Republicans back new revenues in debt deal: Kyl, page 1

Does this mean Rep's have agree to tax increases?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republicans have tentatively agreed to between $150 billion and $200 billion in increased revenues in budget talks, Republican Senator Jon Kyl said on Wednesday.

"If the government sells something and gets revenue from it, that's revenue. If there is a user fee of some kind and we want to raise that to keep up with the times, that's revenue. And if you add up all of the revenues that we Republicans have agreed to, it's between $150 billion and $200 billion," Kyl said on the Senate floor.

Kyl

reply to post by mishigas

---

the way it reads he is saying "revenues" is when the goverment creats a good and sales it and they are for that. Now the Dems "revenue" means tax increases.

No this is not the republicans saying they are for tax increases. Its just a bunch of mumbo jumbo talk

reply to post by camaro68ss

---

the way it reads he is saying "revenues" is when the goverment creats a good and sales it and they are for that. Now the Dems "revenue" means tax increases.

I don't know of anything that the govt creates. But I guess it could mean selling off assets, eh? Sorta like a yard sale?

reply to post by Ex_CT2

---

When he talks about "selling" something, he's talking about Government real-property. You know, government buildings and real estate. They (the Republicans) mentioned this before. I think the plan is to sell off property to private parties and then lease it back.

I'd love to own one of those buildings. I'd jack up the rent and then eject them in the middle of the night!

reply to post by galdur

---

Well, the deficit is what 1.5 trillion and little relief in sight for the next years so 100-200 billion isn´t really going to amount to much. Then there´s the problem of funding these huge deficits. Who´s gonna do that? All Uncle Sam´s creditors are totally up to their ears in U.S. debt paper as it is. The FED is virtually bankrupt, it is leveraged 53-1 against its own capital and can´t do QE3. I guess it´ll be up to god or aliens now.

They need to both cut outlays and increase revenues - massively. Running a deficit of 40-50% of revenues year after year simply isn´t sustainable.

And the sad thing is those 100-200 billion are usually projected out over 10 years, so the immediate impact is nil.

It is possible to both cut outlays and increase revenues, but it hinges upon the job market recovering.

I've often wondered....the average Joe lunchbox works his butt off for 40-60hrs a week, doing nothing wrong, but he is the one that loses his job and is most severely impacted by these financial crises. Why is that?

reply to post by mishigas

---

I guess it must be because the govt. isn´t really of the people or for the people. It´s bought by big money and answers to it first and foremost. So big money has free play. It pumps and dumps one bubble after the other and by now contagion from those bubbles has gotten into sovereign debt and they´ll pick up entire countries on the cheap. But I think they have lost control of the monsters they have created.

Now those jokers in congress want so sell assets?

During the 111th Congress (2009-2010), U.S. Representatives and Senators introduced 176 bills that would have reduced spending and 2,480 bills that would have raised spending.

www.ntu.org...

It´s basically a sorry version of a one-party, corporate run political system. There is a figurehead that is sort of elected in more or less questionable elections with laughable voter turnout and then Wall Street fills his administration with people that nobody voted for in any elections at all. Congress then is little more than a rubber stamp. It is handed legislation to pass that it doesn´t even read. Pretty much all policy originates with Wall Street and policy groups and think tanks and other brain boxes connected with that. Democracy and liberty are just window dressing, advertising slogans and spin to cover this totalitarian system.

It´s a system in terminal decay and has been rotting at an accelerating rate for the last 20-30 years. Nonsensical terror hollywoodshows and desperate war lies should be viewed in this light. Psychopaths will try anything in the interests of their own self-preservation.

It´s way too far gone for any repair. It must be discontinued right away. It has nothing left but escalating wars and sooner or later it will run out of "enemies" that can´t defend themselves. Then it will be other nuclear powers.

reply to post by mishigas

---

No, mishigas, you are not far off with this thread. I think the correction was over the Reuter's "implication" that the idea of revenue increases was something "new" on the negotiating table, and, absent of much talk over exactly what "revenue" is, that it would make it seem as if Republicans are agreeing to tax increases.

"If you add up all of the revenues that we Republicans have agreed to, it's between $150 billion and $200 billion" was indeed said by Sen Kyl. Republicans have been agreeing to revenue increases, just not in the form of a tax increase. Republicans are against raising "taxes", period.

"If there is a user fee of some kind and we want to raise that to keep up with the times, that's revenue," was also said by Kyl. So, Republicans are agreeing to raising revenue with user fees. Some of these user fees could indeed be "surcharges". Or new various, before unheard of "licenses". How 'bout a new license for being allowed to catch sand crabs for bait?

Or, as my sister found out, when she ended up voting for every candidate who would not raise her taxes, she ended up writing out checks to pay for the school bus which had previously been provided via taxes. And to take her kids to, for example, historic places or parks, some formerly not charging an entrance fee, now cost more, as taxes no longer paid enough for them. The idea that she couldn't get something for nothing was never discussed, as politicians conveniently left out exactly what less taxes but new user fees would mean.

A family could conceivably be paying more for "user fees" than if the services were provided via taxes. Also, a "user fee" by business would be passed down to the consumer just as taxes.

Sigh...I remember when Pres Clinton pointedly said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" I knew he wasn't technically telling a lie, but I also knew he had "something" with her. So I'm very cautious when politicians say no new taxes, as if that means my lunch will now be free.

J.B. said it best no tax increase, now do not get him crying, he does the enough thehill.com... from the link

Boehner says tax hikes were never on table in debt-ceiling talks

so you see it was all just Kyl.

People are marching in the streets all over Quebec
  Posted 4 days ago with 72 member flags

Critical Mass Has Arrived: Fast & Furious Scandal - Dems Join With GOP
  Posted 18 days ago with 32 member flags

Breaking: Ron Paul to end active campaigning - cnn
  Posted 15 days ago with 26 member flags

Anon has released 1.7 GB of files....
  Posted 7 days ago with 24 member flags

Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality
  Posted 13 days ago with 23 member flags

US judge blocks indefinite detention of Americans
  Posted 13 days ago with 21 member flags

Ron Paul, Adam Smith Push To End Indefinite Detention Of Americans
  Posted 13 days ago with 20 member flags

The Vetting Breitbart - Obama : Born in Kenya
  Posted 12 days ago with 18 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: