GOP Unveils Tax Plan That Would Double Deficit, Add Four Times More Debt Than Stimulu

[Stlrs4Life]

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/09/15/gop-unveils-tax-plan-that-would-double-defict/

GOP Unveils Tax Plan That Would Double Deficit, Add Four Times More Debt Than Stimulus, Health-Care Reform Combined (http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/09/15/gop-unveils-tax-plan-that-would-double-defict/)
Jon Ponder | Sep. 15, 2010
Just days after the release of data showing that Pres. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress had reduced the federal deficit by 13 percent (http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/09/14/obama-reduced-federal-deficit-by-103-6-bil-down-13-from-2009/) — down $103 billion — over the past year, the Republicans have released a tax plan that the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/14/AR2010091406838.html) says would increase the deficit by a multiplier of four, compared with the stimulus and health-care reform, policies the GOP voted against, claiming they were too expensive:


Even as they hammer Democrats for running up record budget deficits, Senate Republicans are rolling out a plan to permanently extend an array of expiring tax breaks that would deprive the Treasury of more than $4 trillion over the next decade, nearly doubling projected deficits over that period unless dramatic spending cuts are made.
The measure, introduced by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) this week, would permanently extend the George W. Bush-era income tax cuts that benefit virtually every U.S. taxpayer, rein in the alternative minimum tax and limit the estate tax to estates worth more than $5 million for individuals or $10 million for couples.
Aides to McConnell said they have yet to receive a cost estimate for the measure. But the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently forecast that a similar, slightly more expensive package that includes a full repeal of the estate tax would force the nation to borrow an additional $3.9 trillion over the next decade and increase interest payments on the national debt by $950 billion. That’s more than four times the projected deficit impact of President Obama’s health-care overhaul and stimulus package combined.
Independent voters should take note. As we all saw recently during the 12 years that the GOP controlled one or both houses of Congress, they trumpet their fiscal restraint and advocacy of smaller government … until they get elected and actually control the government. As soon as they seize power, their high-minded ideals are crushed in their rush to fulfill their true objective: handing over the treasury and governance of the United States to their corporate sponsors.
We saw it in the Bush era when they started two wars and then outsourced war-making operations to Halliburton, Blackwater and their other big donors, at a cost of tens of billions of dollars to taxpayers; when they deregulated the financial, food and health-care industries, allowing them to rake in billions in profit while providing increasingly shoddy, defective and even deadly products; and when they turned a $800 billion surplus (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html) into a $1.2 trillion deficit — which they excused, as Dick Cheney said, because, “Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.”
What this latest deficit-busting tax proposal shows is that Republicans are not waiting until November to abandon their purported principles. In a fit of hubris on a grand scale, they’re tossing fiscal discipline out the window now in order to benefit their true constituent base — and here’s a hint: it ain’t the tea party. Not hardly.

[LLT]

LOL...I take it the plan is to just bury everyone in these type of articles without actually bothering to support them or thouroughly discuss them?

[stlrtruck]

Either way you look at it, this isn't about fixing the problem. Regardless of which side of the aisle you sit on. This is obviously about pointing the finger, doesn't matter which party is in power. The media is as much to blame as the people voted into power for the current situation - doesn't matter which party they claim to be part.

Truly if the media and those elected to positions of power gave a rats arse about fixing the problem, and truly helping the constituents, and America in general get back to a position of prestige, it won't matter what party is in power. They all lie, they all cheat, and they rob Americans of what they should be receiving from the elected officials.

[Stlrs4Life]

LOL...I take it the plan is to just bury everyone in these type of articles without actually bothering to support them or thouroughly discuss them?



No need, they explain themselves. I don't have to explain it any further.

[7SteelGal43]

:toofunny:


Just days after the release of data showing that Pres. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress had reduced the federal deficit by 13 percent — down $103 billion — over the past year

really ?!!


Senate Republicans are rolling out a plan to permanently extend an array of expiring tax breaks

And this is what he calls the Republicans "tax plan" that would double the deficit ? Just look what Obamas already done to the deficit.


tax breaks that would deprive the Treasury of more than $4 trillion over the next decade, nearly doubling projected deficits over that period unless dramatic spending cuts are made.

SO MAKE SPENDING CUTS ALREADY. Learn to operate within a budget like every household and business has to. Don't promise to pay for something you can't afford or something you shouldn't be paying for in the first place. Don't come put your grubby little grabbers in my pocket when you shoot the budget to hell. YOU make the spending decisions, DC, not me.

I just love how the author tries to make it sound like the Republicans have a plan in the works to raise taxes and/or spend more. I'm getting dizzy from all the spin. Regardless of what Democrats say, tax cuts are a good thing. More money in my pocket means more money I'm gonna put back into the economy, not D.C.s pocket. Oh I'll pay my "fair share" through income tax, sales tax, but not feed the greed (from Dems AND Reps). The Obama administration has taken a deficit which Bush began to spiral out of control by acting like a *ahem* liberal and increased it what, 10 fold ? more ?



PUHLEASE.........I can't stop laughing

[Vis]

:toofunny:


I just love how the author tries to make it sound like the Republicans have a plan in the works to raise taxes and/or spend more. I'm getting dizzy from all the spin. Regardless of what Democrats say, tax cuts are good thing. More money in my pocket means more money I'm gonna put back into the economy, not D.C.s pocket. The Obama administration has taken a deficit which Bush began to spiral out of control by acting like a *ahem* liberal and increased it what, 10 fold ? more ?



PUHLEASE.........I can't stop laughing

How low can you go with tax cuts? Down to 0? There has to be a level that works the best. the last time we had a tax level that had a surplus and a good economy, it was at the levels of the Clintons. Thats where it should be unless you have actual evidence for a better level and not just slogans.

[7SteelGal43]

How low can you go with tax cuts? Down to 0? There has to be a level that works the best. the last time we had a tax level that had a surplus and a good economy, it was at the levels of the Clintons. Thats where it should be unless you have actual evidence for a better level and not just slogans.



I'm pretty sure nobody on either side is suggesting down to 0. In fact, we're not talking about NEW tax cuts here, we're talking about keeping ALREADY EXISTING tax cuts....savvy ? As I said earlier, I don't mind paying my FAIR SHARE, but we are largely OVERtaxed just to feed a hungry, greedy DC. The Reagan, Clinton, Bush tax cuts were great, but if NEW taxes arise, like paying for these new Obama programs, what F'in good are those tax cuts ?!!!!!

[Vis]

I'm pretty sure nobody on either side is suggesting down to 0. In fact, we're not talking about NEW tax cuts here, we're talking about keeping ALREADY EXISTING tax cuts....savvy ? As I said earlier, I don't mind paying my FAIR SHARE, but we are largely OVERtaxed just to feed a hungry, greedy DC. The Reagan, Clinton, Bush tax cuts were great, but if NEW taxes arise, like paying for these new Obama programs, what F'in good are those tax cuts ?!!!!!

The existing cuts included an ending date and saw the rise of huge deficits. Why is that level better than the Clinton levels? Why is that level better than a lower level?

[SCSTILLER]

Ok, I have to chime in here on all the Clinton loving. I am going to speak on my experience in the military under Clinton as I have first hand knowledge of this subject. YES, the government was operating on a level surface, but many programs suffered because of it, mainly the defense of the country. The welfare recipients still got their checks, and who knows how man other liberal policies still thrived under Clinton, but the military suffered (yes, welfare was reformed under Clinton, but it was a republican bill and it did cut alot of fraud out). Now, we in the military under Clinton, and with our intelligence beaureas, we suffered budget cuts that were unbeleivable. We had to wait up to a month for a lightbulb for our airplanes, our weapons quals were extended to save ammunition and money, and trying to get new boots was a pain in the arse. As for our intelligence brothers being under funded, I will point to 9-11 as proof (don't give me the it happened on Bushs watch crap,not buying it). The defense of the nation suffered under Clinton, but the freeloaders still got the welfare recipients were still able reap the benefits of free money. If that is a balanced, deficit cutting budget, you can have it.

[X-Terminator]

I'm pretty sure nobody on either side is suggesting down to 0. In fact, we're not talking about NEW tax cuts here, we're talking about keeping ALREADY EXISTING tax cuts....savvy ? As I said earlier, I don't mind paying my FAIR SHARE, but we are largely OVERtaxed just to feed a hungry, greedy DC. The Reagan, Clinton, Bush tax cuts were great, but if NEW taxes arise, like paying for these new Obama programs, what F'in good are those tax cuts ?!!!!!

They're no good unless you cut spending. It's as simple as that. Problem is, neither side wants to do it. Yes, that includes Republicans, who spend just as much as Democrats do, except in different areas, despite their constant mantra of being for limited government. If Republicans truly cared about the deficit, they'd stay true to their beliefs and cut taxes AND spending. Democrats believe in "targeted" tax cuts (which many, many Americans don't qualify for) along with overspending, and that isn't the way to go either. The reason Clinton ended up with a surplus is because he did what I'm suggesting - he cut taxes and spending. Obama sure as hell isn't going to do that, because his spending has gone way beyond anyone's imagination, and it's only going to get worse.

[st33lersguy]

This proves the Washington Post is partisan, this is just typical liberal stance against tax cuts. Of course what this artivle won't tell you is that these tax cuts will help job growth.

[SteelerEmpire]

Either way you look at it, this isn't about fixing the problem. Regardless of which side of the aisle you sit on. This is obviously about pointing the finger, doesn't matter which party is in power. The media is as much to blame as the people voted into power for the current situation - doesn't matter which party they claim to be part.

Truly if the media and those elected to positions of power gave a rats arse about fixing the problem, and truly helping the constituents, and America in general get back to a position of prestige, it won't matter what party is in power. They all lie, they all cheat, and they rob Americans of what they should be receiving from the elected officials.

It IS a game to them (Dems, Repubs, etc... and the media). But in reality, their playing (and destroying) people's lives... as if they don't realize the power that they do have...

[SteelCityMan786]

How low can you go with tax cuts? Down to 0? There has to be a level that works the best. the last time we had a tax level that had a surplus and a good economy, it was at the levels of the Clintons. Thats where it should be unless you have actual evidence for a better level and not just slogans.

It's basic stuff, spend within what revenue you bring in. Simple as that. Something DC does NOT want to do.

[7SteelGal43]

They're no good unless you cut spending. It's as simple as that. Problem is, neither side wants to do it. Yes, that includes Republicans, who spend just as much as Democrats do, except in different areas, despite their constant mantra of being for limited government. If Republicans truly cared about the deficit, they'd stay true to their beliefs.


Couldn't agree more !

[GBMelBlount]

Just days after the release of data showing that Pres. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress had reduced the federal deficit by 13 percent — down $103 billion — over the past year

Dom, is this the same article you posted Tuesday said Obama reduced the deficit by 13% because it ONLY increased 90 Billion last month compared to 103 billion a year ago? LOL!!!!!!

Bush's average debt was about 25 bil /mo.....still too high.

Also, are you noticing that most republicans on this board have a problem with the gross government overspending in general whether by republicans or democrats....

You only seem to have a problem when it's republicans....:grin:

[GBMelBlount]

The existing cuts included an ending date and saw the rise of huge deficits. Why is that level better than the Clinton levels? Why is that level better than a lower level?

90's saw an incredible market boom due to new technology...we are in a recession now....big difference, don't you think?

The tax increase will affect 50% of small businesses who create 80% of new jobs.....

Do you think raising taxes on the job creators will improve the economy or increase jobs? If so, how?

So Vis, what do you feel is the larger problem?

The government is not taking enough of people's hard earned money?....

or....the government is spending way too much?

[smokin3000gt]

Dom, is this the same article you posted Tuesday said Obama reduced the deficit by 13% because it ONLY increased 90 Billion last month compared to 103 billion a year ago? LOL!!!!!!

Bush's average debt was about 25 bil /mo.....still too high.

Also, are you noticing that most republicans on this board have a problem with the gross government overspending in general whether by republicans or democrats....

You only seem to have a problem when it's republicans....:grin:


What do you expect when he gets his news from the penisreview??