So! Cutting taxes DOESN'T increase tax revenue as the right claimed!

The Kansas state legislature went against Brownback's "experiment" of cutting, cutting, cutting taxes to improve the economy because it was failing, failing, failing. HA!

Can I say "we told you so"?

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/07/kansas-republicans-raise-taxes/

 

Why is a state like Texas, which has greater fiscal stability than most of the country despite imposing a tax burden on its citizens less than that of Kansas, ignored?

 

The point shouldn't be to reduce taxes...but to reduce spending to the point that taxes are no longer needed.

Just stop spending so much money....you won't need as much income...and you get to cut taxes without any budgetary issues whatsoever.

 

Or boost the economy. The problem with cutting spending is that it's always a partisan cut and as in Kansas, it can do damage. And the biggest issue, defense spending, is never addressed.

 

"Boost the economy"...what exactly does that mean?

The economy is organic and central planning ALWAYS has consequences.

 

The capitalist economy experiences recessions every 4 to 7 years, and every administration declares that it will finally end the cycles, and every one of them has failed. But the economy can be set on an upward trend and recessions will in such a case be smaller and shorter as happened after FDR's programs took effect. What we need now is a similar effort. That will "boost the economy".

 

You realize that you just move the burden of spending somewhere else and you lose the economy of scale that states can leverage when they make large purchases.

 

can it really fail?? that would mean raising taxes on the private sector would be good for the private sector. See how absurd liberalism is and why its considered just plain stupid by conservatives and libertarians.

 

actually FDR's programs were collectively called The Great Depression and World War 2, the worst economic period in the history of the world. If Obama's economy had been as bad he would have displaced FDR as the greatest liberal hero ever.

If you look at all the slaughter through human history you see how stupid mankind was and cant be surprised at how stupid the liberal half of mankind is even today.

 

to a liberal, depression and world war will boost the economy!! this is like saying the bullet in JFK's brain was good for his mental health. it does not pass the kindergarten test yet it is perfectly accepted by adult liberals. You tell me we are not in trouble when this kind of ignorance is common in today's America?

 

Doesn't work for the narrative?

 

yes, the liberal narrative is the more you tax an economy the more it thrives!! it's like saying the more water you take out of the swimming pool the more the water level in the pool rises.

 

And the "right" believes that the less you spend in an economy the more it thrives. It's like saying the less water you put in the pool the fuller it gets!

Of course, both of these positions are wrong. If you want to fill a pool, with an open drain at the bottom (taxes) you have to decrease the amount of water you remove (decrease taxes) and increase the amount of water coming out of the hose (spending) until the two balance and the water level stays constant.

Of course, this only applies at the Federal Level, at the state level, states are limited by the incomes (relative to prices) of their citizens. If the Federal government cuts spending, the states will have to make cuts.

 

if you have evidence of that I will pay you$10,000. Bet???

 

Problem is that NO ONE, not Democrat nor Republican are willing to make the deep cuts that are needed to sustain the spending without taxing the people into the ground. I personally believe in a Fair Tax (consumption based) tax plan. Then people only pay as much taxes as they want, based upon the things they buy. That won't solve the problem with neither party being willing to pass a balanced budget, but it would give people a choice of sorts on paying them.

 

wrong of course Republicans want balanced budgets deep cuts etc and will do the second there is enough support to make it possible, but not one second before. Its very important to recognize that Democrats are the enemy.

 

They will never have the complete support and will always cave to the Democrats. When a budget that the Dems don't like comes through they load it up and the Republicans say no.......and threats of a government shut-down start......and of course it is always the Republicans to blame per the MSN. It has turned into a giant game of chicken and so far the Republicans always flinch first.

 

yes but that will change the second they have enough support, but not a second before.Its important to realize that Democrats are the enemy.

 

Taxes don't pay for spending. Why would the government have to collect money it creates?

This is the equivalent of believing that in your bathtub that the drain is connected to the faucet and in order to get anything out of the faucet you have to put water down the drain FIRST (where the faucet is spending and the drain is taxes).

Taxes don't pay for spending because spending MUST come before taxes. Logically it's impossible in a fiat system like we have today for it to be any other way.

A movie theater creates tickets. Tickets which are a debt. The theater owes you 1 seat. When you redeem your ticket the theater goes from -1 seat to owing you zero seats, and you go from +1 ticket to zero tickets and get access to your movie. Everyone ends up back at zero. If the ticket is the currency, the movie theater doesn't tax tickets from people in order to have them, they create them and sell them to get them out in the world.

The US government must provision itself. It creates a tax so people are obligated to work for the money that is used to pay it. Thus the government spends taxes into the private sector so people have the money to pay the tax, not the other way around.

 

Does this mean you owe me $10k? You just said that "Republicans want balanced budgets deep cuts etc".

That is, unless you believe that "deep cuts" will lead to more spending.

 

OMG!!!!! So that it can spend it obviously!!

 

what??????????????

 

If I were going to impose a tax, I would drop almost all taxes, including the income tax, and tax only the land people own (not the things they build on it).

Land Value Tax.

 

No, it taxes to prevent inflation AFTER it creates and spends. This is a fact. The government doesn't collect taxes first. This is why we have the stupid debt ceiling argument every year. The government approves spending and a year later it argues about paying for spending it already approved.

The height of political semantics hoisted on a largely ignorant population.

 

Great idea, since the tax would be so high people would see they true cost of govt and vote Republican 100%