Kansas Republicans forced to raise taxes after Tax Cut Failure

a reply to: CranialSponge

Amen! Yes, yes, and yes! Now how do we get out of this mess?

a reply to: mOjOm

That's the winning strategy, but who will work it?

a reply to: mOjOm

Spending, domestic and foreign is rife with corruption. Even the most ardent partisan would agree that government does not spend the money they take, wisely.

a reply to: Boscov

Good question. Maybe get a whole bunch of poor and middle class 50 year old single moms who had to raise 3 or more kids by themselves and have them figure out where to spend our tax dollars. Because if anyone knows how to stretch a buck it's them.

a reply to: mOjOm

Best suggestion ever!

originally posted by: DBCowboy

Spending, domestic and foreign is rife with corruption. Even the most ardent partisan would agree that government does not spend the money they take, wisely.

Exactly. Corruption is always the problem. After all, corruption by definition is a problem. Nobody ever said, "Whew, I thought our business might fail for a minute. Good thing all that corruption saved us!"

Where and how they spend the money must be watched and made sure it's done in the best possible ways. But as long as they don't over spend and spend it all here and in as many places as possible it would be fine. Because most or all that money would go right back into our economy anyway. That's all we're really doing with money anyway if you think about it. We pass it back and forth with each other for goods and services. It's just a slick way we've come up with that creates productivity for ourselves.

a reply to: CB328

Only a misguided fool would be glad to have their taxes raised.

They need to cut spending to the bone and then cut taxes once they have secured the budget cuts they need. Government needs to stop growing and start shrinking and leave people alone.

a reply to: Metallicus

Not always as this thread points out. If taxes are lowered with the idea that it will create more economic activity but that doesn't happen then things start shutting down and people suffer. At which point, because of the tax breaks and mismanagement taxes must then be raised again to get those organizations back up and running again and get people back to work.

The idea that if you give wealthy people and big business tax breaks that will stimulate the economy because they take it and create more business fails if they don't do that. With the middle class it does help mostly because they take whatever extra money they get and spend it again anyway. Some businesses do and some wealthy do to but not enough to make it worth it. It's either stuffed away or invested in ways that don't help local economies.

originally posted by: muse7
After 30+ years the middle class and poor are still waiting for that wealth to trickle down.

Apparently, the original point of the "trickle down" metaphor was that the wealthy would get all of the benefits then urine on everyone else. And that urine would be our sustenance.

There's a side to "trickle down economics" that's never mentioned. These policies have succeeded into turning the public into pure consumers; in other words, we've become societies that can't function without the wealthy. Their companies make our clothing, transportation, furniture, housing, utensils and tools, all while dumbing us down to the point that we reject real fruit & vegetables as "blemished" since they don't look like the corporate products we see in stores. And this is by design.

As for the OP: I'm not surprised in the least. But no matter how many times it fails the public, there will always be politicians who'll continue to push it in exchange for fat campaign contributions.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Spending cut - until there are no government services? That' the plan - and it's juvenile.

Logic would dictate that there should be an optimum tax rate.

Personally I believe that there should be a flat tax that would apply to income and corporations. I think that corporations that make over 1 million dollars profit per year should have a minimum tax equivalent to at least 15%.

I also think that US corporations that do business overseas should have to bring home their capitol at least once per year and pay tax on it.

I'm so tired of this whole democrat vs republican thing that gets debated here and elsewhere. We need to have strong business to have strong employment. Both parties should work towards that goal. If you have so many rules and regulations for businesses then who will start them? If you have no regulations who will be abused? Let's all try to listen to each other and find that middle ground so we can all prosper

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: CB328

Only a misguided fool would be glad to have their taxes raised.

They need to cut spending to the bone and then cut taxes once they have secured the budget cuts they need. Government needs to stop growing and start shrinking and leave people alone.

Someone should study economics more. Even if they cut spending they still would have to raise taxes because there are bills that need to be paid.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: DBCowboy

Spending cut - until there are no government services? That' the plan - and it's juvenile.

Why do you rely on the Government for anything? Only a juvenile expects someone else to take care of them.

An adult takes care of themselves.

I'm more thank willing to listen Wildbob, but I consistently find the same old arguments coming from the right on the matter of trickle down economics.

a reply to: Wildbob77

Personally I believe that there should be a flat tax that would apply to income and corporations. I think that corporations that make over 1 million dollars profit per year should have a minimum tax equivalent to at least 15%.

So in other words, you want to cut down more taxes for the wealthy and corporations? After 30 years of doing this already? You do realize the idea of a flat tax by far benefits the wealthy more than the poor? At the moment the wealthy pay 39% in income taxes at their highest. The poor typically pay 15% of their taxes to zero. A Flat tax will more than cut taxes in half for the most wealthy and make little difference for the poor. Corporations pay between 15%-39% tax rate, so again you want to lower the taxes of corporations. So why should we continue slashing taxes in the hopes that the wealth will trickle down?? It hasn't worked before, what will be different this time??

I also think that US corporations that do business overseas should have to bring home their capitol at least once per year and pay tax on it.

I don't have a problem with this, it's a nice idea. I say nice as in, who's going to deal with the other nations to agree to American laws? Who's going to tell China or any of the other nations what to do? Again, it's a nice idea.

We need to have strong business to have strong employment.

We need strong businesses, but at the same time, we need strong regulations to ensure those at the bottom are protected. What we've seen over the last 30+ years is a sharp increase in the powers and earnings of corporations, at the expense of the middle and working classes. You've made the common mistake of assuming a strong business will create strong employment without regulation when, evidently over the last 30 years, we've seen the opposite. Jobs are shipped abroad, incomes are slashed, employees cut, those who remain work more shifts. We need to move beyond these assumptions and towards reality.

I'm all ears Wildbob. I'm more than happy to listen to you and debate this. I'm still hearing more of the same though.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: CB328

Only a misguided fool would be glad to have their taxes raised.

They need to cut spending to the bone and then cut taxes once they have secured the budget cuts they need. Government needs to stop growing and start shrinking and leave people alone.

Someone should study economics more. Even if they cut spending they still would have to raise taxes because there are bills that need to be paid.

There is more than one school of economic thought. Personally, I don't believe Government improves the situation of its constituency. People would be better off without their interference.

originally posted by: Metallicus

Why do you rely on the Government for anything? Only a juvenile expects someone else to take care of them.

An adult takes care of themselves.

What do you think Government taxes go toward exactly??? It's almost like you think they only spend it on Welfare and Government Programs to help poor people or something.

originally posted by: muse7
After 30+ years the middle class and poor are still waiting for that wealth to trickle down.

Move to Russia, then you will understand exactly what trickle down is. I'm not even kidding.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: CB328

The problem isn't taxes. It's government spending.

Don't those two things pretty much go hand in hand??? The more they spend the more they must tax. It's not like they are spending their own money.

Yes. So when you cut taxes you need to cut spending, which is what needs to be done.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Yes. So when you cut taxes you need to cut spending, which is what needs to be done.

That's fine. But the problem comes in figuring out what should be cut and what shouldn't. What is actually good spending and bad spending. What helps and what doesn't.

All that and more and that doesn't even include cutting out the pork, kickbacks and corruption spending. Those alone would probably account for enough that cutting areas wouldn't even need cutting if they were removed.

a reply to: CranialSponge

And now, as per usual, the taxpayers are the ones that will have to pay the piper (with drastic tax increases to play catch-up) because of their representatives' incompetency on the subject of Basic Economics 101.

And ironically these same taxpayers who just go stiffed with this massive bill, caused by their elected representatives incompetence, will turn around and re-elect them to office.

Cognitive dissonance at its finest.


-dex