Budget talks: This is getting nasty

AZ, maybe things would be worse if we hadn't spent the stimulus money. I disagree, but maybe.

But, it certainly failed to "stimulate" the economy. That was the goal.

At best, it bought a little bit of time. If the economy had improved, it might have been a bridge to a better time. But, the economy still sucks.

(Also, the benefits -- whatever they were -- only went to certain segments of the economy. Money was spent on construction projects and on public employees. It did nothing for other segments in the economy. It's not the Governments job to pick winners and losers.)

 

Much of what FDR did bought time. Same principles apply. The 1937 double dip (which everybody forgets about) brought additional grief, and frankly, it took WWII to bail us out.

 

As long as we're going to permit the investment bankers to get away with rape, pillage and murder without a peep, where else can we go? Have to learn from history . . . certain free-market
controls/restrictions were lifted before the twenties roared and the inevitable crash followed. And you just
saw the same thing happen, again. The 60-80 year cycles continue . . . the jackals think
everybody who lived through the previous wolves-raiding-henhouses scenario is dead, and they think
they can get away with it, again.

Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom -- and survival.

 

The government has been living on considerably less. That's why there's so much debt. There's not enough revenue to cover what's being spent.

My definition of wealthy is that you are probably wealthy. But I'd create an income bracket above the current one and significantly raise the tax rates there.

It's time to end the fiction. The credit crunch, the mortgage crisis - it all funnels back to a central delusion that an individual can and should get to have everything they want, and tilt the system accordingly to produce those results.

 

The stimulus failed because whole segments of the economy refused to partake in it out of "principle." In theory, it wasn't big enough because it didn't create an environment where you'd have to be a fool to sit it out. It was just big enough where, if you had a thoughtful conscience, you acknowledged the effort and started resuming regular investment/hiring practices. the price of gas, for one, is a key factor weighing down the employment rate. By many accounts, it should be well under $3 a gallon.

What we're seeing is a Randian-style backlash by the financial elite, pumped full of delusions and false righteousness by a handful of right-wing radio yakkers who are drilled by ideological cronies to reject the America we've lived in since The Great Depression. They're choosing this moment as their big stand against the cruel world of "takers." This is not unique to American society; it's happened all over the world. It's just particularly regrettable here. America, with all its flaws, is still the best thing going, threatened now by a small portion of its populace saying "hunh-uh."

 

The positive of higher gas prices is that it will help the environment and spur further investment in alternative energy research.

 

"Wealthy" people get the great majority of their income in capital gains, not "wages and tips."

You can increase the highest marginal bracket to 90 percent, and it won't matter to Steve Jobs, who'll just give himself a $1 salary and pay 15% tax on his $500 million in capital gains.

And they could. Fire some servants. Tip frugally at restaurants. Get rid of that private jet and fire the crew. Better yet, fly coach (airlines are so enormously profitable, they don't need your first-class money). Don't buy that Porsche (so what if the salesman at the dealer loses a commission --- he'll just have to learn to live on less, too). Government might get more revenue from the rich guy, but it would get less revenue from the people he laid off --- and the states may have to pay them unemployment. Great idea. :

 

Wow really? What do you consider rich or wealthy? Aren't these the same people who create most of the jobs in Amercia?

Sorry but who the Hell are you to say that rich people should live on less? Sorry but I don't understand why everyone thinks they know better how to spend other people's money.

 

The government has been living on considerably less? Are you serious. The government just keeps spending more and more. If there isn't enough revenue (taxes) then how about cutting back on spending? What a novel concept.

 

You'll also have a lot of people just decide to drop out of the work force.

Many doctors have already decided to take an early retirement. Keep raising their taxes, and more will head towards the door.

My dad is 78. He still works full time as a lawyer. Tax him enough and he might as well just retire.

I'm open to general idea of raising taxes if it's paired with true, enforceable spending cuts. But, let's make sure we look at the unintended consequences before we just "tax the rich".

The goal has to be increased revenue. Too much of what is discussed is designed to just punish the wealthy and will have detrimental effects on the economy.

 

Without specific reference to any posts above this one, I'd observe that it's a little heartbreaking to see the American middle class cut its own throat in service of the old Reaganite nonsense.

 

In what way is it "heartbreaking" to ask that capital gains taxes be brought into line with income taxes?