I thought the Bush tax cuts only benefitte dthe rich?

[Jim in CT]

Spence -

"The tax cuts are going to expire, this will cause a lack in revenues "

So when the cuts expire, meaning tax rates increase, you think tax revenues will go down? I'm not saying I disagree with you, I'm just suprised to hear that...

"there is no magic formula that says when taxes go down the economy is always stimulated."

You leave the public with more money, more money will be spent or invested, stimulating the economy. How can that fail to occur? People aren't going to put extra money in their mattress.

"those at the top who will just park it long-term."

Maybe. Or maybe they will use that money to expand businesses. It's not fair, but people at the top are the ones who drive the economy and create wealth opportunities for many others. I can't say that's "fair", but it's reality. When Clinton slashed capital gains taxes, the rich invested a lot more money, because it was more lucrative for them to do so. That's what primes the pump. Well, one of the things that primes the pump.

"why isn't Congress doing more to cut expenses?"

Because Obama and the current congress are implementing a liberal agenda, which is spend, spend, spend...

" I've not heard any serious proposals to cut costs."

When a candidate like Sean Bielat has the courage to say, for example, we have to cut medicare and social security, the media says that Bielat doesn't care about seniors. That's how that gets played. There is a massive disincentive for politicians to tell the truth during campaigns.

Gov Christie, in NJ, is standing up to the state unions and making massive cuts. He's making a lot of people unhappy, but he's doing what clearly has to be done. We need more like him.

Good, fair, probing questions.

[scottw]

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;808490]Spence -

"The tax cuts are going to expire, this will cause a lack in revenues "

this is because they already have the money spent that they were planning on getting when the tax cuts expire, so in their minds they are "losing money" the same way that they raced to spend the supposed budget surplus projections at the end of the Clinton admin. before the surplus ever even materialized.....

they need to be cut off like addicts

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So when the cuts expire, meaning tax rates increase, you think tax revenues will go down? I'm not saying I disagree with you, I'm just suprised to hear that...

See addendum in previous post.

You leave the public with more money, more money will be spent or invested, stimulating the economy. How can that fail to occur? People aren't going to put extra money in their mattress.

Sure they will. Household savings are way up and I'd think that a lot of this is in cash or safe low yield investments. It might as well be in the mattress.

Obviously people can't spend if they don't have any money, but what they do with it and the time of the benefits isn't an easy equation.

Maybe. Or maybe they will use that money to expand businesses. It's not fair, but people at the top are the ones who drive the economy and create wealth opportunities for many others. I can't say that's "fair", but it's reality. When Clinton slashed capital gains taxes, the rich invested a lot more money, because it was more lucrative for them to do so. That's what primes the pump. Well, one of the things that primes the pump.

The point I made above is that big business already has a lot of cash but isn't expanding for other reasons. If it's uncertainly or just a more realistic picture of our economic picture I'm not sure...probably a factor of both.

Because Obama and the current congress are implementing a liberal agenda, which is spend, spend, spend...

The agenda isn't to spend, it's to provide beneficial services in a manner deemed to be most effective. Both Democrats and Republicans seem to like to spend while at the same time they argue over what's most effective and or constitutionally appropriate.

Don't see a lot of difference between the two in practice.

When a candidate like Sean Bielat has the courage to say, for example, we have to cut medicare and social security, the media says that Bielat doesn't care about seniors. That's how that gets played. There is a massive disincentive for politicians to tell the truth during campaigns.

Seniors have a reasonable expectation of necessary benefits from a system they paid into. Just simply stating you must cut isn't a solution to the problem, which is really the point. How do you apply conservative thinking to transform the system rather than just bitch about how good things would be if liberal ideas never existed.

Ultimately, it's probably more a matter of good management over ideology.

Gov Christie, in NJ, is standing up to the state unions and making massive cuts. He's making a lot of people unhappy, but he's doing what clearly has to be done. We need more like him.

Agree you have to play hardball with the unions as they are very effective in using centralized power.

-spence