Obama is a supply sider?

[pphilfran]

You are laughable. The $787 billion economic stimulus package was approved by Congress in February, 2009. You read the daily caller and regurgitated the "real" stimulus. Tarp was started under BUSH. Bond buyback stated under BUSH.

No tarp funds in stimulus.

Tax incentives Total: $288 billion

Total health care spending: $155.1 billion

Education Total: $100 billion

Aid to low income workers, unemployed and retirees (including job training) Total: $82.2 billion

Infrastructure Investment Total: $105.3 billion

Water, sewage, environment, and public lands Total: $18 billion

Government buildings and facilities Total: $7.2 billion

Communications, information, and security technologies Total: $10.5 billion

Energy Infrastructure Total: $21.5 billion

Energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment Total: $27.2 billion

Housing Total: $14.7 billion

Scientific research Total: $7.6 billion

Other Total: $10.6 billion

Tax cuts should have went to infrastructure.

If you can't be civil then we have no need to continue in our debate....

1st...TARP was signed on Bush's watch...but the benefits of TARP didn't show up until Obama was in office...Obama knew of TARP and used TARP as part of his stimulus plan....he had 3 trillion at his disposal and all 3 trillion was used during his term as prez...TARP is considered part of the 2008 stimulus...you can read about it here... http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/20/news...stimulus_cost/

Now, let's talk about tax cuts or tax increases and the reduction of corp taxes...

Somewhere between 0% tax rates and 100% tax rates is the sweet spot...too much tax and you will slow growth (less money to spend) while too little tax might spur growth but you could end up with less revenue...kinda depends on the economic situation of the time...good economy you can raise taxes....slow economy you don't raise taxes...I have no idea where the sweet spot should be in our current economic climate...I feel we should err to the lower tax side in our current mediocre economy with high unemployment...

Sometime in recent history I heard about lowering the corp tax rate and eliminating loopholes.....when was that? I am racking my brain...Oh...
Romney!

He got the crap beat out of him because he never listed the loopholes he wanted to eliminate....


Obama is now wanting to do the same thing...what loopholes does Obama wish to eliminate? Should be a damn long list....but I am 100% sure you can pop each and every one off the top of your head and list each for me..

Tax cuts can raise revenue...or bring forward money by raising rates so people move earnings as early as possible to avoid the hike or they can defer as much as possible to take advantage of lower future rates...

Let's look at Clintons term and LTCG rates in particular...

Yearly LTCG tax rates and federal revenue can be found here... http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=161

Look closely...

Rates were cut in 1997 and 1998...

Prior to the cut the LTCG rate was at 29.19% -Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 2-2.5% range

After the cut the LTCG rate was at 21.19% - Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 4-5% range

Rate was lowered by 30%...realized gains doubled...simple to see that we had increased revenue....

The same thing happened again when rates were cut further after 9/11

Even with a crashed market in 2008 we had realized gains at 2%

Mind boggling....huh....

Over the long term we pull in revenue in the 17.5% - 18% of GDP range...crappy economy will produce less while a booming economy will produce more...

Table 1.2 has annual revenue as a % of GDP http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Last year was the Obama administrations best year...a whopping 16.7%...after spending trillions on stimulus and more trillions in the various QE's...

Obama is not alone in failure....the Dems in Congress are just as guilty...Pubs in Congress merrily joined in on the three ring circus...

This entire mess has been decades in the making...Pubs and Dems are both the cooks in the toxic brew we are being fed....
Hell, the 2008 recession can be directly traced back to Clinton....see LTCM...see Brooksley Born....watch The Warning on PBS online

[pphilfran]

BTW, over the long term I am for increased tax rates...we must get the debt under control...but I wouldn't increase taxes in our current economy....we should be laser focused on improving the economy....which would increase revenue...

[okie52]

If you can't be civil then we have no need to continue in our debate....

1st...TARP was signed on Bush's watch...but the benefits of TARP didn't show up until Obama was in office...Obama knew of TARP and used TARP as part of his stimulus plan....he had 3 trillion at his disposal and all 3 trillion was used during his term as prez...TARP is considered part of the 2008 stimulus...you can read about it here... http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/20/news...stimulus_cost/

Now, let's talk about tax cuts or tax increases and the reduction of corp taxes...

Somewhere between 0% tax rates and 100% tax rates is the sweet spot...too much tax and you will slow growth (less money to spend) while too little tax might spur growth but you could end up with less revenue...kinda depends on the economic situation of the time...good economy you can raise taxes....slow economy you don't raise taxes...I have no idea where the sweet spot should be in our current economic climate...I feel we should err to the lower tax side in our current mediocre economy with high unemployment...

Sometime in recent history I heard about lowering the corp tax rate and eliminating loopholes.....when was that? I am racking my brain...Oh...
Romney!

He got the crap beat out of him because he never listed the loopholes he wanted to eliminate....


Obama is now wanting to do the same thing...what loopholes does Obama wish to eliminate? Should be a damn long list....but I am 100% sure you can pop each and every one off the top of your head and list each for me..

Tax cuts can raise revenue...or bring forward money by raising rates so people move earnings as early as possible to avoid the hike or they can defer as much as possible to take advantage of lower future rates...

Let's look at Clintons term and LTCG rates in particular...

Yearly LTCG tax rates and federal revenue can be found here... http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=161

Look closely...

Rates were cut in 1997 and 1998...

Prior to the cut the LTCG rate was at 29.19% -Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 2-2.5% range

After the cut the LTCG rate was at 21.19% - Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 4-5% range

Rate was lowered by 30%...realized gains doubled...simple to see that we had increased revenue....

The same thing happened again when rates were cut further after 9/11

Even with a crashed market in 2008 we had realized gains at 2%

Mind boggling....huh....

Over the long term we pull in revenue in the 17.5% - 18% of GDP range...crappy economy will produce less while a booming economy will produce more...

Table 1.2 has annual revenue as a % of GDP http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Last year was the Obama administrations best year...a whopping 16.7%...after spending trillions on stimulus and more trillions in the various QE's...

Obama is not alone in failure....the Dems in Congress are just as guilty...Pubs in Congress merrily joined in on the three ring circus...

This entire mess has been decades in the making...Pubs and Dems are both the cooks in the toxic brew we are being fed....
Hell, the 2008 recession can be directly traced back to Clinton....see LTCM...see Brooksley Born....watch The Warning on PBS online

[Sooner8th]

If you can't be civil then we have no need to continue in our debate....

1st...TARP was signed on Bush's watch...but the benefits of TARP didn't show up until Obama was in office...Obama knew of TARP and used TARP as part of his stimulus plan....he had 3 trillion at his disposal and all 3 trillion was used during his term as prez...TARP is considered part of the 2008 stimulus...you can read about it here... http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/20/news...stimulus_cost/

Now, let's talk about tax cuts or tax increases and the reduction of corp taxes...

Somewhere between 0% tax rates and 100% tax rates is the sweet spot...too much tax and you will slow growth (less money to spend) while too little tax might spur growth but you could end up with less revenue...kinda depends on the economic situation of the time...good economy you can raise taxes....slow economy you don't raise taxes...I have no idea where the sweet spot should be in our current economic climate...I feel we should err to the lower tax side in our current mediocre economy with high unemployment...

Sometime in recent history I heard about lowering the corp tax rate and eliminating loopholes.....when was that? I am racking my brain...Oh...
Romney!

He got the crap beat out of him because he never listed the loopholes he wanted to eliminate....


Obama is now wanting to do the same thing...what loopholes does Obama wish to eliminate? Should be a damn long list....but I am 100% sure you can pop each and every one off the top of your head and list each for me..

Tax cuts can raise revenue...or bring forward money by raising rates so people move earnings as early as possible to avoid the hike or they can defer as much as possible to take advantage of lower future rates...

Let's look at Clintons term and LTCG rates in particular...

Yearly LTCG tax rates and federal revenue can be found here... http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=161

Look closely...

Rates were cut in 1997 and 1998...

Prior to the cut the LTCG rate was at 29.19% -Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 2-2.5% range

After the cut the LTCG rate was at 21.19% - Realized gains as a % of GDP was in the 4-5% range

Rate was lowered by 30%...realized gains doubled...simple to see that we had increased revenue....

The same thing happened again when rates were cut further after 9/11

Even with a crashed market in 2008 we had realized gains at 2%

Mind boggling....huh....

Over the long term we pull in revenue in the 17.5% - 18% of GDP range...crappy economy will produce less while a booming economy will produce more...

Table 1.2 has annual revenue as a % of GDP http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Last year was the Obama administrations best year...a whopping 16.7%...after spending trillions on stimulus and more trillions in the various QE's...

Obama is not alone in failure....the Dems in Congress are just as guilty...Pubs in Congress merrily joined in on the three ring circus...

This entire mess has been decades in the making...Pubs and Dems are both the cooks in the toxic brew we are being fed....
Hell, the 2008 recession can be directly traced back to Clinton....see LTCM...see Brooksley Born....watch The Warning on PBS online

I'll be civil if you'll be civil.

1. tarp was started under BUSH October 3, 2008.

2. tarp and stimulus package are two different things.

From you own link:
The rest came from a combination of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, the $787 billion stimulus bill passed in the early days of the Obama administration, and various smaller stimulus programs.

3. You looked only at long term and comparing to income - not tax revenue - to gdp. You said simple to see gained revenue - simple to see the stock market was soaring. Look at the average effective tax rate and how it went DOWN. Now you are trying to tell me the stock market was soaring because of the cp tax cut? Is that your position?

Dow Jones industrial average

December 31, 1996 6448.27
December 31, 1998 9181.43

The market went up in those two years by 42%. You are telling me the market went up because of the cg tax cuts.

Even with a crashed market in 2008 we had realized gains at 2% - did not see that, i saw HUGE drops in revenues and cg tax revenues.

I don't have office on my this laptop so i can't see the 1.2 table.

Blaming clinton for bush's recession? laughable - remember it was yet another republican idea.

You are right there is a balance in taxes, but every time taxes are brought up the right screams too high!!

[pphilfran]

I'll be civil if you'll be civil.

1. tarp was started under BUSH October 3, 2008.

2. tarp and stimulus package are two different things.

From you own link:
The rest came from a combination of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, the $787 billion stimulus bill passed in the early days of the Obama administration, and various smaller stimulus programs.

3. You looked only at long term and comparing to income - not tax revenue - to gdp. You said simple to see gained revenue - simple to see the stock market was soaring. Look at the average effective tax rate and how it went DOWN. Now you are trying to tell me the stock market was soaring because of the cp tax cut? Is that your position?

Dow Jones industrial average

December 31, 1996 6448.27
December 31, 1998 9181.43

The market went up in those two years by 42%. You are telling me the market went up because of the cg tax cuts.

Even with a crashed market in 2008 we had realized gains at 2% - did not see that, i saw HUGE drops in revenues and cg tax revenues.

I don't have office on my this laptop so i can't see the 1.2 table.

Blaming clinton for bush's recession? laughable - remember it was yet another republican idea.

You are right there is a balance in taxes, but every time taxes are brought up the right screams too high!!

First, show me where I have not been civil?

I never said that lower cap gains caused the market to go higher...I stated that lower cap gains rates did not lower cap gains revenue...

Of course the stock market had a lot to do with cap gains...and the economy had a lot to do with the stock market....

The key is to grow the economy...good economy creates good profits....good profits create higher stock market...higher stock market produced more cap gains....more cap gains creates higher revenue...

But we want to start at the *** end...revenues...and tend to ignore the fact a growing economy trumps tax rates....which can be plainly seen in the LTCG rate...

Total blame for the 2008 goes to everyone involved...including the Clinton administration...

You need to watch this...exceptionally well done...

The Warning from the far right PBS http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/

In The Warning, veteran FRONTLINE producer Michael Kirk unearths the hidden history of the nation's worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. At the center of it all he finds Brooksley Born, who speaks for the first time on television about her failed campaign to regulate the secretive, multitrillion-dollar derivatives market whose crash helped trigger the financial collapse in the fall of 2008.

"I didn't know Brooksley Born," says former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, a member of President Clinton's powerful Working Group on Financial Markets. "I was told that she was irascible, difficult, stubborn, unreasonable." Levitt explains how the other principals of the Working Group -- former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin -- convinced him that Born's attempt to regulate the risky derivatives market could lead to financial turmoil, a conclusion he now believes was "clearly a mistake."

Born's battle behind closed doors was epic, Kirk finds. The members of the President's Working Group vehemently opposed regulation -- especially when proposed by a Washington outsider like Born.

"I walk into Brooksley's office one day; the blood has drained from her face," says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. "She's hanging up the telephone; she says to me: 'That was [former Assistant Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. He says, "You're going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II."... [He says he has] 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.'"

[Curly Bill]

BTW, over the long term I am for increased tax rates...we must get the debt under control...but I wouldn't increase taxes in our current economy....we should be laser focused on improving the economy....which would increase revenue...

Do you have any proof that even if taxes were raised that would help the debt, as opposed to leading to more spending? You of course don't, and neither does anyone else, which is why anyone but those who think the government has more right to our money than we do, is opposed to such an idea.

[Sooner8th]

First, show me where I have not been civil?

I never said that lower cap gains caused the market to go higher...I stated that lower cap gains rates did not lower cap gains revenue...

Of course the stock market had a lot to do with cap gains...and the economy had a lot to do with the stock market....

The key is to grow the economy...good economy creates good profits....good profits create higher stock market...higher stock market produced more cap gains....more cap gains creates higher revenue...

But we want to start at the *** end...revenues...and tend to ignore the fact a growing economy trumps tax rates....which can be plainly seen in the LTCG rate...

Total blame for the 2008 goes to everyone involved...including the Clinton administration...

You need to watch this...exceptionally well done...

The Warning from the far right PBS http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/

In The Warning, veteran FRONTLINE producer Michael Kirk unearths the hidden history of the nation's worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. At the center of it all he finds Brooksley Born, who speaks for the first time on television about her failed campaign to regulate the secretive, multitrillion-dollar derivatives market whose crash helped trigger the financial collapse in the fall of 2008.

"I didn't know Brooksley Born," says former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, a member of President Clinton's powerful Working Group on Financial Markets. "I was told that she was irascible, difficult, stubborn, unreasonable." Levitt explains how the other principals of the Working Group -- former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin -- convinced him that Born's attempt to regulate the risky derivatives market could lead to financial turmoil, a conclusion he now believes was "clearly a mistake."

Born's battle behind closed doors was epic, Kirk finds. The members of the President's Working Group vehemently opposed regulation -- especially when proposed by a Washington outsider like Born.

"I walk into Brooksley's office one day; the blood has drained from her face," says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. "She's hanging up the telephone; she says to me: 'That was [former Assistant Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. He says, "You're going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II."... [He says he has] 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.'"

What I said was it was a republican idea - phil and wendy gramm pushed it hard the last days clinton was in office. Bush had total control over the goverment for six years why didn't he do anything about if the right knew so much.

[pphilfran]

Do you have any proof that even if taxes were raised that would help the debt, as opposed to leading to more spending? You of course don't, and neither does anyone else, which is why anyone but those who think the government has more right to our money than we do, is opposed to such an idea.

I have that concern..."Look! We have money burning a hole in our pocket!"

I agree with Diverdog....freeze spending at current levels and let inflation slowly lower the deficit and debt...hell, you could even grow spending as long as you keep it below the inflation rate....we would do well with slow and steady debt improvement (debt as a % of GDP)

I would like to see slightly higher rates to get revenue to 19-19.5% of GDP....but it doesn't really matter when we have all the deductions and loopholes that are in common use...I'd start with limiting dependent deductions to 2...a significant other and one rug rat....that should tell you how far I would go.....

[okie52]

I have that concern..."Look! We have money burning a hole in our pocket!"

I agree with Diverdog....freeze spending at current levels and let inflation slowly lower the deficit and debt...hell, you could even grow spending as long as you keep it below the inflation rate....we would do well with slow and steady debt improvement (debt as a % of GDP)

I would like to see slightly higher rates to get revenue to 19-19.5% of GDP....but it doesn't really matter when we have all the deductions and loopholes that are in common use...I'd start with limiting dependent deductions to 2...a significant other and one rug rat....that should tell you how far I would go.....

Hear! Hear! And free birth control for everyone!!!

[pphilfran]

What I said was it was a republican idea - phil and wendy gramm pushed it hard the last days clinton was in office. Bush had total control over the goverment for six years why didn't he do anything about if the right knew so much.

I am not trying to paint a pretty picture of the right....I have said it numerous times...they are all to blame...watch The Warning and you will have a better understanding of my stance....

Brooksley Born was the only one that got it right....Clintons hand picked Economic Working group railroaded her out of her position because she wanted to put the clamps down on derivative trading...

LTCM went down the tubes due to derivative during the Clinton administration...about 4 billion to buy up the worthless assets....but Clintons had picked Economic Working Team said it was just a fluke....couldn't happen again...the markets will regulate themselves....

[pphilfran]

Hear! Hear! And free birth control for everyone!!!

I would like to take the deduction down to 0...but I know that wouldn't fly....