Under Obama, Taxes hit a 30-year Low

sillystring

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Posts
694
Media
0
Likes
66
Points
248
Gender
Male
Didn't the recession knock out about 1/3 of individual taxpayer earnings? How is taxing less money a victory for anyone in Washington?
 

TheBestYouCan

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Posts
827
Media
203
Likes
2,291
Points
263
Location
U.S.
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Yes, Actually, Obamacare Is the Biggest Tax Increase in History - Reason.com

"On page 19 of the 36-page PDF of the CBO’s analysis of the ObamaCare law from when it was passed is a line that says “total revenues” from 2010 to 2019 and lists the number 525, which is the way people in government write $525,000,000,000 when they are trying to pass a $525,000,000,000 tax increase.

In current dollars, that makes it even on the first-four-year-basis of the Obama Treasury department the largest tax increase of the 27 pieces of legislation since 1968 that were analyzed in the paper. In 1945, at the peak of World War II, the entire federal budget was only about $92.7 billion."
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
“If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.” -Ludwig von Mises

"Therefore, since men are naturally corrupt and rapacious, the best course is to let them do whatever the fuck they want."
 

TheBestYouCan

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Posts
827
Media
203
Likes
2,291
Points
263
Location
U.S.
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
"Therefore, since men are naturally corrupt and rapacious, the best course is to let them do whatever the fuck they want."

Not the conclusion drawn by the originator of the quote, nor was the first part of your statement an assertion in said quote.

Moving along.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Not the conclusion drawn by the originator of the quote, nor was the first part of your statement an assertion in said quote.

Moving along.

Just surprised you would adopt such a dangerously short-sighted quote as a motto. But as you say . . . moving along.
 

TheBestYouCan

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Posts
827
Media
203
Likes
2,291
Points
263
Location
U.S.
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Just surprised you would adopt such a dangerously short-sighted quote as a motto. But as you say . . . moving along.

Good, that will contrast nicely with my lack of surprise to your misunderstanding of the quote and the arguments it highlights.

Back to taxes!
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,312
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Didn't the recession knock out about 1/3 of individual taxpayer earnings? How is taxing less money a victory for anyone in Washington?

For decades, it has been standard practice for the Republicans to decry the tax-and-spend Democrats. A common refrain leading up to the 2008 election was that Obama would tax us all into misery. Hence, the newsworthiness that, in fact, taxes are down.

As to your "query" re earnings being down 1/3 (with no time frame given for this assertion masquerading as a question), the Bureau of Economic Analysis provides information with regards to Gross Domestic Product and Gross Domestic Income, among other data. A quick look at the history from 2000-2012, shows growth up until the fourth quarter of 2008, with a decline through the second quarter of 2009, and then a steady upsurge with a return to pre-2009 levels by the second quarter of 2010. Since that time, GDI has remained higher than ever, increasing each quarter.

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1
 

sillystring

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Posts
694
Media
0
Likes
66
Points
248
Gender
Male
For decades, it has been standard practice for the Republicans to decry the tax-and-spend Democrats. A common refrain leading up to the 2008 election was that Obama would tax us all into misery. Hence, the newsworthiness that, in fact, taxes are down.

As to your "query" re earnings being down 1/3 (with no time frame given for this assertion masquerading as a question), the Bureau of Economic Analysis provides information with regards to Gross Domestic Product and Gross Domestic Income, among other data. A quick look at the history from 2000-2012, shows growth up until the fourth quarter of 2008, with a decline through the second quarter of 2009, and then a steady upsurge with a return to pre-2009 levels by the second quarter of 2010. Since that time, GDI has remained higher than ever, increasing each quarter.

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1

The data point for the link you posted is the 2009 tax rate. Did I really need to give you a time frame when combining the term "recession" with the question I posited?

Why are you giving me earnings increase data since the recession (of 2008 since you might think I am referring to previous ones)? The article detailed that taxation in 2009 was at a record 30 year low....of course it was...the income of taxpayers slid to the left and they fell into lower tax brackets.

I'm not decrying the taxation policies of this Administration, but this thirty year low for taxation is not a victory for anyone in Washington. Our very liberal tax code adjusted for decreased earnings.
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,789
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Yes, Actually, Obamacare Is the Biggest Tax Increase in History - Reason.com

"On page 19 of the 36-page PDF of the CBO’s analysis of the ObamaCare law from when it was passed is a line that says “total revenues” from 2010 to 2019 and lists the number 525, which is the way people in government write $525,000,000,000 when they are trying to pass a $525,000,000,000 tax increase.

In current dollars, that makes it even on the first-four-year-basis of the Obama Treasury department the largest tax increase of the 27 pieces of legislation since 1968 that were analyzed in the paper. In 1945, at the peak of World War II, the entire federal budget was only about $92.7 billion."

Sorry- this a bullshit statistical manipulation.
Taken as actual inflation adjusted dollars... its about 17th.

Further... only two groups are actually "taxed"... those who refuse to buy insurance at all... and those who have the most expensive and comprehensive plans...

SInce this is a pure copy of Romneycare in Massachusetts... that means that about 2% will pay the tax for not having insurance, and about 15% for having ultra-deluxe healthcare plans.


For those Americans who already HAVE health insurance... Obamacare with REDUCE their insurance costs, extend their benefits, and guarantee that they will not be dropped the minute the insurer has to actually shell out real cash.

So, you see... Most americans who have insurance will end up with MORE disposable income in their pocket- In Spite of the fact that the program technically raises money.


So, really... knock it off with the hysterical bulllshit.

besides, after 25 years of the GOP cutting federal revenue and increasing federal spending on wars and military and oil subsidies and such... the primary problem is that State and Federal governments are now UNDERFUNDED.

Its damn well time we RAISED some people's taxes BACK to where they used to be when the US infrastructure was the envy of the world.

y'know... back when the Middle class had a RISING standard of living?

Not the DECLINING standard of living in which GOP economic idiocy has resulted.
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
. . . your misunderstanding of the quote and the arguments it highlights.

You're right. I shouldn't let my parody quote speak for von Mises as if he were somehow anti-government.

Von Mises can speak for himself:

"Government is . . . the opposite of liberty. It is beating, imprisoning, hanging. Whatever a government does it is ultimately supported by the actions of armed constables."

"The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning. Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom."

"Government means always coercion and compulsion and is by necessity the opposite of liberty."

"Government is essentially the negation of liberty."

"Liberty is always freedom from the government."
 

TheBestYouCan

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Posts
827
Media
203
Likes
2,291
Points
263
Location
U.S.
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So, you see... Most americans who have insurance will end up with MORE disposable income in their pocket- In Spite of the fact that the program technically raises money.

So, really... knock it off with the hysterical bulllshit.

Its damn well time we RAISED some people's taxes BACK to where they used to be when the US infrastructure was the envy of the world.

y'know... back when the Middle class had a RISING standard of living?

Not the DECLINING standard of living in which GOP economic idiocy has resulted.

So where does the 525 billion come from? You are claiming that much will be raised by a measly 2% of the population?

And you do realize that no matter the tax rate, for the past 50 years the amount of tax revenue as a percentage of GDP averages about 18%. That's with a high of 20.6 % in 2000 and a low of 14.4% in 1950. Meanwhile government spending has steadily increased... it's simple. You can't spend more than you take in and expect to be prosperous forever (and that includes war spending, social spending, etc by BOTH sides).

You're right. I shouldn't let my parody quote speak for von Mises as if he were somehow anti-government.

Von Mises can speak for himself:

"Government is . . . the opposite of liberty. It is beating, imprisoning, hanging. Whatever a government does it is ultimately supported by the actions of armed constables."

"The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning. Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom."

"Government means always coercion and compulsion and is by necessity the opposite of liberty."

"Government is essentially the negation of liberty."

"Liberty is always freedom from the government."

Of course, to a great extent, Mises is anti-government to the same extent you are anti-fire when it burns down your house.

Thanks for the great quotes! :smile:
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
Of course, to a great extent, Mises is anti-government to the same extent you are anti-fire when it burns down your house.

Thanks for the great quotes! :smile:

You're right, it makes perfect sense to be anti-fire, *when* it burns down your house. But I missed von Mises making a similar qualification in his comments about government.

And you're welcome! :smile:
 

TheBestYouCan

Legendary Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Posts
827
Media
203
Likes
2,291
Points
263
Location
U.S.
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You're right, it makes perfect sense to be anti-fire, *when* it burns down your house. But I missed von Mises making a similar qualification in his comments about government.

And you're welcome! :smile:

You certainly did! A more in-depth reading of Von Mises will reveal many such qualifications! :)
 

craigsmith

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Posts
1,045
Media
0
Likes
428
Points
98
Location
Sikeston Missouri
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
My insurance premiums went up. I was paying 356$ per month on my children and 465$ for me, now I pay 789$ for my children and 613$ for me per month. My ded used to be $4000, which had to be met before the insurance would pay 80/20, now the ded is 10,000$ with a 70/30 and the 10,000 has to be met before the insurance will pay the 70 percent. This is all in network. If I do out of network the ded is 25,000. My insurance will not pay for name brand pres either only generic. How has obsmacare helped me and my family ?
 

stiff8er

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Posts
132
Media
19
Likes
202
Points
188
Location
Portland, OR
Verification
View
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
My insurance premiums went up. I was paying 356$ per month on my children and 465$ for me, now I pay 789$ for my children and 613$ for me per month. My ded used to be $4000, which had to be met before the insurance would pay 80/20, now the ded is 10,000$ with a 70/30 and the 10,000 has to be met before the insurance will pay the 70 percent. This is all in network. If I do out of network the ded is 25,000. My insurance will not pay for name brand pres either only generic. How has obsmacare helped me and my family ?

Considering that the law isn't taking effect until 2014, I'm not sure your point?
 

craigsmith

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Posts
1,045
Media
0
Likes
428
Points
98
Location
Sikeston Missouri
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Certain parts have already kicked in and I think that is why my premiums have gone up and the insurance has changed. If it changed this much just over these few changes - what is going to happen in 2014. Plus all the taxes will hit as well. it will be a MESS!
 

stiff8er

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Posts
132
Media
19
Likes
202
Points
188
Location
Portland, OR
Verification
View
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
Which parts have kicked in that your provider has confirmed has caused your premiums to go up that much. You haven't provided any evidence of correlation. You can't just assume without facts to back up your claim - no pun intended.
 

Bardox

Loved Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Posts
2,234
Media
38
Likes
551
Points
198
Location
U.S.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The rise in your insurance prices are not due to any active part of the ACA. The blame for that rise is squarely on the shoulders of your provider. If the change is too much for you go insurance shopping. See what prices other companies have for the same coverage.