Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   How much will it cost you if Bush tax cuts end? A lot... According to a think tank that considers itself nonpartisan while giving awards to Paul Ryan and Charles Koch   (cnbc.com) divider line 86
    More: Stupid, Charles Koch, President George W. Bush, Bush Tax Cuts, Four Asian Tigers, investment advisors, Tax Foundation, McBride, Brookings' William Gale  
•       •       •

1966 clicks; posted to Business » on 15 Aug 2012 at 5:11 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-15 03:08:07 PM  
The Bush/Obama tax cuts.
 
2012-08-15 03:16:25 PM  
It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.
 
2012-08-15 03:18:29 PM  

kronicfeld: It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.


Yeah. When you average in billionaires and millionaires with average joes, it kinda f*cks the numbers.
 
2012-08-15 03:24:33 PM  
I had no idea all this time that Senator John Breaux was really a Republican.
 
2012-08-15 03:26:14 PM  
The impact of slightly higher rates is way overshadowed by the impact of Ryan's plan to remove nearly every deduction that the bottom 99% uses.
 
2012-08-15 03:28:50 PM  
Connecticut residents would get rocked the worst, with an additional cost of $5,783 a year while New Yorkers would get hit $5,542 on average, the study from the nonpartisan Tax Foundation states.

Connecticut has a median household income of $68,595.

2012 tax schedule (head of household):
10% on taxable income from $0 to $12,400, plus
15% on taxable income over $12,400 to $47,350, plus
25% on taxable income over $47,350 to $122,300, plus

The pre-Bush tax cut rate would be
15% on taxable income from $0 to $47,350, plus
28% on taxable income over $47,350 to $122,300

Which means a 5% increase from $0 to $12,400 ($620), and a 3% increase from $47,350 to $68,595 ($637.35)

Which means taxes on an real average family in Connecticut, making $68,595 a year, would go up, at most $1257.
 
2012-08-15 03:35:31 PM  
The "temporary" Bush tax cuts almost single handedly caused our "massive" deficit problem.
 
2012-08-15 03:43:56 PM  
Just think what would have happened if we had never had the Bush tax cuts - it would have cost us minus 1.7 trillion dollars.
 
2012-08-15 04:07:55 PM  

Aarontology: kronicfeld: It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.

Yeah. When you average in billionaires and millionaires with average joes, it kinda f*cks the numbers.


Me and Bill Gates make an average of a billion a year each.
 
2012-08-15 04:12:23 PM  
Seems legit.
 
2012-08-15 04:30:57 PM  
I'm getting laid off at the end of this year (and probably not going ot look for a job right away) so I'm going to say it's not going to cost me SHIAT (becuase I won't be making shiat).
 
2012-08-15 04:33:04 PM  

FloydA: Aarontology: kronicfeld: It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.

Yeah. When you average in billionaires and millionaires with average joes, it kinda f*cks the numbers.

Me and Bill Gates make an average of a billion a year each.


I'll bet those tens of millions of taxes you tow average make you want to join the tea party! To stop that taxing of your tens of millions on average!
 
2012-08-15 04:46:26 PM  

Aarontology: FloydA: Aarontology: kronicfeld: It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.

Yeah. When you average in billionaires and millionaires with average joes, it kinda f*cks the numbers.

Me and Bill Gates make an average of a billion a year each.

I'll bet those tens of millions of taxes you tow average make you want to join the tea party! To stop that taxing of your tens of millions on average!


i105.photobucket.com
CURSE YOU TAXBONGOOOOOOoooooo!!!!!
 
2012-08-15 04:56:57 PM  
The cost will have to be measured in new terms; current language can't accurately describe a derpstorm of that magnitude.
 
2012-08-15 05:08:01 PM  

Ambivalence: I'm getting laid off at the end of this year (and probably not going ot look for a job right away) so I'm going to say it's not going to cost me SHIAT (becuase I won't be making shiat).


SURPRISE! Unemployment benefits are taxable income.

But seriously folks, like I've been saying since the Republicans cut federal income taxes RIGHT FARKIN' AFTER WE STARTED A SECOND WAR IN 2003, I obsolutely cool about my taxes going up to pay for the two wars. Even if the second war was unnecessary and based on Bush II lies.

/Remember, when Clinton lied, thousands of Americans and Iraqis didn't die.
 
2012-08-15 05:09:41 PM  
To be fair the Obma camp is showing poor math apptitude. No matter what I put in this calculator I get the same numbers.

Link

I know, I know, this is fark and you were told there would be no math.
 
2012-08-15 05:17:34 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: The "temporary" Bush tax cuts almost single handedly caused our "massive" deficit problem.


Not true. They didn't cost a penny. See, there is the budget. No mention of cost from them at all. It almost like they didn't include it in the budget. I don't see no spending for two wars either counted in until after 2009. Strange that. Therefore they must have been free too.
 
2012-08-15 05:22:53 PM  
Don't worry, war with Iran will banish the weak kneed taxpayers to the disloyal side of politics.
 
2012-08-15 05:24:15 PM  
...and 2 Democrats. Did you quit reading right there, subby?
 
2012-08-15 05:27:16 PM  
Fark it. It will cost a lot, TFA is correct. But we need the revenue. I say let all the bush/obama tax cuts expire or phase out.
 
2012-08-15 05:39:21 PM  
I speak for a lot of people on this matter. I don't have that kind of extra money laying around. I declared bankruptcy at the end of last year. Raising my taxes by any amount throws off my budget by such a large amount that I'll have to go back to court to get the plan revised. That alone will cost another couple thousand dollars. There are a lot of people in the same boat as I am in.

I had to go bankrupt due to a fraudulent acts of third parties. The judge was bought off, of that I have no doubt.
 
2012-08-15 05:49:46 PM  
media.cnbc.com

Funny how the 5 richest states have the highest savings...
 
2012-08-15 06:01:12 PM  
So Subby, you dis this think tank because they lean to the right. All think tanks have a bias. As soon as one says they don't, they're lying. But how about some equal disdain for groups that, say, give Peace Prizes to dudes that have done jack shiaat.
 
2012-08-15 06:13:30 PM  

Rodeodoc: for groups that, say, give Peace Prizes to dudes that have done jack shiaat


You think a think tank does that? Are you high? You're high, aren't you.
 
2012-08-15 06:16:28 PM  

AirForceVet: Ambivalence: I'm getting laid off at the end of this year (and probably not going ot look for a job right away) so I'm going to say it's not going to cost me SHIAT (becuase I won't be making shiat).

SURPRISE! Unemployment benefits are taxable income.


I do believe I mentioned i won't be looking for a job right away, and since "looking for a job" is a requirement for collecting unemployment...

DUH!
 
2012-08-15 06:26:44 PM  
It's high time to strangle the "job creators" with their own entrails, innit?
 
2012-08-15 06:28:17 PM  
F*ck you, don't care. Two wars. One bailout. Pay up.
 
2012-08-15 06:59:30 PM  
For most Farkers it's a non-issue since they aren't taxed for living in their Mom's basement.
 
2012-08-15 07:53:59 PM  

CujoQuarrel: For most Farkers it's a non-issue since they aren't taxed for living in their Mom's basement.


Mom is, though.

Wont anyone think of the children, er, parents?!

/man up and either accept significant cuts to every program, including the ones you think should be sacrosanct, or raise revenue.
 
2012-08-15 07:54:50 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: The "temporary" Bush tax cuts almost single handedly caused our "massive" deficit problem.


Not really. The tax cut are estimate to cost between $300B and $450B per year. Our deficits are about $1.3 Trillion.

Yes, they have an impact, but they are far from the main cause.
 
2012-08-15 08:01:18 PM  

impaler: Which means taxes on an real average family in Connecticut, making $68,595 a year, would go up, at most $1257.


Wait, is that a real family, or a RealTM family?
 
2012-08-15 08:11:33 PM  
I'm OK with the Bush tax cuts getting rolled back. The roads don't build themselves. And, yes, I would be out a few grand, but the thought of not throwing an axle on an interstate is AOK with me.
 
2012-08-15 08:23:59 PM  
Your dignity, knowing that your mistaken savior screwed you.
 
2012-08-15 08:24:44 PM  
unless of course you are a welfare um, person
 
2012-08-15 08:28:58 PM  

verbaltoxin: F*ck you, don't care. Two wars. One bailout. Pay up.


Yep. When the country/supreme court elects a President that is hell bent on destroying the economy to prove what a big penis he has and to make all his crony friends just a little richer then we need to shut the fark up and start paying for our mistakes.
 
2012-08-15 08:29:36 PM  
So:

Campaign for the Bush tax cuts
Extend the Bush tax cuts
Claim the bush tax cuts destroyed the economy
Say an expiration of the Bush Tax cuts would destroy the economy
ignore that when the bush tax cuts expire, we get the Clinton Tax rates.
Say that the Bush tax cuts need to Continue.
 
2012-08-15 08:30:54 PM  
I like how subby left out the part of the article that mentioned that they have also given awards to Democratic senators John Breaux and Max Baucus.
 
2012-08-15 08:33:46 PM  
By non-partisan they mean "conservative": "Tax Foundation has "operate[d] as a unit" of Citizens for a Sound Economy."

Who is Citizens for a Sound Economy?

Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) (1984-2004) was a conservative political group.
 
2012-08-15 08:41:51 PM  

HeadLever: Marcus Aurelius: The "temporary" Bush tax cuts almost single handedly caused our "massive" deficit problem.

Not really. The tax cut are estimate to cost between $300B and $450B per year. Our deficits are about $1.3 Trillion.

Yes, they have an impact, but they are far from the main cause.


Seems to me that if one simple thing accounts for 23-34% of the deficit, then it's worth doing something about it.
 
jvl
2012-08-15 08:51:44 PM  
"Non partisan" does not mean "we have no opinion" subtard. It just means they aren't affiliated with a political party.
 
2012-08-15 08:58:34 PM  

o5iiawah: So:

Campaign for the Bush tax cuts
Extend the Bush tax cuts
Claim the bush tax cuts destroyed the economy
Say an expiration of the Bush Tax cuts would destroy the economy
ignore that when the bush tax cuts expire, we get the Clinton Tax rates.
Say that the Bush tax cuts need to Continue.


The Bush tax cuts created a much larger deficit than we should have now, but didn't really destroy the economy. The problem now is we're in a global recession, and it'd be idiotic to raise taxes right now. If they would've been repealed back when Iraq War 2: Electric Boogaloo started, we would've had a lot more room to maneuver when the recession hit.
 
2012-08-15 09:09:01 PM  

stratagos: CujoQuarrel: For most Farkers it's a non-issue since they aren't taxed for living in their Mom's basement.

Mom is, though.

Wont anyone think of the children, er, parents?!

/man up and either accept significant cuts to every program, including the ones you think should be sacrosanct, or raise revenue.


Don't be silly, all their Mom's are on welfare..
 
2012-08-15 09:20:00 PM  

anfrind: Seems to me that if one simple thing accounts for 23-34% of the deficit, then it's worth doing something about it.


I agree. While I am conservative, i don't have a problem with taxes being raised to get the debt problem under control. We need to hit this from both a spending side and a revenue side just as soon as the economy gets on somewhat of a firm footing.
 
2012-08-15 09:21:20 PM  

kronicfeld: It would be silly to infer anything from the article's failure to qualify the impact by income bracket.


But then where would fark outrage from the left come from? When there are democrat leaders and old democrat economy advisers praising his work?

And big shock, the states who have the highest pay rates will suffer the most.
 
2012-08-15 09:21:56 PM  

HeadLever: anfrind: Seems to me that if one simple thing accounts for 23-34% of the deficit, then it's worth doing something about it.

I agree. While I am conservative, i don't have a problem with taxes being raised to get the debt problem under control. We need to hit this from both a spending side and a revenue side just as soon as the economy gets on somewhat of a firm footing.


I would rather it get under control from cuts, not raising taxes
 
2012-08-15 09:29:05 PM  
Ctrl+f, "Median"
0 of 0.

Shocking.
 
2012-08-15 09:31:03 PM  

steamingpile: I would rather it get under control from cuts, not raising taxes


While I belive that most of the deficit reduction should be done with cuts, this problem is too big for one thing to solve. The deficit is $1.3 trillion and that about double what we spend on DoD (including the wars). There is no doubt that we need to get back to livinging within our means. However, to pay down this huge debt load I believe that we also need to hit it with additional revenues as well.

It is a very daunting task.
 
2012-08-15 10:02:09 PM  

HeadLever: Marcus Aurelius: The "temporary" Bush tax cuts almost single handedly caused our "massive" deficit problem.

Not really. The tax cut are estimate to cost between $300B and $450B per year. Our deficits are about $1.3 Trillion.

Yes, they have an impact, but they are far from the main cause.


25% isn't a factor? ok, howzabout the tax cuts and the war and medicare part d?
 
2012-08-15 10:29:27 PM  
I've been to the Koch Estate on Palm Beach and trust me when I say this; they could pay every Farkers taxes for probably 5 years before they might notice a few less pennies in their account.
 
2012-08-15 10:33:35 PM  

EnderWiggnz: 25% isn't a factor?


Factor, sure. Single hanedly caused? Hell no.

Did you even read the post, or is your reading comprehension that bad?
 
Displayed 50 of 86 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report