Tax Breaks vs. Budget Cuts... maybe we should try both?

[RgrF]

Making the "poor" poorer seems to be a goal for some of the posters here, seems making the wealthy a bit poorer they could care less about.

[Mac1337]

Lux Interior wrote:
Most of the wealth is concentrated at the top, therefore, it makes sense that they pay most of the taxes.

They do. Why do people still complain they don't pay their"fare" share? But when half the people pay no taxes and still use the country, somehow that is fair. Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income, even if it amounts to a few dollars.

[Ted King]

rankandfile wrote:
[quote=DaveS]
I know I'm being a little snide here but are you really stating that "voodoo economics" actually works????

"Voodoo economics" refers to supply side theory. Stimulus spending is a demand side approach.

George H. W. Bush referred to Reagan's economic plan as voodoo economics when Bush ran for President in 1980.

Supply side won't work when interest rates are at the "zero bound". Demand side, properly done, will. It's straight out of Keynes.
Thanks rankandfile, you explained that way better than I ever could have.

[Mac1337]

Supply side means you spend your money. Demand side means you spend somebody else's money that the government took from someone who could be doing some supply side activity with it.

[DaveS]

Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=DaveS]
I will only ask at what point do "poor" people need to contribute?

Why do "poor" (I don't know why you put it in quotes) people need to contribute? Most of the wealth is concentrated at the top, therefore, it makes sense that they pay most of the taxes. They would pay most of the taxes under almost any system. Even a flat tax.

You can increase the taxes on the poor, if that's what you want to do in the name of fairness, but what does that accomplish? It makes the poor poorer and more reliant on social programs. So you're sucking money from the people who have the least so you can give it back to them.

Sounds very inefficient to me.
Lux, you hit the nail on the head. I need someone to define "poor" or maybe at what point does one have enough money to begin paying federal taxes? And I do fully understand that there are other taxes.

Right now we are at the point that about 46% of our working/earning population pays no federal tax. So describe your 'poor' for me please.

[DaveS]

rankandfile wrote:
[quote=DaveS]
I know I'm being a little snide here but are you really stating that "voodoo economics" actually works????

"Voodoo economics" refers to supply side theory. Stimulus spending is a demand side approach.

George H. W. Bush referred to Reagan's economic plan as voodoo economics when Bush ran for President in 1980.

Supply side won't work when interest rates are at the "zero bound". Demand side, properly done, will. It's straight out of Keynes.
So what your really saying is that it isn't so much the money you borrow (or create) - it's what you spend it on the matters.