Is there a trickle up policy?

[Hlleonard]

It is ironic this is exactly what everyone thought when Carter was in office we had a hostage crises for over 465 days interest rates were 18% unemployment through the roof America was in terrible shape but there was a man named Reagan who believed in the American people and had a positive vision was a great communicator (with out teleprompter). He knew the problem could not be fixed by the government because it was the problem. We elected him President and Iran released the hostages, Russia was afraid of him after he spent a ton of money building up the military and his efforts and money ended the cold war. He turned America around in no time and has gone down as one of the greatest president of modern times.

It is sad that Obama the nations first African American president is so incompetent and will be the worst president of modern times. the only two thing he has accomplished is he went on a tour and apologized because America was exceptional he has changed that we are not exceptional any more and he gave us Obama care one of the worst programs I have ever seen.

You do not believe we can overcome this mess (of course you try to pin it on the republicans) when it is Obama problem again he thinks you solve the problem by making the government larger and taxing the hell out of the folks who make the jobs history has proved time and time again that big government is the problem not the answer. I do share your fear that there is not another Reagan that come in and undo 8 years of Obama. FYI 26 yeas before Obama national debt rose 9.5 trillion dollars five years of Obama debt rose 7 trillion dollars. and that is a fact Jack.

Even after this great history lesson that Reagan gave us the liberals still think that the government is the answer.

--
Hmmm. not exactly sure what all that rant was about... You could be right about this president being the worst president in history, he has to surpass Bush11 first, but do you believe we could stand another Reagan... lets see..debt increased 218% under Mr Reagan in the eighties... now if we assume Mr Obama doubles the debt ( As Bush11 did), thats 20 trillion and we elect another Reagan and this new Mr Reagan performs like the first one, that would result in a debt of lets see... somewhere between 40 and 50 trillion dollars?.. If my calculator is broken maybe you can do the math and show us where this new Jesus will be our savior... I personally believe most of the right wingnuts here have a tough time seeing the real world because they have their head so far up their Mohammad's backside they haven't seen daylight since he started this ruination of our great country in the 80's.

[SLP]

I am intrigued with the idea of a consumption tax. The rich would pay far more because they of course spend much more. No tax on food of course and don't double tax, so no tax on used items. I think it would give many that need it tax breaks, and give more opportunities for those who want to save and invest the opportunity of doing so because it would encourage saving. That was the one idea I really liked that Huckabee was pushing when he ran for president of few years back. I forget how many billions I think it was said at the time that would not be sucked out of the economy by eliminating the expenses that filing traditional taxes currently cost Americans and American companies. It also would basically eliminate the need for the IRS ( well except that they now are supposed to enforce Obama Care), but that is another topic for discussion.

[Hlleonard]

I am intrigued with the idea of a consumption tax. The rich would pay far more because they of course spend much more. No tax on food of course and don't double tax, so no tax on used items. I think it would give many that need it tax breaks, and give more opportunities for those who want to save and invest the opportunity of doing so because it would encourage saving. That was the one idea I really liked that Huckabee was pushing when he ran for president of few years back. I forget how many billions I think it was said at the time that would not be sucked out of the economy by eliminating the expenses that filing traditional taxes currently cost Americans and American companies. It also would basically eliminate the need for the IRS ( well except that they now are supposed to enforce Obama Care), but that is another topic for discussion.

--
I suspect somewhere in the future we will see some form of that... The idea makes more noise every year,Personally I believe it will hurt us as a country and further shift the tax burden to the folks who can least afford it... In the middle part of the last century the top tax rate was 70 or 80 percent I think (not going to look that up), now it is 38% or something like that and it seems the end result is a massive debt we likely will never be able to get out from under.... It seems the more we reduce the taxes on the rich the worse shape we get in.

[SLP]

--
I suspect somewhere in the future we will see some form of that... The idea makes more noise every year,Personally I believe it will hurt us as a country and further shift the tax burden to the folks who can least afford it... In the middle part of the last century the top tax rate was 70 or 80 percent I think (not going to look that up), now it is 38% or something like that and it seems the end result is a massive debt we likely will never be able to get out from under.... It seems the more we reduce the taxes on the rich the worse shape we get in.

The rate were much higher, but it was not as different as at first glace or one might think. When the rates were that high the tax code also had many more tax breaks and loopholes available in order for people to be able lower their actual rate just because the rates were so high. It basically was a real mess and much more inefficient. Once the rates were lowered the tax code was also simplified and many of those loopholes were done away with. Really either a consumption tax or a very simple flat tax is the way to go. Having high rates and then having to have all kinds of available breaks and loopholes for people to take just to lower those rates is very inefficient and costly.

[Hlleonard]

The rate were much higher, but it was not as different as at first glace or one might think. When the rates were that high the tax code also had many more tax breaks and loopholes available in order for people to be able lower their actual rate just because the rates were so high. It basically was a real mess and much more inefficient. Once the rates were lowered the tax code was also simplified and many of those loopholes were done away with. Really either a consumption tax or a very simple flat tax is the way to go. Having high rates and then having to have all kinds of available breaks and loopholes for people to take just to lower those rates is very inefficient and costly.

--
There are a lot of folks who believe a flat tax would be the answer to our budgetary problems... It just seems to me if half the people, as Mr. Romney says, pay no taxes, then our system must be saying these folks are in a financial condition where they can't afford to pay taxes, if thats the case then I don't understand how charging them taxes on goods and services won't result either in a greater hardship on them or cause them to need more government assistance and at the same time we are reducing taxes on the upper class so that looks to me like a disaster in the making.

[SLP]

--
There are a lot of folks who believe a flat tax would be the answer to our budgetary problems... It just seems to me if half the people, as Mr. Romney says, pay no taxes, then our system must be saying these folks are in a financial condition where they can't afford to pay taxes, if thats the case then I don't understand how charging them taxes on goods and services won't result either in a greater hardship on them or cause them to need more government assistance and at the same time we are reducing taxes on the upper class so that looks to me like a disaster in the making.

It has been years since I researched this so I don't remember specific numbers, but with Huckabe's proposal people would receive a rebate each year so in effect for the most part those who pay nothing now would continue to do so. Also as I said no food or any used items would be taxed. So where now if a person purchases a used car and pay tax on it with his "fair tax" proposal they wouldn't pay a tax on it since the original consumption tax was already previously paid on it. It would really help the poor if done right. The current system where the poor can not deduct their rent while homeowners are able to their mortgage interest isn't very "fair" now is it?

[DJD]

--
There are a lot of folks who believe a flat tax would be the answer to our budgetary problems... It just seems to me if half the people, as Mr. Romney says, pay no taxes, then our system must be saying these folks are in a financial condition where they can't afford to pay taxes, if thats the case then I don't understand how charging them taxes on goods and services won't result either in a greater hardship on them or cause them to need more government assistance and at the same time we are reducing taxes on the upper class so that looks to me like a disaster in the making.

We all have budgets and I don't care if someone else experiences budget issues like I/we all do. Apparently Obama didn't care either or he wouldn't have done that to people like me with Obamacare.

IMO....The assumption that people who don't pay taxes are hard up is another false thought. Many are scamming the system and using them as a reason to not try a consumption tax or flat tax is unfair. It's saying the minority will dictate what the majority does and that is wrong in my opinion. Also it might clean up some of the abuse the system gets hammered with now.

I'm sure some are hurting but I know many who just don't care and spend way more than they should on eating out or buying way to much junk...them when they don't get their 4k back each year they gripe. Of course they want that large check to go buy a big screen.

Im really not as cold hearted as it sounds. I just don't like to keep doing things the same way when it suckks and when a new idea is out there the concern is more about the few instead of the many. There has to be a better way.

[Hlleonard]

We all have budgets and I don't care if someone else experiences budget issues like I/we all do. Apparently Obama didn't care either or he wouldn't have done that to people like me with Obamacare.

IMO....The assumption that people who don't pay taxes are hard up is another false thought. Many are scamming the system and using them as a reason to not try a consumption tax or flat tax is unfair. It's saying the minority will dictate what the majority does and that is wrong in my opinion. Also it might clean up some of the abuse the system gets hammered with now.

I'm sure some are hurting but I know many who just don't care and spend way more than they should on eating out or buying way to much junk...them when they don't get their 4k back each year they gripe. Of course they want that large check to go buy a big screen.

Im really not as cold hearted as it sounds. I just don't like to keep doing things the same way when it suckks and when a new idea is out there the concern is more about the few instead of the many. There has to be a better way.

--
I do agree with most if not all in this post, not sure just how we separate the needy from the users though... We do need to do a better job of that.. The only place we differ is how much damage the welfare system is doing to our country, with 12% of the budget going in that direction and I'm sure most of that goes to the folks who actually need it (you and I likely disagree on that) if we did away with the entire thing we would still have a budget nightmare although it would be less of a nightmare but would likely cause us a whole new set of problems.

[GeoFisher]

--
. It just seems to me if half the people, as Mr. Romney says, pay no taxes, then our system must be saying these folks are in a financial condition where they can't afford to pay taxes,

Never Mind.....

IGNORANCE on the left is bliss.........

Later,

Geo

[Hlleonard]

Never Mind.....

IGNORANCE on the left is bliss.........

Later,

Geo

--
lol... you have a good evening sir.

[roadrunner]

--
Hmmm. not exactly sure what all that rant was about... You could be right about this president being the worst president in history, he has to surpass Bush11 first, but do you believe we could stand another Reagan... lets see..debt increased 218% under Mr Reagan in the eighties... now if we assume Mr Obama doubles the debt ( As Bush11 did), thats 20 trillion and we elect another Reagan and this new Mr Reagan performs like the first one, that would result in a debt of lets see... somewhere between 40 and 50 trillion dollars?.. If my calculator is broken maybe you can do the math and show us where this new Jesus will be our savior... I personally believe most of the right wingnuts here have a tough time seeing the real world because they have their head so far up their Mohammad's backside they haven't seen daylight since he started this ruination of our great country in the 80's.

I was in business during Carters presidency and we have a catalog of our products and inflation was so rampant we could not print catalogs fast enough we had to send out letters telling them to mark up there price by a certain %. We were sending these adders about every three or four weeks it was terrible. When Reagan was president it all changed for the better, no one thought we would see single digit interest rates but in about two years interest dropped to 7% and these were some of the best times for Americans. The reason his spending was so high he had to invest heavily in our military that was in a very weaken state. I do not have a problem with building up our military. Again I lived through this time period and i am reflecting how terrible it was under the Carter administration and how downtrodden everyone was and how Reagan turned it around and how he started the greatest recovery of all time. You can add to the debt when you add as much as he did to the GDP. Again you can look at the numbers and make them twist them, you can find economist that share your feelings. I am going strictly on my living through these times and how much better off everyone was under Reagan.

[Hlleonard]

I was in business during Carters presidency and we have a catalog of our products and inflation was so rampant we could not print catalogs fast enough we had to send out letters telling them to mark up there price by a certain %. We were sending these adders about every three or four weeks it was terrible. When Reagan was president it all changed for the better, no one thought we would see single digit interest rates but in about two years interest dropped to 7% and these were some of the best times for Americans. The reason his spending was so high he had to invest heavily in our military that was in a very weaken state. I do not have a problem with building up our military. Again I lived through this time period and i am reflecting how terrible it was under the Carter administration and how downtrodden everyone was and how Reagan turned it around and how he started the greatest recovery of all time. You can add to the debt when you add as much as he did to the GDP. Again you can look at the numbers and make them twist them, you can find economist that share your feelings. I am going strictly on my living through these times and how much better off everyone was under Reagan.

--
Reagan was the first president that I voted for, was actually 35 years old and didn't care in the least about politics, Had been earning a living for some years and I do remember times of 14% mortgage rates, not just exactly sure when they were that high... Being on the front end of the last 30 years looked a whole different that it does on the back end of it, we had a good many years of what was prosperity to us and I also had money to buy new trucks,cars and a new boat all the while raising two kids... The bad side of all that was living good but not paying the bills and now looking back it is easy to see how maybe if we did things a little differently we might not have the monster staring us in the face that we have now... I do believe the president we have now isn't doing us any budgetary favors but to demonize him because he has not saved us from the last thirty years that we just spoke of is a bit insane... I would hope we could get our finances back to where we won't eventually be crushed by them but it is doubtful any president can accomplish that because he is being pulled from all sides the same as Mr. Reagan was and the end result seems always to be go the easy route the same as he did and I believe we will eventually be crushed by the debt we have spent years accumulating and continue to accumulate at an alarming rate.