Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
SSI Trust fund
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TerryMiller" data-source="post: 1744996" data-attributes="member: 7900"><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px">So many wish to ignore that a deficit occurs because more is spent than what is brought in with revenues. Bush's tax cuts did increase revenues, but it was the spending that creates the deficit. 9/11 was a factor in that as I mentioned before with regards to the increased spending. There was also the prescription drug deal that was a big boondoggle as well.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px">What should have occurred with the increased spending with the wars was to reduce spending elsewhere, but good luck with getting politicians to agree with doing that.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Part of the increase in revenues comes because of the additional employment in a good economy. If you have more people paying a limited tax, you will obviously have more revenue. So yes, some taxes are needed.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Georgia'"><span style="font-size: 12px">As for your idea of 0% taxes, why don't we just have a flat tax or "fair tax" and let everyone pay taxes instead of mostly the top 50% of the wage earners? The bottom 50% of the earners only pay something like 3% of the total taxes for the country while the top 50% pays 97%. If you want "fair" taxes, then everyone should pay the same percentage, regardless of income amount.</span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TerryMiller, post: 1744996, member: 7900"] [FONT=Georgia][SIZE=3]So many wish to ignore that a deficit occurs because more is spent than what is brought in with revenues. Bush's tax cuts did increase revenues, but it was the spending that creates the deficit. 9/11 was a factor in that as I mentioned before with regards to the increased spending. There was also the prescription drug deal that was a big boondoggle as well. What should have occurred with the increased spending with the wars was to reduce spending elsewhere, but good luck with getting politicians to agree with doing that. Part of the increase in revenues comes because of the additional employment in a good economy. If you have more people paying a limited tax, you will obviously have more revenue. So yes, some taxes are needed. As for your idea of 0% taxes, why don't we just have a flat tax or "fair tax" and let everyone pay taxes instead of mostly the top 50% of the wage earners? The bottom 50% of the earners only pay something like 3% of the total taxes for the country while the top 50% pays 97%. If you want "fair" taxes, then everyone should pay the same percentage, regardless of income amount.[/SIZE][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
SSI Trust fund
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom