Kick the can down the road:

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Kick the can down the road:
24
Wed, 07-20-2011 - 8:45am

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Fri, 07-22-2011 - 8:34am
xxxs,

I was around and earning an income during the Reagan era. He worked with the legislature to do as you are proposing now. Rates were cut as were many exemptions. Within a short time, the rates were increased, but the deductions were not restored for the people, instead many new deductions were created for large companies with political influence.

Repeating this tax reform again after only a generation would indicate we have forgotten the recent past.

As a separate section to my post, and as a question to you. If incomes are going down, why eliminate the AMT? That was the only part of your post which didn't make sense to me.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Fri, 07-22-2011 - 1:57pm
That is exactly what I'm concerned about which is why I appreciate those that are trying to get specifics out of this 'deal' an not vague promises. It's too easy for those vague promises to get reversed or never happen.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 8:11am

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 8:54am

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 9:11am

I disagree. Had both Bush and Obama failed to act to increase government spending in late 2008 and in 2009, there would be *no* economy. To look for boom when the goal was saving our arses is a bit of a misdirect.

Tom is correct in his assessment. On prior spending, I'll quible some with Obama and Bush in how we spent the dollars, but they needed to be spent, and pronto.

Where we really have to pay attention is the rhetoric from the right. We've had 30 years of trickle down logic, and all we've gotten for the effort is a trickle. Tax rates at the highest levels are low and can stand increase, but as Tom suggests, I'd phase them in.

Cutting SS and Medicare should be a non-starter. We can do a lot more by shifting our health care model.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 9:59am
We will never know. Most people's deposits were protected by our government. It could have protected all deposits for far less. Regional banks that were solvent could have replaced the national banks at failed over time. Instead we are subsidizing failure and have created a system where large companies know the government will bail them out as needed.
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 10:05am
Bush inherited the Clinton recession, Obama inherited the Bush recession. Eventually after a few years a President has to own his management or mismanagement of our economy.

Obama believes printing money and giving it to people is the cure for our economic system. If that is the case, why not print a million a month per person and drop it in our mall? Wouldn't you love a million a month, wouldn't your neighbors. Imagine a million a month for every kid, wouldn't it be heaven.

You indicated not wondering about debt and mentioned the data isn't conclusive. This isn't the case. The result of too much debt is hyper inflation, followed by a collapse of most services. The pain would last long, and our country for generations would be impoverished.

The Republicans don't have clean hands on this. Unfortunately the Democrats have a blood lust for overspending, to the point it jeopardizes the future of our culture imo.

Google "eat the rich" (without the quotes) or search for the video on youtube. Skip the first minute or so, it's a pointless rant, just look at the numbers. We can't tax our way out of this mess.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-22-2011
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 8:10pm

Is this what you would do in your own house if your bills started to go up and your income went down?

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Tue, 07-26-2011 - 11:41am

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Tue, 07-26-2011 - 11:43am