Obama Budget Speech

#76
#76
utvolpj said:
it's sad people still believe what this man is shoveling. Cut the spending and the revenues are fine. But of course too many view big gov't as a solution so it makes sense why they feel the need to tax the "rich". No wonder we're in this hole :disappointed:
Click to expand...
His logic doesn't make a lot of sense. 250k seems to be his calling card number. There are a whole lot of small businesses in this tax bracket and none of them are rich. Punish the people who create the jobs by taxing them more. He's trying his best to sell snake oil to anyone who is listening. I think all he is really trying to do is collapse this economy period. Poor people don't create jobs. If there is no confidence in the direction of America no one who has any money will either. They'll continue to set on their money like they have for 3 years running. This guy needs to go, his policies are a failure and so is he.
 
#77
#77
utgibbs said:
As for 9 million extra workers, do we really need to get into those percentages? Besides, wouldn't most of those be in the magic 40%?
Click to expand...

you think that when the economy adds labor participation that it gets added on the high end? this is ridiculous.
 
#78
#78
demotivational_obama_raise_debt_ceiling.jpg
 
#79
#79
droski said:
you think that when the economy adds labor participation that it gets added on the high end? this is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Thanks again for all of your support. I was saying exactly what you are saying. Most of those jobs created would have had minimal impact on the federal income coffers (the 40% who pay 0%). :hi:

Would you explain your numbers to BPV? He's a bit confused in his own area of interest.

Revenue from capital gains went up, BPV, no doubt about it. They contributed about 2-3% of the extra revenue in the treasury from 1992 - 2000. Meanwhile, income tax revenues accounted for > 25% of the additional revenues.

1. STP tax code
2. Single-payer health system
3. Slash defense + war + penal
4. Raise taxes back to pre-Reagan
 
Last edited:
#81
#81
droski said:
so how do explain the massive increase in tax revenue BEFORE clinton raised taxes?
Click to expand...

Prediction for Gibbs response: "Capital is so evil that it controls information. Heretofore, your response is invalid. I am egregious to you for interrupting my jacking off to Karl Marx. Good day" :hi:
 
#83
#83
DefenseisDesire said:
Prediction for Gibbs response: "Capital is so evil that it controls information. Heretofore, your response is invalid. I am egregious to you for interrupting my jacking off to Karl Marx. Good day" :hi:
Click to expand...

I'm lol'ing IRL to the fact that Gibbs clearly hasn't read brother marx's thoughts on supply side economics.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#84
#84
droski said:
so how do explain the massive increase in tax revenue BEFORE clinton raised taxes?
Click to expand...

See, when you're a doofus, it's hard to reason through the fact that ordinary income was drastically boosted by capital gains. Connecting dots works for most, but the massive incomes were driven by????
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#85
#85
thusorosschoolofglobalc.jpg


Obama's speech was so tedious and boring (not to
mention completely misleading) that Biden, among
others, fell asleep.

biden_drops_brain.jpg


117bjlt.jpg


The false prophet of Obama and his Ministry of Economic Voodoo

Such is the logic of the Obama administration,
which now absurdly proposes that spending America
into a total debt collapse is somehow a "balanced
approach." Sure, it is balanced in the same way
that a man walking a tightrope strung 35 stories
above the city street, carrying two suitcases
stuffed with hundreds of pounds of T-bills, with
strong winds and a forecast of an approaching
hail storm is also "balanced."

That Obama could even pretend such a scenario
is healthy for the future of America just goes to
show you the depth of financial insanity that
has gripped the players in Washington D.C. --
on both sides of the aisle. Today, President Obama
proposed spending cuts of $4 trillion over the next
12 years, but just as we figured, virtually none of
those cuts kick in until Obama is out of office.
They're all "back-loaded" cuts that happen at some
theoretical time in the future rather than right now.

In other words, under Obama's new plan, the
national debt will still grow by a net
amount of $26 trillion over the next 12 years
even after the $4 trillion in so-called cuts.
Obama's debt spending is accelerating so rapidly
that the mathematicians now call it a "blowout
phase" of government debt.
Click to expand...

attackp.jpg


ss49.jpg


elephantfall.jpg


2qu23c8.jpg


QUEEN3.jpg


Muny Dews

budget2011.jpg


Above is a graph showing exactly what was cut
from the budget by the big budget compromise
of 2011. That little yellow line at the bottom of
the chart represents the $38 billion cut from the
budget. That is what all the yelling and screaming
was about.

According to the Democrats, if we cut that
yellow line out of the budget, the elderly
would starve, schools across the country
would close, and the world would soon face
economic and social collapse.

According to the Republicans, cutting that
yellow line out of the budget was a huge victory.
They have set us upon the path to fiscal
solvency.

This chart demonstrates that neither the
Democrats or Republicans are correct. The
budget cuts amounted to nothing; literally
a drop of water in the ocean. Nothing has
really changed.
Click to expand...

2r26q77.jpg


mwsj8n.jpg


obozoheader.jpg
 
Last edited:
#88
#88
do you think he gets emailed all these cartoons or searches for them? must take up a good % of his day.
 
#90
#90
DefenseisDesire said:
Prediction for Gibbs response: "Capital is so evil that it controls information. Heretofore, your response is invalid. I am egregious to you for interrupting my jacking off to Karl Marx. Good day" :hi:
Click to expand...

Or we ask, "what are you talking about?" I'm not sure what droski was seeing through his crack smoke haze.

us_revenue_type_100.png


Total revenues increased slightly 1980 - 1990 (I'll even give Ronnie the good Bush I years); but significant increase after 1992. :hi:
 
Last edited:
#91
#91
after 1992 and particularly after 1994-1995, the economy was moving along at a pretty good pace. Couple that with a sharp cut in capital gains and it's no wonder revenues to the treasury increased. The problem you have, gibbs, is that you think taxes should be high regardless of how well the economy is performing.

also, the dollar was strong and oil was cheap during Clinton's two terms and China had yet to emerge.
 
#92
#92
MG1968 said:
after 1992 and particularly after 1994-1995, the economy was moving along at a pretty good pace. Couple that with a sharp cut in capital gains and it's no wonder revenues to the treasury increased. The problem you have, gibbs, is that you think taxes should be high regardless of how well the economy is performing.

also, the dollar was strong and oil was cheap during Clinton's two terms and China had yet to emerge.
Click to expand...

Amazed at how quickly sometimes we can roll off excuses.

I think taxes should be simple, transparent, and progressive, as I have said many times. I think we would be amazed at what the rates fall to when applying these simple maxims.
 
#93
#93
more fun from Dear Leader:

"Under their vision, we can't invest in roads and bridges and broadband and high-speed rail," Obama told a select group of the Democratic faithful at the second of three fundraising events in his hometown of Chicago.
"I mean, we would be a nation of potholes, and our airports would be worse than places that we thought -- that we used to call the Third World, but who are now investing in infrastructure."
Click to expand...

Republicans plans to shrink the reach of government is "not a vision that's impelled by the numbers" but a "choice" to give a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the rich rather than ask those who've been "blessed" to "give a little more."
Click to expand...

blessed rather than worked hard
 
#95
#95
We ve all been blessed to be born in this country.

Some take the opportunity and put the work with it and become successful. Some take from the success of others.
 
#96
#96
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Yesterday in an interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC he used the word "Lucky"

Yea, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet got lucky, okay
Click to expand...

I am constantly amazed at what comes out of his mouth (which is saying something after 2+ years of hearing it)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top