- and working-class Americans will vote GOP

Is there no way to convince these idiots that Republicans don't give a shiat about them? In fact, they appear to hate them.

we can pile the evidence sky high and rub peoples noses in the truth and i've got friends who will STILL vote straight ticket Republican.

Weaver95: None of our usual suspects can defend the GOP on this. None of them. Not without looking like idiots.

So how is this different than any other time?


GAT_00: Good. The payroll cut doesn't need to be extended.
If we were on our way to a full and quick recovery, I would say yes. But Europe is threatening to upend all of the progress we have made. And our progress, haven't exactly been great.

Weaver95: None of our usual suspects can defend the GOP on this. None of them. Not without looking like idiots.

Somehow I don't think that's an issue for most of them.

Darth_Lukecash: If we were on our way to a full and quick recovery, I would say yes. But Europe is threatening to upend all of the progress we have made. And our progress, haven't exactly been great.

And so a few more bucks a month will save us? Not to mention it's depleting Social Security and that doesn't need any help.

GAT_00: Darth_Lukecash: If we were on our way to a full and quick recovery, I would say yes. But Europe is threatening to upend all of the progress we have made. And our progress, haven't exactly been great.

And so a few more bucks a month will save us? Not to mention it's depleting Social Security and that doesn't need any help.

Few more bucks could make a difference, for a lot of families.

Lionel Mandrake: And yet millions of middle- and working-class Americans will vote GOP

Is there no way to convince these idiots that Republicans don't give a shiat about them? In fact, they appear to hate them.

But Jesus and queers and taxb0ng0 going to take their guns away!

Darth_Lukecash: Few more bucks could make a difference, for a lot of families.

It's not fixing anything, and we're bankrupting the future. No more.

GAT_00: Darth_Lukecash: If we were on our way to a full and quick recovery, I would say yes. But Europe is threatening to upend all of the progress we have made. And our progress, haven't exactly been great.

And so a few more bucks a month will save us? Not to mention it's depleting Social Security and that doesn't need any help.

It does, when you realize that those dollars trickle up.

A few more bucks distributed across several million folks, adds up to more dollars spent. That is more dollars put into circulation. That means that more gas is bought. More groceries are bought. Bills are paid. Yes, it doesn't directly benefit the Fortune 500 directly, it takes a bit of time to grease the wheels on the way up. Which is why when you look to boost the economy, you grease the folks who spend and consume. If you don't, then you're just sending dollars overseas, and that may take years before it finds its way back as demand for goods and services.

You want to see the top earners get some of this sweet stuff? They will, after it goes through a few layers, and circulates a bit. The problem lies in when folks want to cut the middle man out, and just shove money out the door to off shore banks directly. It cuts out that process of accumulation and circulation. The disruption in the process is part and parcel of why we have some farked up shiat in the economy right now. Folks wanted to bypass the natural trickle up process.

It has never been trickle down. Not even in the Middle Ages. Wealth flows, certainly, but to accumulates to the head of the river only after it runs its course first. Pouring cash directly the head has only wound up with a LOT of dry savannah...

All we have to do is lift the FICA cap on incomes over $500k a year, and this tax cut will not only pay for itself, but keep SS solvent for a long long loooong time.

I think it's a great idea to remove billions of dollars in consumer spending from the economy. What did the economists say? 1.5% drop in GDP? That sounds like a brilliant idea!

Weaver95: Not without looking like idiots.

Uh...how would we know the difference?

TheOther: GAT_00: Good. The payroll cut doesn't need to be extended.

The faster the debt mounts, the sooner the middle class is destroyed and the revolution starts...so I'm conflicted.

Well, so long as you remember the first rule of Fight Club...

Well, we always here about how consumer spending is the majority of the US economy, and how much we spend around the holidays can make or break businesses. It seems like while the economy is still struggling removing money from the vast majority of consumers who actually would spend it (rather than those who are very comfortable shoving it in a savings account or other non-spending investments) might not be the best way to boost the economy.

And why aren't the Democrats behind means testing for things like Medicare and Social Security benefits? I mean, sure, if we're going to have universal health care, we should have universal health care. However, in the mean time, if the poor of the country have to pay for their own health care and/or go without, why are we using public funds to give medicare money to people with hundreds of millions of dollars?

Today's GOP is the greatest threat the United States has ever faced.

GAT_00: Not to mention it's depleting Social Security and that doesn't need any help.

No it does not. It borrows from the general fund, i.e. income taxes.

Normally, a reduction in the payroll tax would indeed reduce contributions to the Social Security trust fund, but last year's bill specifically made up for this loss from the general fund. The trust fund got every penny it normally would have, and all the proposals on the table this year do the same.

What changes here isn't the solvency of the trust fund. What changes is where the money comes from. Payroll taxes mainly come from the middle and working classes. The general fund is supported by income taxes, which mainly come from the well-off and the rich. So, generally speaking, a payroll tax cut that's compensated for by transfers from the general fund reduces the taxes of the middle and working classes and raises the taxes of the well-off and the rich.

Link (new window)

hubiestubert: It does, when you realize that those dollars trickle up.

But it is a trickle. We're talking about pretty small amounts of money, and we've pretty well proven that it isn't doing anything. Enough of the tax cuts. Instead of taking in a little less and offering a whole lot less for your tax money, how about we take in a little more and start building things?

Dusk-You-n-Me: No it does not. It borrows from the general fund, i.e. income taxes.

Well, I didn't know that. Good to know, and I shall withdraw that point. The rest remains.

TheOther: The Iconoclast: TheOther: GAT_00: Good. The payroll cut doesn't need to be extended.

The faster the debt mounts, the sooner the middle class is destroyed and the revolution starts...so I'm conflicted.

Well, so long as you remember the first rule of Fight Club...

What's that?

That you don't talk about Fight Club.

GAT_00: hubiestubert: It does, when you realize that those dollars trickle up.

But it is a trickle. We're talking about pretty small amounts of money, and we've pretty well proven that it isn't doing anything. Enough of the tax cuts. Instead of taking in a little less and offering a whole lot less for your tax money, how about we take in a little more and start building things?

Where do profits come from? How do utility companies make their money? Does it magically appear? Ford? Agribusiness? McDonald's? Walmart? How do they make their money?

By selling shiat.

Wealth is not created. It is passed around. People buy stuff. They buy other stuff. They pay bills.

You are NOT this dense, so please stop pretending.

Purchasing power travels up the chain. It winds up in more consumer spending. Consumer spending fuels demand for goods and services. Those goods and services are linked inextricably to consumers. Consumers have more cash to spend, it translates to increased profits.

The top earners do NOT fuel the economy. They don't pay the utilities. They don't buy the majority of the gas. They don't pay the mortgages on those homes. They don't keep dollars in circulation. You want a healthy economy? Then we need to let that wealth circulate a bit before it accumulates upward. It needs to pass around a bit. You cut that step out, and you have the trouble that we keep seeing.

You are no where near this dense, and it would be nice if you stopped pretending to be a gottverdammt moron.

GAT_00: Darth_Lukecash: If we were on our way to a full and quick recovery, I would say yes. But Europe is threatening to upend all of the progress we have made. And our progress, haven't exactly been great.

And so a few more bucks a month will save us? Not to mention it's depleting Social Security and that doesn't need any help.

dude.. tax relief to the people at the bottom of the spectrum has nearly the same stimulative effect as direct transfers to people at the bottom of the spectrum. and by "bottom of the spectrum" i pretty much mean anyone not in the top 5%.

GAT_00: hubiestubert: It does, when you realize that those dollars trickle up.

But it is a trickle. We're talking about pretty small amounts of money, and we've pretty well proven that it isn't doing anything. Enough of the tax cuts. Instead of taking in a little less and offering a whole lot less for your tax money, how about we take in a little more and start building things?

we haven't proven any such farking thing. dude gat_00 you're as dumb as right wing trolls at times.
'

just because the president can't snap is fingers and recover the economy doesn't mean that basic laws of economics don't continue to function. and actual research by the CBO and others shows that cutting the payroll tax has a minimum effective economic multiplier of around 1.7. you're right it does only "trick up" to the rich, instead of "pouring it straight into their coffers" like the republicans like to do. THAT'S HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK. it changes hands 10+ times between going into that not-top-5%ers pocket and finding it's way to a top-5%er.


basic motherfarking economics, learn it before ever opening your mouth again GAT

GAT_00: Well, I didn't know that. Good to know, and I shall withdraw that point.

I didn't either until recently.

And what hubiestubert is saying is correct. We need to get money into the hands of the people who will spend it, and the payroll tax cut is an excellent way to do that. That stimulates the economy. We should also "build things", energy, infrastructure, all of that. That is also stimulative. Both of those actions will create demand, which creates jobs, lowering unemployment and raising revenues. Then you start working on the deficit and debt. Not the other way around.

hubiestubert: You are no where near this dense, and it would be nice if you stopped pretending to be a gottverdammt moron.

This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days. Want to do something good? Well, you'll need a tax cut. Want to stop something bad? Well, you'll need a tax cut.

Stop with the tax cuts, and stop with the short term tax cuts. You want to change the tax code? Change the verdammen tax code permanently? None of this short term shiat. I'm tired of endlessly debating this temporary tax cut and that temporary tax cut. That's it. No more. Want the payroll tax to be where it is now? Permanently change the code or shut the hemorrhaging fark up.

Note this isn't directly at you, but just venting. I'm aware of how this is a benefit, but it just isn't going anywhere. Quit with the endless compromises to get the Republicans to vote for it. You tried. Now smash them with it in the general for raising your taxes and move on.

GAT_00: This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days.

Tax cuts do not fix everything because not all tax cuts are equal. Those 01 and 03 tax cuts heavily favored the rich, and we got the worst GDP and job growth of any administration in 75 years because of it.

Tax cuts for the lower brackets do fix things - a lack of demand for one. Which stimulates the economy and feeds back into the cycle I mentioned above.

Dusk-You-n-Me: Tax cuts do not fix everything because not all tax cuts are equal

No, but they're used in everything. The legislation that doesn't have a tax cut is an anomaly.

I'm not saying they do fix everything or anything, I'm saying they're treated like they fix everything.

GAT_00: This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days. Want to do something good? Well, you'll need a tax cut. Want to stop something bad? Well, you'll need a tax cut.

dude stop kneejerking. you're as bad as a republican

republican: problem? TAX CUTS!
you: Tax cuts? HELL NO!

sometimes, just sometimes, they are actually appropriate.

Dusk-You-n-Me: GAT_00: This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days.

Tax cuts do not fix everything because not all tax cuts are equal. Those 01 and 03 tax cuts heavily favored the rich, and we got the worst GDP and job growth of any administration in 75 years because of it.

Tax cuts for the lower brackets do fix things - a lack of demand for one. Which stimulates the economy and feeds back into the cycle I mentioned above.

qft

GAT_00: hubiestubert: You are no where near this dense, and it would be nice if you stopped pretending to be a gottverdammt moron.

This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days. Want to do something good? Well, you'll need a tax cut. Want to stop something bad? Well, you'll need a tax cut.

Stop with the tax cuts, and stop with the short term tax cuts. You want to change the tax code? Change the verdammen tax code permanently? None of this short term shiat. I'm tired of endlessly debating this temporary tax cut and that temporary tax cut. That's it. No more. Want the payroll tax to be where it is now? Permanently change the code or shut the hemorrhaging fark up.

Note this isn't directly at you, but just venting. I'm aware of how this is a benefit, but it just isn't going anywhere. Quit with the endless compromises to get the Republicans to vote for it. You tried. Now smash them with it in the general for raising your taxes and move on.

True enough. We do need to address not just the tax code, and we need to address spending. Not about more or less but efficient spending, and efficient taxation.

The waste that is endemic to the process has to be addressed. Between pork, between just shameful giveaways, between just general incompetence, and giveaways that hide behind the myth of incompetence, we throw hundreds of millions of dollars away every year. On contracts that aren't filled. On bridges to nowhere. On giving folks a stipend for a family farm that hasn't been worked beyond a caretaker staff for a generation. On programs that not only don't work, but actually serve to cause further problems. On bullshiat "Wars on _______" that don't mean anything but increased payouts to folks with their hands in Senators' pockets. And Senators and Reps who wouldn't know ethics if it bit them on their cocks.

I understand the frustration. But we also need to see ourselves out of this mess, and right now, we have seen far too much of our cash shipped out of the general economy, off to banks outside the US, and that isn't coming back any time soon. Not as increased demand for goods and services from workers in a foreign land. Not as investments from banks that are interested in developing industries. These funds are gone, and will stay gone a long time, because they are in quiet little accounts, in unassuming facades, with staff paid to never give out information, and we let that happen, and some folks applauded while the American taxpayer got looted.

GAT_00: I'm saying they're treated like they fix everything.

By the right, yes they are. Obama wanted to end the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and keep them for under $250K. We know how that turned out but the point is the "tax cuts fix everything" mantra is not shared by both parties.

hubiestubert: GAT_00: hubiestubert: You are no where near this dense, and it would be nice if you stopped pretending to be a gottverdammt moron.

This is more being utterly tired with tax cuts. Tax cuts fix everything these days. Want to do something good? Well, you'll need a tax cut. Want to stop something bad? Well, you'll need a tax cut.

Stop with the tax cuts, and stop with the short term tax cuts. You want to change the tax code? Change the verdammen tax code permanently? None of this short term shiat. I'm tired of endlessly debating this temporary tax cut and that temporary tax cut. That's it. No more. Want the payroll tax to be where it is now? Permanently change the code or shut the hemorrhaging fark up.

Note this isn't directly at you, but just venting. I'm aware of how this is a benefit, but it just isn't going anywhere. Quit with the endless compromises to get the Republicans to vote for it. You tried. Now smash them with it in the general for raising your taxes and move on.

True enough. We do need to address not just the tax code, and we need to address spending. Not about more or less but efficient spending, and efficient taxation.

The waste that is endemic to the process has to be addressed. Between pork, between just shameful giveaways, between just general incompetence, and giveaways that hide behind the myth of incompetence, we throw hundreds of millions of dollars away every year. On contracts that aren't filled. On bridges to nowhere. On giving folks a stipend for a family farm that hasn't been worked beyond a caretaker staff for a generation. On programs that not only don't work, but actually serve to cause further problems. On bullshiat "Wars on _______" that don't mean anything but increased payouts to folks with their hands in Senators' pockets. And Senators and Reps who wouldn't know ethics if it bit them on their cocks.

I understand the frustration. But we also need to see ourselves out of this mess, and right now, we have seen far too much of our cash shipped out of the general economy, off to banks outside the US, and that isn't coming back any time soon. Not as increased demand for goods and services from workers in a foreign land. Not as investments from banks that are interested in developing industries. These funds are gone, and will stay gone a long time, because they are in quiet little accounts, in unassuming facades, with staff paid to never give out information, and we let that happen, and some folks applauded while the American taxpayer got looted.

do you still try to call yourself a republican, you dirty socialist pig?

/snerk

Dusk-You-n-Me: GAT_00: I'm saying they're treated like they fix everything.

By the right, yes they are. Obama wanted to end the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and keep them for under $250K. We know how that turned out but the point is the "tax cuts fix everything" mantra is not shared by both parties.

Who's proposing this one?

hubiestubert: We do need to address not just the tax code, and we need to address spending. Not about more or less but efficient spending, and efficient taxation.

Exactly. We're spending all this time addressing these little fixes and absolutely ignoring where we need to resolve the code, at the top. Let's keep this tax cut for the average American, but pay for it by fixing all these loopholes at the top.

Darth Norquist is pleased.

djkutch: Darth Norquist is pleased.

I'm pretty sure Norquist was opposing this cut.

GAT_00: Who's proposing this one?

Dude I just explained how all tax cuts are not equal. You're killing me here.

GAT_00: djkutch: Darth Norquist is pleased.

I'm pretty sure Norquist was opposing this cut.

A breach of oath?!

Dusk-You-n-Me: GAT_00: Who's proposing this one?

Dude I just explained how all tax cuts are not equal. You're killing me here.

I'm just saying, the tax cut mantra is not GOP only.

djkutch: A breach of oath?!

Something more basic: a Democrat proposed it.

GAT_00: I'm just saying, the tax cut mantra is not GOP only.

I disagree. But I'm tired of being slow played.

GAT_00: djkutch: Darth Norquist is pleased.

I'm pretty sure Norquist was opposing this cut.

*head*asplode*

Weaver95: None of our usual suspects can defend the GOP on this. None of them. Not without looking like idiots.

You seem to have forgotten that they have not only lowered the bar of shameless ignorance, the buried it. Then they dug it up, painted a face on it, screamed at it as if it were some type of demon, burned it, threw "Holy Water" on it, burned it again, and finally burying it even deeper.

GAT_00: I'm just saying, the tax cut mantra is not GOP only.

dude stop being a farking rock.

"tax cuts mantra" = "tax cuts solve everything" = republicanism
"hey, this one particular tax cut is actually helping stimulate the economy and here's evidence and logic why" != republicanism != tax cuts mantra

Marcus Aurelius: All we have to do is lift the FICA cap on incomes over $500k a year, and this tax cut will not only pay for itself, but keep SS solvent for a long long loooong time.

We've had this discussion before. HERE's how you fix the system:

We institute Trump's one-time wealth tax (approx. 25% of all wealth over 100 million per person.).

Then we return to the tax tables as they were during Reagan's first term, after the Tax Reform Act of 1984. Indexed for inflation, of course., however, nobody is taxed on their FIRST $20,000 of income. Fair, because all taxpayers receive the credit.

We also remove the cap on Social Security taxation, and put it on the "other" side. Nobody is payroll-taxed on their FIRST 20,000 of earned income. No SS tax (Medicare goes away completely, see below), no income tax. Again, it's fair because everyone gets it no matter their income level. Social Security payments will also be indexed to other income. Every year there is an analysis of the funding status of SS. After about $50,000, the Social Security payment is reduced (gradually) so that at $125,000, it goes away (again, indexed for inflation, so it may vary from year to year). Not permanently -- if your income dips down, Social Security comes back.

On the other side (because everyone has to share the pain, right?) we eliminate the Earned Income Tax Credit. No entity (individual or corporate) gets more money back from the IRS than they paid in income taxes during the year.

Single-payer. Nobody should have to choose between healthcare and food, OR (for those of you with aristocracy fetishes) have to choose between healthcare in their old age and being able to give their heirs something when they die. If we can't fully pay for this with the tax code changes, we do something Medicare-like, but subject to the same rules two paragraphs ago (nobody's taxed on their first 20K of income).

Next, we pass a law stating that no company may engage in any political activity (donating to campaigns, lobbying, anything) unless that corporation pays at least 75% of the corporate income tax that they should have paid before deductions/loopholes/credits/etc. Any company that pays zero corporate income tax during a calendar year is banned from engaging in any political activity for two years. And no, the righties don't get to pull the "well, then PEOPLE who don't pay taxes shouldn't get to vote". People are people, corporations are not, and we desperately need to ensure that this concept is fully embraced under law.

We then pass a law stating that any company that moves its operations overseas to a country with lower corporate taxes than the US must simply pay an import duty calculated to offset the loss to the federal government. Or they can decide not to have the US as customers at all. Either way works.

The repulsive gap between the working poor and the mega-rich is compressed, but people are still allowed to become filthy rich (unless you think nobody was rich during Reagan's administration). Those who can pay more, pay more. Everyone gets $20,000 per year absolutely free of every sort of federal tax whatsoever. People get to go to the doctor. Social Security gets funded well into the next century.

Kazan: dude stop being a farking rock.

Says the guy who seems to only know how to insult.

Dusk-You-n-Me: But I'm tired of being slow played.

That's usually the response I get for taking an unorthodox or unpopular position.

GAT_00: That's usually the response I get for taking an unorthodox or unpopular position.

Your position is neither unorthodox or unpopular. Closing tax loop holes at the top? Yeah, you're the very first person to ever think of that. I was pretty patient in my explanations and your response was "both sides do it". No, they do not, not by a long shot. Just saying it doesn't make it true. And it doesn't do those on the left who are actually willing to raise taxes any justice. Stop it.

GAT_00: Says the guy who seems to only know how to insult.

because i've lost patience with people who are walking talking examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect no matter the side of the political road they're on. you're making me look stupid by association.