http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5heWSF9tlVbX2wAVCi7sLAxTfo2hAD8TVBGSO0

Yep, tax cuts mean bigger deficits. How long can we continue to pile on the debt to cover our shortfalls before we have to live within our means?

Borrow more money from the COMMIES!

Let's hope the Democratic Congress doesn't roll over on this one too! Just try to keep the ball til January 2009 for crying out loud...

Some temporary tax cuts in 2002 might have been a great idea to stimulate the economy when a recession was clearly on, but they should have been temporary. A temporary, conditional tax cut IF there's a recession (or specific precursors to one) for 2008 might not be such a bad idea, either, but anything not slated as temporary should be opposed.

Andrew

I would support tax cuts for those making below $150K if taxes were raised on those making over $500K and the overall effect was revenue neutral.

Agreed.

"Yep, tax cuts mean bigger deficits."

Wrongo.

Both John Kennedy (a democrat) and Ronald Reagan (a republican) won hard-fought tax cuts, and each time they brought prosperity to the American people.

Herb

Herb, do you have a short memory? What has happened to our deficits during George W. Bush's tax cuts? They've gone up faster than at any time in our history. If we give more tax cuts today, they are achieved by selling more debt to cover the shortfall. It's simple math, really.

Fair enough.

The problem was guns AND butter.

Blame Mr. Bush for the guns in this post-9/11 world.
Blame congress for the butter.

Herb

There were some news articles a little over a year ago that said the tax cuts benefited the most wealthy taxpayers, and the poorest taxpayers were in fact paying more.

I thought the point of taxes were to encourage certain activities, while discouraging others - one would think they should consider increasing taxes and tariffs on foreign-made goods, so that way domestic products would seem to cost less, which would then encourage companies to create jobs in this country. I guess we can't do that because China already owns too much of the U.S., and wants to own more.

(Too bad nobody in congress is likely to insert a section in an Iraq troop paycheck bill that would require a full and complete pullout to begin immediately, and require congress to pass a balanced budget.)

And if we increase tarrifs on foreign goods, they will increase tarrifs on our goods, which will increase unemployment.

A balanced budget woulde be really bad, it would cause unemployment to skyrocket, and probably a depression.

Herb said>>>
Both John Kennedy (a democrat) and Ronald Reagan (a republican) won hard-fought tax cuts, and each time they brought prosperity to the American people.

So when is this going to happen now??? We live in different times and the world economy is NOT like it use to be back when JFK and Uncle Ronnie ran America. Trickle Down isn't working and there is NO signs that it will!

"A balanced budget woulde be really bad, it would cause unemployment to skyrocket, and probably a depression."

I've read some really stupid comments, but his one ranks right up there with some of the stupidest!

I'd like to know how many households here on this board spend more than they make every year and feel that they can sustain that until retirement?

Probably about everyone, nearly everyone has a car and a home, and are seveal years wages in debt.

Without that, production would come to a standstill.

The people that I know that spend more than they make usually have to file for bankruptcy at some point, because you can't keep spending more than you make as it eventually catches up to you.

"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." - Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson also believed owning people was good for business, and it didn't hurt his sex life either.

But to owe the COMMIES??? WWHT???