Muscatine

US > Iowa > Muscatine IA metro > Muscatine IA > Muscatine > Negotiating with the Taliban?

Negotiating with the Taliban?

Posted in: Muscatine
Beacause it fosters increased sales across the board. If people have more money, they spend more money. It's the American way.


Can't argue with the part about "If people have more money, they spend more money".   But where is the increased tax revenue?   Give us some numbers please.

 

Let me state that I am NOT speaking for BB - but this might answer your question about the increased tax revenue. I took this from a letter to the editor in today's QC Times - 7/2/11 - which you can check at QCTimes.com

 

"In 1998, with a population of 270 million, the U.S. generated personal federal income taxes of $783 billion. The marginal tax rate was 39.6 percent and the capital gains rate was 25%.

In 2007, when the marinal rate was 35 percent and capital gains rate was 15 percent, the U.S. population was 301 million - up 11.5 percent over 1998. Yet Federal Personal Income taxes were $1.1 trillion or 42.4 percent higher than 1998. Lower tax rates do generate more revenue. That was proven by JFK, Ronald Reagan and George Bush."

 

Now you may shut your trap.

 


I'm going to revisit this.

Using a letter to the editor in theQCTimes as a source of reliable information is nuts.   You could just as well ask the next guy you see on the corner of Sycamore and 2nd Street.

It's certainly not enough to respond with "Now you may shut your trap".

 

The onus is on you - you prove how lowering taxes does NOT increase tax revenue.

 

July 3rd 2011 Report Reply
  • Stock
  • mallory
  • Respected Neighbor
  • USA
  • 3461 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor
"In 1998, with a population of 270 million, the U.S. generated personal federal income taxes of $783 billion. The marginal tax rate was 39.6 percent and the capital gains rate was 25%.

In 2007, when the marinal rate was 35 percent and capital gains rate was 15 percent, the U.S. population was 301 million - up 11.5 percent over 1998. Yet Federal Personal Income taxes were $1.1 trillion or 42.4 percent higher than 1998. Lower tax rates do generate more revenue. That was proven by JFK, Ronald Reagan and George Bush."

 

Now you may shut your trap.

 


I'm going to revisit this.

Using a letter to the editor in theQCTimes as a source of reliable information is nuts.   You could just as well ask the next guy you see on the corner of Sycamore and 2nd Street.

It's certainly not enough to respond with "Now you may shut your trap".

 

The onus is on you - you prove how lowering taxes does NOT increase tax revenue.

 


I gave a variation of this proof a long time ago.   You aren't paying attention.   You're relying on the Limbaughs of the world and Fox "News" too much.

If one would reduce the sales tax from 7% to 2% we would save a nickle for every dollar we spent.    After spending $20 we would have an extra dollar to spend.   If we spent that all on taxable items, the state would now get 2 cents.   The state loses 98 cents.

But it is even worse.   There are some things which are not subject to sales tax.   If we spent half of it on those things, the state loses 99 cents.  We could also spend it in another state to make the result even worse.

July 3rd 2011 Report Reply
"In 1998, with a population of 270 million, the U.S. generated personal federal income taxes of $783 billion. The marginal tax rate was 39.6 percent and the capital gains rate was 25%.

In 2007, when the marinal rate was 35 percent and capital gains rate was 15 percent, the U.S. population was 301 million - up 11.5 percent over 1998. Yet Federal Personal Income taxes were $1.1 trillion or 42.4 percent higher than 1998. Lower tax rates do generate more revenue. That was proven by JFK, Ronald Reagan and George Bush."

 

Now you may shut your trap.

 


I'm going to revisit this.

Using a letter to the editor in theQCTimes as a source of reliable information is nuts.   You could just as well ask the next guy you see on the corner of Sycamore and 2nd Street.

It's certainly not enough to respond with "Now you may shut your trap".

 

The onus is on you - you prove how lowering taxes does NOT increase tax revenue.

 


I gave a variation of this proof a long time ago.   You aren't paying attention.   You're relying on the Limbaughs of the world and Fox "News" too much.

If one would reduce the sales tax from 7% to 2% we would save a nickle for every dollar we spent.    After spending $20 we would have an extra dollar to spend.   If we spent that all on taxable items, the state would now get 2 cents.   The state loses 98 cents.

But it is even worse.   There are some things which are not subject to sales tax.   If we spent half of it on those things, the state loses 99 cents.  We could also spend it in another state to make the result even worse.

 

I think I will believe my source at the QC Times L-O-N-G before I would rely on your reckoning! Thanx tho!

 

July 3rd 2011 Report Reply
  • Stock
  • mallory
  • Respected Neighbor
  • USA
  • 3461 Posts
  • Respect-O-Meter: Respected Neighbor
 

The onus is on you - you prove how lowering taxes does NOT increase tax revenue.

 


I gave a variation of this proof a long time ago.   You aren't paying attention.   You're relying on the Limbaughs of the world and Fox "News" too much.

If one would reduce the sales tax from 7% to 2% we would save a nickle for every dollar we spent.    After spending $20 we would have an extra dollar to spend.   If we spent that all on taxable items, the state would now get 2 cents.   The state loses 98 cents.

But it is even worse.   There are some things which are not subject to sales tax.   If we spent half of it on those things, the state loses 99 cents.  We could also spend it in another state to make the result even worse.

 

I think I will believe my source at the QC Times L-O-N-G before I would rely on your reckoning! Thanx tho!

 


You ask for proof.   I give you proof and you insist on denying it.  

You don't have to rely on my reckoning, just do the math yourself.

It's simple, maybe 4th grade level.

 

Would it make it easier if I used the example where the sales tax is reduced to zero.   Would that be sufficient proof or would you still insist there would be an increase in tax revenue?

July 3rd 2011 Report Reply
Popular Topics
Homeowner
Crime
Politics
Board Meetings
Children
Environment
Lost Pets
Advertise Here!

Promote Your Business or Product for $10/mo

istockphoto_12477899-big-head.jpg

For just $10/mo you can promote your business or product directly to nearby residents. Buy 12 months and save 50%!

Buynow