Jump to content

Which American President Cut Taxes For 98.6% Of Working Families?


Recommended Posts

Whew... I thought somehow the government was going to pull a fast one and make us pay the bill for their spending of a trillion dollhairs.Glad they are not

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope, the most 'socialist' president in history apparently.
Wow, those figures are really impressive if you don't understand taxes!Cutting taxes is not the same as a tax credit. A tax credit that is refundable is barely a tax credit. The making work pay tax credit is fully refundable, including to those families who do not pay taxes. What does that make this? A 1 time stimulus payment that you just have to file a tax return to get. On the point of making it a big deal that they temporarily extended some of the AMT (alternative minimum tax) provisions... everyone has done that. If they wanted to make them permanent or expand them I'd give him credit where it's due, but this isn't a tax cut any more than the electric company signing you up for a new contract when the old one expired is them "giving you power".The article wonders why they haven't taken credit for this, and the reasoning is pretty simple. There are dozens of bills and proposals of futher ways to raise taxes that will absolutely dwarf these decisions, even if they were actual cuts. Saying "Look, we lowered 98% of people's taxes" would be swallowing a hand grenade because in 6 months the other side can turn around and prove they did the exact opposite.Do you actually read articles you post or just the titles?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought referring to refundable tax credits as tax cuts was pretty silly, and from the comments on the article the AMT thing seems to not be that impressive either. I just find it fun to post stuff like this in FCP and see what retarded replies I can get from AKoff and Sal Paradise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've always thought referring to refundable tax credits as tax cuts was pretty silly, and from the comments on the article the AMT thing seems to not be that impressive either. I just find it fun to post stuff like this in FCP and see what retarded replies I can get from AKoff and Sal Paradise.
HEY
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've always thought referring to refundable tax credits as tax cuts was pretty silly, and from the comments on the article the AMT thing seems to not be that impressive either. I just find it fun to post stuff like this in FCP and see what retarded replies I can get from AKoff and Sal Paradise.
And occasionally you snag a naked cowboy in your net.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I've always thought referring to refundable tax credits as tax cuts was pretty silly, and from the comments on the article the AMT thing seems to not be that impressive either. I just find it fun to post stuff like this in FCP and see what retarded replies I can get from AKoff and Sal Paradise.
Either you're lying about this or you're admitting to being a troll. Both you should try and cut back on.
And occasionally you snag a naked cowboy in your net.
I've been posting on economic and accounting issues related to obama for about a year now. Accounting and finance are my job; it's not like i'm talking out of my butt here. On top of that, I do my best to express my thoughts in an organized writing style and put a lot of effort into my posts in an attempt to make them understandable by someone with no business background whatsoever. Feel free to try and find a single economic or accounting issue i've misstated. I'll be waiting. In the meantime, maybe you should consider not taking shots at me anymore, especially on topics you either don't understand or are unwilling to justify your opinion on.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Either you're lying about this or you're admitting to being a troll. Both you should try and cut back on.I've been posting on economic and accounting issues related to obama for about a year now. Accounting and finance are my job; it's not like i'm talking out of my butt here. On top of that, I do my best to express my thoughts in an organized writing style and put a lot of effort into my posts in an attempt to make them understandable by someone with no business background whatsoever. Feel free to try and find a single economic or accounting issue i've misstated. I'll be waiting. In the meantime, maybe you should consider not taking shots at me anymore, especially on topics you either don't understand or are unwilling to justify your opinion on.
1. Fair comment. 2. You said that every single economist thought that the Stimulus package was a terrible idea. Even if this is an exaggeration, it's clearly wrong. You said to Cwik that the laws Obama was proposing if passed would be without doubt the worse thing for the economy ever. I'm also assuming this is an exaggeration as it wasn't in the course of a series discussion, and you didn't specify what legislation you were talking about. But again I think it's clearly wrong (unless you were talking about some proposed measure that i am not aware of, in which case I don't think it'd be big enough to be the worst thing for the economy ever) to act as if that is the consensus view, or even that it's the correct view. The stimulus, healthcare reform, financial/auto 'restructuring', new financial regulations(though I guess that is more Geither) are the biggest things I have seem him either proposing or passing. I'm not saying their perfect or non-debatable because they aren't, but to say it will wreck the economy is a massive overstatement imo. It's the same hysteria that surrounded Clinton's policies in the early 1990s (Gingrich proclaiming the destruction of the American economy at the hands of Bill Clinton) and turned out to be totally false.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Either you're lying about this or you're admitting to being a troll. Both you should try and cut back on.I've been posting on economic and accounting issues related to obama for about a year now. Accounting and finance are my job; it's not like i'm talking out of my butt here. On top of that, I do my best to express my thoughts in an organized writing style and put a lot of effort into my posts in an attempt to make them understandable by someone with no business background whatsoever. Feel free to try and find a single economic or accounting issue i've misstated. I'll be waiting. In the meantime, maybe you should consider not taking shots at me anymore, especially on topics you either don't understand or are unwilling to justify your opinion on.
i love it
Link to post
Share on other sites
You said to Cwik that the laws Obama was proposing if passed would be without doubt the worse thing for the economy ever. I'm also assuming this is an exaggeration as it wasn't in the course of a series discussion, and you didn't specify what legislation you were talking about. But again I think it's clearly wrong (unless you were talking about some proposed measure that i am not aware of, in which case I don't think it'd be big enough to be the worst thing for the economy ever) to act as if that is the consensus view, or even that it's the correct view. The stimulus, healthcare reform, financial/auto 'restructuring', new financial regulations(though I guess that is more Geither) are the biggest things I have seem him either proposing or passing. I'm not saying their perfect or non-debatable because they aren't, but to say it will wreck the economy is a massive overstatement imo. It's the same hysteria that surrounded Clinton's policies in the early 1990s (Gingrich proclaiming the destruction of the American economy at the hands of Bill Clinton) and turned out to be totally false.
If Obama gets all the things he wants passed, it will lead to the biggest economic destruction by any administration ever, even worse than FDR's extensions of the Great Depression. Unless Obama seriously cuts spending, but something like 40%, the US will be in double digit inflation within the next 12 months. His time to show fiscal responsibility is running out, and instead he continues to spend like a drunken sailor. And that's just the mid-term effects. The real effects of his wet dreams will be felt by the next generation, the way we are now feeling the effects of SS and Medicare/Medicaid.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If Obama gets all the things he wants passed, it will lead to the biggest economic destruction by any administration ever, even worse than FDR's extensions of the Great Depression. Unless Obama seriously cuts spending, but something like 40%, the US will be in double digit inflation within the next 12 months. His time to show fiscal responsibility is running out, and instead he continues to spend like a drunken sailor. And that's just the mid-term effects. The real effects of his wet dreams will be felt by the next generation, the way we are now feeling the effects of SS and Medicare/Medicaid.
If you're willing, I will wager $50 that this doesn't happen.We can go RPI or CPI, you can set the bar at 30% reduction in spending. As in, if within 12 months of this date federal spending hasn't decreased by 30%, and inflation is in double digits, you win. I'm not sure what measure of spending you would want to use, but I suspect that's irrelevant anyway as we both know it's not going to happen.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're willing, I will wager $50 that this doesn't happen.We can go RPI or CPI, you can set the bar at 30% reduction in spending. As in, if within 12 months of this date federal spending hasn't decreased by 30%, and inflation is in double digits, you win. I'm not sure what measure of spending you would want to use, but I suspect that's irrelevant anyway as we both know it's not going to happen.
Hmm, tempting... 12 months is the most likely timeframe, but it could extend to 18, so I'd hate to risk $50 bucks on the exact timing. If you are willing to make it "sometime within the next 18 months the US will have double digit inflation", I could probably do it.The things that could prevent it, besides Obama showing some fiscal responsibility (which we know won't happen) is for the Fed to suddenly and rapidly decreasing the money supply. If they do this, the country will be sent into a 30's style depression. There are not a lot of good choices right now.So yeah, if you agree to the wording, you are on.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll do it for $50, even odds, double digit inflation at any time in the next 16 months (before the end of October 2010) as measured by the official RPI. I can transfer money on basically any site but Stars/Tilt would be easiest. I might not be posting regulary on FCP a year from now, but my AIM and e-mail will be the same so if you see the RPI at 10+ and I haven't messaged you hit me up on either and i'll send it over. The time includes October so if it's reported in November for the month of October (I imagine there's a lag in reporting in the USA as there is over here) that's allowed.Deal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll do it for $50, even odds, double digit inflation at any time in the next 16 months (before the end of October 2010) as measured by the official RPI. I can transfer money on basically any site but Stars/Tilt would be easiest. I might not be posting regulary on FCP a year from now, but my AIM and e-mail will be the same so if you see the RPI at 10+ and I haven't messaged you hit me up on either and i'll send it over. The time includes October so if it's reported in November for the month of October (I imagine there's a lag in reporting in the USA as there is over here) that's allowed.Deal?
I think it's normally called the CPI here, but same concept, so yeah, deal.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's normally called the CPI here, but same concept, so yeah, deal.
Ahh for some reason I thought there was a RPI for the USA too, after some googling there appears not to be one so yeah, CPI is fine with me.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You misspelled Reagan's name in your title.
I originally typed regean then thought it sounded dumb and opted for the simpler Regan
Link to post
Share on other sites
lol at what happens when you combine a poker forum with politics. gambling on the economy.
Yeah, I figured it's a bit crazy to bet on something as non-linear as the economy, but inflation is by far the most likely path. The question is not IF, the question is when and how much. It's possible that if the Fed and Obama take drastic action (ha!), it could stop below 10%, maybe in the 7-9% range, but a number of respected economists in the US and around the world are predicting not just double digit inflation, but runaway, Zimbabwe style inflation. I doubt it will get that far, but I'd be more likely to accept this bet: "Obama and the Federal Reserve will drive the nation into bankruptcy" than this bet: "Obama and the Federal Reserve will suddenly begin to show fiscal discipline and will avert a crisis."Realisitically, it will be somewhere between the two, so double-digit inflation seems reasonable.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Either you're lying about this or you're admitting to being a troll. Both you should try and cut back on.I've been posting on economic and accounting issues related to obama for about a year now. Accounting and finance are my job; it's not like i'm talking out of my butt here. On top of that, I do my best to express my thoughts in an organized writing style and put a lot of effort into my posts in an attempt to make them understandable by someone with no business background whatsoever. Feel free to try and find a single economic or accounting issue i've misstated. I'll be waiting. In the meantime, maybe you should consider not taking shots at me anymore, especially on topics you either don't understand or are unwilling to justify your opinion on.
Honey I was not sniping at you but more at him. Lol catching you in his net is akin to fishing for tuna and catching a great white.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Honey I was not sniping at you but more at him. Lol catching you in his net is akin to fishing for tuna and catching a great white.
so you're calling me fat? :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll do it for $50, even odds, double digit inflation at any time in the next 16 months (before the end of October 2010) as measured by the official RPI. I can transfer money on basically any site but Stars/Tilt would be easiest. I might not be posting regulary on FCP a year from now, but my AIM and e-mail will be the same so if you see the RPI at 10+ and I haven't messaged you hit me up on either and i'll send it over. The time includes October so if it's reported in November for the month of October (I imagine there's a lag in reporting in the USA as there is over here) that's allowed.Deal?
I think it's normally called the CPI here, but same concept, so yeah, deal.
I think that Sheiky will win this bet but for a different reason - money quotes from article that I linked.The raging debate now is when -- not if -- the Fed's massive printing is going to spark a huge round of "inflation" forcing up interest rates. The fears are unfounded.The key to sorting this endgame out is simple: Financial deleveraging constitutes deflation by definition.Household debt via bankruptcies, foreclosures, credit-card defaults, and walk-aways is falling faster than the Fed is "effectively printing.” I use that term because the Fed can print all it wants; if the money just sits as excess reserves, the velocity of that money will be zero and it won’t affect the economy or prices.Moreover, savings are rising, banks have little impetus to lend, and consumers and businesses are reluctant to borrow.Thus, the most likely result of Ben Bernanke's printing-press operation will be to drag the "job-loss recovery" out for another decade, just as happened in JapanDeleveraging the most leveraged economy in History
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...