Republican Tax Cuts For The Rich And The Debt Crisis

Your premise is Congress wants to have a balanced budget?


"Starve the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives to limit government spending by cutting taxes, to deprive the federal government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force it to reduce spending. The term "the beast", in this context, refers to the United States federal government and the programs it funds, using mainly American taxpayer dollars, particularly social programs such as education, welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan testified to the Senate Finance Committee: "Let us remember that the basic purpose of any tax cut program in today's environment is to reduce the momentum of expenditure growth by restraining the amount of revenue available and trust that there is a political limit to deficit spending."

Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

GOP WANTED TO GUT GOV'T AND SHRINK IT FOR DECADES

 

???? wtf are you talking about? Learn reading comprehension if you butt into anothers comments!

 

Of course not. Bush created an asset bubble based on fraudulent mortgages--a false prosperity that generated tax revenue and then blew up in our faces.

 

I'm all for not raising the limit but to do that Congress has to first balance the budget. Start with $30 billion in pork items. It would also help focus Congress on their job. Then go back to Clinton era tax rates and clean up the cheating. Get a mentality of this job needs done.

John Anderson was right. Could be why I only voted for him until Obama. Social liberal and fiscal conservative.

 

Trump was the guy who pulled our forces down to under 3,000. There's no reason to believe a Trump exit would have been any less dramatic.

 

Really and how exactly did Bush do that all on his own and how local property taxes generated revenue to the federal government? You do know it was TARP which Bush initiated and we MADE money off of TARP.

 

Not when I graduated.

 

Actually, the US government told people back in April when they'd pull out completely. I have little sympathy for people still there and demanding evacuation when that time came.

 

Shouting won't cover up Trump's malfeasance.

 

Postulations, suppositions and conjecture which prove nothing

And since you have repeatedly refused to answer here you go? Look for yourself and then tell me where we should set the rate and why.




https://taxfoundation.org/federal-capital-gains-tax-collections-historical-data/

 

Operating under the rules and regulations dictated by Fannie and Freddie and dodge noted on my entire post.

 

Barnie Frank one of the most senior and considered THE EXPERT on Fannie and Freddie by both sides of the aisle. He led the opposing to the Bush/Rep efforts to reform both in the early 2000's proclaiming as that expert there was NO problem they were both perfectly sound.

Hey, Barney Frank: The Government Did Cause the Housing Crisis

By Peter Wallison

A member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission responds to our interview with Barney Frank, arguing that without the government's intervention, there would be no housing crisis

On December 9, The Atlantic published online an interview with Congressman Barney Frank. In it, he called me a "real extremist." This name-calling was not only false but also inappropriate to the seriousness of the issue -- which is whether government housing policy, and not the banks or the private sector, caused the 2008 financial crisis. I decided to respond to both Congressman Frank's statements and the questions he was asked about government housing policy and the financial crisis.


We're hearing Republicans in the presidential primary blame the housing crisis on the Clinton-era push to lend more to poor people. In your view, what caused the mortgage crisis and subsequently the financial crash?

Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts.

His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.
https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...vernment-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/

As far as the ECONOMY residential housing is barely a blip and we made $15B off of TARP it did not CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEFICIT which was the claim.

Yes he would agree to tax rate increases in return for spending cuts. And guess what the Dems never passed the cuts and then ran ads against him for his "No New Taxes" pledge. So why should Rep ever believe Dems when they demand higher taxes and more spending first and then cuts?

Too bad because the work and he should have stuck with it but he was a President facing an opposition Congress.

Yes because it contained huger tax increases which they knew would and did slow down the robust recovery he inherited. I already demonstrated this to you. It almost cost him reelection. Did you bother to look up "triangulation"?

No it did, the Reps took back the Congress in 1995 with their Contract with American and their budgets and welfare reform and tax policies.

The deficit hit a recession high of $414B and then RAPIDLY fell to $161B heading to surplus again why doesn't your cite report that? Then the Dems took back the Congress and reversed course and their BEST deficit did even come close to the Reps WORST.

 

What needs to be explained to you my historical listing is straight from the White House OMB historical tables.

 

Conflating local, state and federal taxation is folly. Why do you do so? Are you an American citizen having studied US Civics?

 

Non-sequitur.

If Obama had not blown there would never have been an ISIS and it had nothing to do with the deficit and Debt when Bush was president.

 

Leaving large amounts of cash, and weapons behind is a recipe for disaster. Trump didn't plan for incompetence like this. Just like in Ukraine. Waiting until Russia has taken a third of the country before lifting a finger was a bad move.

 

Again the difference between the top 20 and 25 is substantial both in terms of income and population.

 

I don't care what you believe but y our posts ooze envy.

 

If the term pencentiles is outside your range of comprehension maybe you should find another conversation because this one is beyond your grasp.

 

at what point will you say the top one percent have paid enough-given they already paying twice as much of the income tax burden as their share of the income.

 

You're confusing assets with income. The total revenue for US last year was $4 trillion.

 

Yes, I remember. People were told to get out and decided to stay, some saying in interviews I saw that they thought they would have time and wanted to stay with their family as long as possible. Perhaps we're a bit apart on the sympathy angle, but sometimes people have to make hard choices. If we were leaving, we can only do so much for them.

 

Or perhaps a snarky comment about a snarky about a snarky comment.

 

Very few at this economic inflection point are in the basement. Try again.

 

I'm just more jaded. There was an issue here a few years back and I convinced two young ladies working on a university project that they had to leave. French and American. I took their passports to a UN military post and arranged their transport out. The UN lady said I don't suppose we can take you out too? We both laughed, she knew how stubborn I am. Had I been attacked I would have said it was my own damn fault for being stubborn. I was left alone. Long story why.