Deficit Through The Years

Obama has kept us at the bottom?

Doth forget recent antics by the tea party nazis in government? They block EVERYTHING. Even their OWN bills.

 

2009s budget was mostly Bush's budget,Obamas stimulus was 200 billion of it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget


"The United States federal budget for fiscal year 2009 began as a spending request by President George W. Bush to fund government operations for October 2008 – September 2009."



Most of Obamas spending is paying the bills Bush left behind.Bushs unfunded wars,Bushs unfunded medicare drug plan,Bushs tax cuts,Bushs expansion of government(Homeland security /TSA etc)

 

Disagree





[/URL]

 

Thank you. Tell the truth!

 

When you lower personal and corporate taxes it most definitely allows the economy to grow. Businesses can hire more people and produce more products at competitive rates. And when people have more money they are able to spend, save, or invest. All three help our economy grow. So even though you are lowering taxes, you are collecting taxes on a much larger pool of money. Check out the link and look at federal receipts under Bush years. Federal receipts are higher. If Bush would have shown a little more restraint in spending in his second term we would have had a surplus. But look at the Obama years and how spending has dramatically hurt us.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

 

Here are the numbers you need to check out. The unemployment rate released by the BLS does not include part time workers or those who have given up looking for work. That number is calculated in the effective unemployment rate or U6. Many estimates put that between 15-22% unemployment. So when you see charts like the one you posted, that is including college graduates and those with Masters degrees working at McDonald's part-time to get by. Not exactly anything that will turn around our economy.

This chart shows private sector job growth under each president. We have still lost a net 161,000 private sector jobs under Obama.



Here is a chart of the labor force participation rate. This shows how many working age people are actually in the workforce. Look at the dramatic dropoff under Obama.

 

That's the perception, but that's not the reality. Lowering corporate taxes won't guarantee larger job growth at all. Rather, it would mean corporations would be intake the extra money and put it into their own pockets, which is the reality in this corporatism society.

Plus, the tax cuts didn't even help stimulate the economy. Rather, the tax cuts literally contributed to the crippling of the economy, on top of the wars Bush pushed us. We had a surplus and it was wasted thanks to the previous administration mindless and tactless efforts to fight.

Lastly, you simply can't lowering the taxes next to zero and expect it to solve everything. That's partisan nonsense propaganda. Reagan knew it, and so did Bush Sr. Convictions never help push the economy.

Plus, you're ignoring the obstructionism that has caused the Congress to stagnate.

 

No, it is the reality. Corporations operate to make money for their shareholders. And when you lower the rate, it opens up competition. So if your competitors are hiring more people and opening more stores it forces them to keep pace. They can't just pocket money and not expand the business. The shareholders will have that CEO fired immediately.

Tax cuts for individuals does help the economy for the reasons I stated. When you have extra money you can spend it, save it, or invest it. Any one of those things are great for our economy. But right now we have a situation where people are hurting financially, can't afford their mortgages, high gas prices, etc. It is the responsibility of the president to lower personal taxes to help out everyone in need.

And nobody is saying lowering the taxes to zero. Romney is saying lower corporate taxes from 35% to 25% to make them more competitive on a global scale. And lower marginal tax rates on individuals by 20%. So if you are in the 15% tax bracket, that would be lowered to 12%. And that money would be huge for families all over the country.

 

Had that been the reality, given that taxes have been the lowest in decades, then we would actually see expedient job growth and businesses actually taking their capital and put it back into the economy via job growth, etc. But realistically, it's not the case.

I'm not against lowering taxes by a long shot. But unlike people working on principle, I understand that there would have to be tax increases in certain areas in order to keep the government afloat as well as the country. It's called being practical rather than thinking lowering the taxes would solve everything. That's a short term solution and won't make the economy grow as well as what conservative jargon want to believe.

Realistically, you can't lower taxes towards economic prosperity.

 

First, taxes are not the lowest in decades. Obama has not touched personal income taxes and our corporate tax rate is the highest in the world. So yes, we have a slow recovery because of his refusal to lower rates. So in order for companies to be competitive in America, it forces them to offshore jobs and big companies are leaving the majority of their profits overseas so they don't have to take the huge tax hit here.

As someone who majored in economics in college I can tell you that managing the economy is about balance. It's not about increasing taxes on the wealthy (Obama) or having incredibly low rates like some Republicans suggest (Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich). Its about having a fair rate of taxes that make sense. But when you have a recession like this, you need to lower rates to spur activity. When you have a growing economy you can increase tax rates marginally. In Bush's second term the economy was actually growing like crazy. If he would have lowered spending or Greenspan raised rates, we would have had a surplus all of those years.

The Federal Reserve has already lowered rates as far as they can go, now it is up to the president to do his part. Obama has put us into a big hole with his spending. He needs to make dramatic moves just to get us back to ground zero.

 

This is a simple concept that every household knows. If you're bringing in $4000/month but you're spending $6000/month. What is the only way to get out of debt...

1) Cut your spending
2) Bring in more money

Every house in America knows this, except for the White House apparently.

 

Again, the U.S. has one of the lowest effective tax rates in the WORLD and raises the least amount of tax income from corporate taxes compared to most industrialized countries.
The average amount paid in federal taxes by U.S. corporations is 12-13%.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/03/30/456005/reminder-corporate-taxes-very-low/?mobile=nc

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo...d-corporate-tax-rates-from-lowest-to-highest/

You repeat a disturbing number of right wing talking points without considering what it is you're regurgitating, or whether or not it's factual.

 

Good point. Expect most households don't print their own money or can sell off their debt globally in government backed securities.

I hate this argument. It's beyond simpleminded.:smt048

 

What's fascinating is that you're very much quick to put all the blame on Obama when it's the Congress that's putting the executive branch in a deadlock. You're too quick to ignore that fact and dismiss it altogether. You say that it's all about balance, yet President Obama has offered something to that effect last year during the whole credit rating debacle. Yet, the TEA Party morons are too quick to put forth the "cut taxes" principle and ignore any tax increases of any kind.

I wonder, for someone who claims to follow politics closely and majored in economics from a conservative front, you certainly don't act on it. There's a realistic, rational approach, which individuals like Clinton, Obama, Reagan, and Bush Sr., advocated. But the modern day GOP is all about crippling the economy for the sake of principle.

If you're going to place the blame, then you'll have to look at both the legislative and executive branch.

Lowering taxes would be ideal, but let's be practical for a minute. You can't lower your way to economic prosperity. There would have to a revision of the already complicated tax code system, and also a "rewards" system to help spur business to put all their eggs in one basket and gain more than lose.

 

Exactly.

That's the main thing conservative minded economists like james here often ignore.

 

Your article helped prove my point. Corporations have to use overseas tax havens to lower their effective tax rate. So now profits are sitting overseas and not being re-invested here in our country. If you lower the rate, then companies won't have to figure out loopholes to stay in business.

Secondly, there are a million small business out there who are setup as corporations. It is not just Apple and Hewlett Packard out there, there are a bunch of main street business going out of business daily because they can't afford the rates and don't have the advantage of large companies overseas benefits.

So again, just lower the rate to 25% and help everyone out!

 

No corporation pays the full load on federal taxes. It's the loopholes in general that are the problem. You can't lower corporate tax rates without eliminating the loopholes.

If you do one without the other, one side is going to claim they're getting screwed.

 

....someone sees it coming huh

 

You're right, which is exactly what Republicans have been pushing for years. To reduce the rate and simplify the code for both corporations and personal income taxes. Because people do the same thing on their personal income taxes. They figure out every tax credit, deduction, and loophole to lower their tax bill. I go to H&R Block every year and the tax person helps me get the most money back.