Obama raising taxes may hurt weak economy

[PostmodernProphet]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080907/D93228880.html


WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrat Barack Obama says he would delay rescinding President Bush's tax cuts on wealthy Americans if he becomes the next president and the economy is in a recession, suggesting such an increase would further hurt the economy.

now I want to be sure you all understand this clearly....Obama acknowledges that raising taxes may hurt the economy.....he says he will not do it it now because the economy is weak.....he wants to wait until the economy is stronger before he hurts it......

here's a clue, Barak.....how about an economic strategy that doesn't hurt the economy at all?.......

[Sitarro]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080907/D93228880.html



now I want to be sure you all understand this clearly....Obama acknowledges that raising taxes may hurt the economy.....he says he will not do it it now because the economy is weak.....he wants to wait until the economy is stronger before he hurts it......

here's a clue, Barak.....how about an economic strategy that doesn't hurt the economy at all?.......


He's a democrat, he's business challenged.

[NightTrain]

I thought he was for CHANGE?

[Yurt]

I thought he was for CHANGE?

only if the change falls in "rev" wright, ayers, obama and rezco's pocket

[theHawk]

Just like how he thinks the gas prices are A-OK. They've just risen a little too fast is all. :lame2:

[April15]

I can not see how else to pay down Bush's debts. The nation needs more income and like any business raising prices/taxes is how its done.

[Kathianne]

I can not see how else to pay down Bush's debts. The nation needs more income and like any business raising prices/taxes is how its done.

Cut spending. Starting with Depts of ED, Homeland Security, Energy.

[Mr. P]

I can not see how else to pay down Bush's debts. The nation needs more income and like any business raising prices/taxes is how its done.

Sure if yer looking for a real recession. GEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZ

[MtnBiker]

I can not see how else to pay down Bush's debts. The nation needs more income and like any business raising prices/taxes is how its done.

Economic growth will increase revenue, raising tax alone will not.

[Little-Acorn]

I can not see how else
That's right. You cannot see any other way.

That's hardly news, coming from a liberal.
:lame2:

[April15]

Cut spending. Starting with Depts of ED, Homeland Security, Energy.For all homeland security does they could just eliminate the whole department. I guess the other two also.

[MtnBiker]

But the most direct and significant kind of Federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand--to cut the fetters which hold back private spending. In the past, this could be done in part by the increased use of credit and monetary tools, but our balance of payments situation today places limits on our use of those tools for expansion. It could also be done by increasing Federal expenditures more rapidly than necessary, but such a course would soon demoralize both the Government and our economy. If Government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need or spent with maximum efficiency. I shall say more on this in a moment.

The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system; and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in ****.

I am not talking about a "quickie" or a temporary tax cut, which would be more appropriate if a recession were imminent. Nor am I talking about giving the economy a mere shot in the arm, to ease some temporary complaint. I am talking about the accumulated evidence of the last 5 years that our present tax system, developed as it was, in good part, during World War II to restrain growth, exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking.

In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the Federal Government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.

Under these circumstances, any new tax legislation--and you can understand that under the comity which exists in the United States Constitution whereby the Ways and Means Committee in the House of Representatives have the responsibility of initiating this legislation, that the details of any proposal should wait on the meeting of the Congress in January. But you can understand that under these circumstances, in general, that any new tax legislation enacted next year should meet the following three tests:

First, it should reduce net taxes by a sufficiently early date and a sufficiently large amount to do the job required. Early action could give us extra leverage, added results, and important insurance against recession. Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues--but the greatest danger is a tax cut too little or too late to be effective.

Second, the new tax bill must increase private consumption as well as investment. Consumers are still spending between 92 and 94 'percent of their after-tax income, as they have every year since ****. But that after-tax income could and should be greater, providing stronger markets for the products of American industry. When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases and profits are high.

Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. The Government has already taken major steps this year to reduce business tax liability and to stimulate the modernization, replacement, and expansion of our productive plant and equipment. We have done this through the 1962 investment tax credit and through the liberalization of depreciation allowances--two essential parts of our first step in tax revision which amounted to a 10 percent reduction in corporate income taxes worth $2.5 billion. Now we need to increase consumer demand to make these measures fully effective--demand which will make more use of existing capacity and thus increase both profits and the incentive to invest. In fact, profits after taxes would be at least 15 percent higher today if we were operating at full employment.

For all these reasons, next year's tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes, for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.

Third, the new tax bill should improve both the equity and the simplicity of our present tax system. This means the enactment of long-needed tax reforms, a broadening of the tax base and the elimination or modification of many special tax privileges. These steps are not only needed to recover lost revenue and thus make possible a larger cut in present rates; they are also tied directly to our goal of greater growth. For the present patchwork of special provisions and preferences lightens the tax load of some only at the cost of placing a heavier burden on others. It distorts economic judgments and channels an undue amount of energy into efforts to avoid tax liabilities. It makes certain types of less productive activity more profitable than other more valuable undertakings. All this inhibits our growth and efficiency, as well as considerably complicating the work of both the taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service.
.

[Yurt]

Cut spending. Starting with Depts of ED, Homeland Security, Energy.

:clap:

oh yeah. Kath, you are a teacher and it is important for folks to know this given you want the dept of ed's spending cut. why is that?

[Kathianne]

For all homeland security does they could just eliminate the whole department. I guess the other two also.

Yep, you're beginning to see the picture. It's only the beginning.

[Yurt]

For all homeland security does they could just eliminate the whole department. I guess the other two also.

what about eliminating the fund for your royal pitttty pot?

[April15]

Economic growth will increase revenue, raising tax alone will not.Economic growth comes from disposable income that is made by working people. Wages in real terms have not kept up with prices of anything.
The national debt is a load on Americas financial solvency and as such a detriment to credit ratings.

[April15]

what about eliminating the fund for your royal pitttty pot?What the hell is "my royal pitty pot".

[Kathianne]

Economic growth comes from disposable income that is made by working people. Wages in real terms have not kept up with prices of anything.
The national debt is a load on Americas financial solvency and as such a detriment to credit ratings.

Ah, but with the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae bail out, we're helping to keep those who never should have been allowed to borrow in their homes, why not double the debt on those that have been responsible? It's for the good of those others, in these 'enlightened times.'

[MtnBiker]

Wages in real terms have not kept up with prices of anything.


Especially energy costs and as much hope and change is desired, a sunny sky or windy day will not bring the price of energy down and grow the economy.

[April15]

Ah, but with the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae bail out, we're helping to keep those who never should have been allowed to borrow in their homes, why not double the debt on those that have been responsible? It's for the good of those others, in these 'enlightened times.'Let me tell you a little story about refinancing. I was going to refi and a broker came to my house and suggested I take out as much equity as I could so I would have a better leverage with the bank when the rates went up and I would not be able to pay them. I asked what he meant by leverage and he replied that the less you owe the faster foreclosure works.
I couldn't believe what he was trying to do.

[MtnBiker]

Economic growth comes from disposable income that is made by working people.

Post #12 deals with that issue.

[midcan5]

This debate is always curious to me. Ask yourself did Bush's tax reductions help the economy, an honest answer would have to be no. By economy I am assuming jobs, growth, and overall prosperity.


"Cutting taxes to shrink government doesn’t work—and that spells trouble for the conservative movement"

"Again looking at 1981 to 2005, Niskanen then asked at what level taxes neither increase nor decrease spending. The answer: about 19 percent of the GDP. In other words, taxation above that level shrinks government, and taxation below it makes government grow. Thanks to the Bush tax cuts, revenues have been well below 19 percent since 2002 (17.8 percent last year). Perhaps not surprisingly, government spending has risen under Bush."

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200606/tax-cuts


"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

[Yurt]

Let me tell you a little story about refinancing. I was going to refi and a broker came to my house and suggested I take out as much equity as I could so I would have a better leverage with the bank when the rates went up and I would not be able to pay them. I asked what he meant by leverage and he replied that the less you owe the faster foreclosure works.
I couldn't believe what he was trying to do.

he is an obama voter, what did you expect?

[April15]

Especially energy costs and as much hope and change is desired, a sunny sky or windy day will not bring the price of energy down and grow the economy.That is to true. So the question then becomes how do you raise wages to keep up with real world prices when part of those prices are interest fees on the money borrowed to keep the business working or expanding.

[Yurt]

This debate is always curious to me. Ask yourself did Bush's tax reductions help the economy, an honest answer would have to be no. By economy I am assuming jobs, growth, and overall prosperity.




:laugh2: you don't even know what debate means...moron

thanks for the laugh

[MtnBiker]

Or another question would be, how do we reduce energy costs?

[Yurt]

That is to true. So the question then becomes how do you raise wages to keep up with real world prices when part of those prices are interest fees on the money borrowed to keep the business working or expanding.

so you honestly believe that raising MW keeps prices the same?

[April15]

Post #12 deals with that issue.The article is more like a pyramid scheme than a viable solution.

[Kathianne]

Let me tell you a little story about refinancing. I was going to refi and a broker came to my house and suggested I take out as much equity as I could so I would have a better leverage with the bank when the rates went up and I would not be able to pay them. I asked what he meant by leverage and he replied that the less you owe the faster foreclosure works.
I couldn't believe what he was trying to do.

And you had a clue to what he was referring to. Imagine if your family had never owned. You want to 'buy.' You haven't 5%, much less 20% to put down. Along comes the gov't backed lender saying, save your 3%, not needed. We can finance the whole thing, matter of fact, we'll lend you enough to get new carpeting and a car. Just sign here.

Disaster. Not to mention those that were hit with 'equity' lines. Damn. Now we're to bail them out? It won't work.

[MtnBiker]

The article is more like a pyramid scheme than a viable solution.

You wouldn't agree with it? What if it was implemented?

[Missileman]

This debate is always curious to me. Ask yourself did Bush's tax reductions help the economy, an honest answer would have to be no. By economy I am assuming jobs, growth, and overall prosperity.


"Cutting taxes to shrink government doesn’t work—and that spells trouble for the conservative movement"

"Again looking at 1981 to 2005, Niskanen then asked at what level taxes neither increase nor decrease spending. The answer: about 19 percent of the GDP. In other words, taxation above that level shrinks government, and taxation below it makes government grow. Thanks to the Bush tax cuts, revenues have been well below 19 percent since 2002 (17.8 percent last year). Perhaps not surprisingly, government spending has risen under Bush."

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200606/tax-cuts


"There is no historical evidence that tax cuts spur economic growth. The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent. During this period, the general tax rate climbed as well, but it reached a plateau in 1969, and growth slowed down five years later. Almost all rich nations have higher general taxes than the U.S., and they are growing faster as well."

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

Like a true liberal, you argue that 20% of my income belongs to the government. We need to fire the whole lot of those ignorant sons-of-bitches in Congress that think I exist to fund their pet projects. Set a reasonable tax level and FORCE Washington to operate within a budget.

[April15]

Or another question would be, how do we reduce energy costs?At this time we need to bite the bullet and refer to a speech made in 1979;

Our people are losing that faith, not only in government itself but in the ability as citizens to serve as the ultimate rulers and shapers of our democracy. As a people we know our past and we are proud of it. Our progress has been part of the living history of America, even the world. We always believed that we were part of a great movement of humanity itself called democracy, involved in the search for freedom; and that belief has always strengthened us in our purpose. But just as we are losing our confidence in the future, we are also beginning to close the door on our past.

In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we’ve discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We’ve learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.

The symptoms of this crisis of the American spirit are all around us. For the first time in the history of our country a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years. Two-thirds of our people do not even vote. The productivity of American workers is actually dropping, and the willingness of Americans to save for the future has fallen below that of all other people in the Western world.

As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning.

These changes did not happen overnight. They’ve come upon us gradually over the last generation, years that were filled with shocks and tragedy.

We were sure that ours was a nation of the ballot, not the bullet, until the murders of John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. We were taught that our armies were always invincible and our causes were always just, only to suffer the agony of Vietnam. We respected the Presidency as a place of honor until the shock of Watergate.

We remember when the phrase “sound as a dollar” was an expression of absolute dependability, until ten years of inflation began to shrink our dollar and our savings. We believed that our nation’s resources were limitless until 1973 when we had to face a growing dependence on foreign oil.

These wounds are still very deep. They have never been healed.

Looking for a way out of this crisis, our people have turned to the Federal Government and found it isolated from the mainstream of our nation’s life. Washington, D.C., has become an island. The gap between our citizens and our government has never been so wide. The people are looking for honest answers, not easy answers; clear leadership, not false claims and evasiveness and politics as usual.

What you see too often in Washington and elsewhere around the country is a system of government that seems incapable of action. You see a Congress twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well-financed and powerful special interests.

You see every extreme position defended to the last vote, almost to the last breath by one unyielding group or another. You often see a balanced and a fair approach that demands sacrifice, a little sacrifice from everyone, abandoned like an orphan without support and without friends.

Often you see paralysis and stagnation and drift. You don’t like it, and neither do I. What can we do?

First of all, we must face the truth, and then we can change our course. We simply must have faith in each other, faith in our ability to govern ourselves, and faith in the future of this nation. Restoring that faith and that confidence to America is now the most important task we face. It is a true challenge of this generation of Americans.

One of the visitors to Camp David last week put it this way: “We’ve got to stop crying and start sweating, stop talking and start walking, stop cursing and start praying. The strength we need will not come from the White House, but from every house in America.”

We know the strength of America. We are strong. We can regain our unity. We can regain our confidence. We are the heirs of generations who survived threats much more powerful and awesome than those that challenge us now. Our fathers and mothers were strong men and women who shaped a new society during the Great Depression, who fought world wars and who carved out a new charter of peace for the world.

We ourselves are the same Americans who just ten years ago put a man on the moon. We are the generation that dedicated our society to the pursuit of human rights and equality. And we are the generation that will win the war on the energy problem and in that process, rebuild the unity and confidence of America.

We are at a turning point in our history. There are two paths to choose. One is a path I’ve warned about tonight, the path that leads to fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure.

All the traditions of our past, all the lessons of our heritage, all the promises of our future point to another path -- the path of common purpose and the restoration of American values. That path leads to true freedom for our nation and ourselves. We can take the first steps down that path as we begin to solve our energy problem.

Energy will be the immediate test of our ability to unite this nation, and it can also be the standard around which we rally. On the battlefield of energy we can win for our nation a new confidence, and we can seize control again of our common destiny.

The nation chose slavery over freedom! The speaker was President Carter.

[April15]

And you had a clue to what he was referring to. Imagine if your family had never owned. You want to 'buy.' You haven't 5%, much less 20% to put down. Along comes the gov't backed lender saying, save your 3%, not needed. We can finance the whole thing, matter of fact, we'll lend you enough to get new carpeting and a car. Just sign here.

Disaster. Not to mention those that were hit with 'equity' lines. Damn. Now we're to bail them out? It won't work.His pay was based on loan amount.

[April15]

You wouldn't agree with it? What if it was implemented?Some day the piper will come to get his due.

[Missileman]

At this time we need to bite the bullet and refer to a speech made in 1979;

Our people are losing that faith, not only in government itself but in the ability as citizens to serve as the ultimate rulers and shapers of our democracy. As a people we know our past and we are proud of it. Our progress has been part of the living history of America, even the world. We always believed that we were part of a great movement of humanity itself called democracy, involved in the search for freedom; and that belief has always strengthened us in our purpose. But just as we are losing our confidence in the future, we are also beginning to close the door on our past.

In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities, and our faith in God, too many of us now tend to worship self-indulgence and consumption. Human identity is no longer defined by what one does, but by what one owns. But we’ve discovered that owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning. We’ve learned that piling up material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose.

The symptoms of this crisis of the American spirit are all around us. For the first time in the history of our country a majority of our people believe that the next five years will be worse than the past five years. Two-thirds of our people do not even vote. The productivity of American workers is actually dropping, and the willingness of Americans to save for the future has fallen below that of all other people in the Western world.

As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning.

These changes did not happen overnight. They’ve come upon us gradually over the last generation, years that were filled with shocks and tragedy.

We were sure that ours was a nation of the ballot, not the bullet, until the murders of John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. We were taught that our armies were always invincible and our causes were always just, only to suffer the agony of Vietnam. We respected the Presidency as a place of honor until the shock of Watergate.

We remember when the phrase “sound as a dollar” was an expression of absolute dependability, until ten years of inflation began to shrink our dollar and our savings. We believed that our nation’s resources were limitless until 1973 when we had to face a growing dependence on foreign oil.

These wounds are still very deep. They have never been healed.

Looking for a way out of this crisis, our people have turned to the Federal Government and found it isolated from the mainstream of our nation’s life. Washington, D.C., has become an island. The gap between our citizens and our government has never been so wide. The people are looking for honest answers, not easy answers; clear leadership, not false claims and evasiveness and politics as usual.

What you see too often in Washington and elsewhere around the country is a system of government that seems incapable of action. You see a Congress twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well-financed and powerful special interests.

You see every extreme position defended to the last vote, almost to the last breath by one unyielding group or another. You often see a balanced and a fair approach that demands sacrifice, a little sacrifice from everyone, abandoned like an orphan without support and without friends.

Often you see paralysis and stagnation and drift. You don’t like it, and neither do I. What can we do?

First of all, we must face the truth, and then we can change our course. We simply must have faith in each other, faith in our ability to govern ourselves, and faith in the future of this nation. Restoring that faith and that confidence to America is now the most important task we face. It is a true challenge of this generation of Americans.

One of the visitors to Camp David last week put it this way: “We’ve got to stop crying and start sweating, stop talking and start walking, stop cursing and start praying. The strength we need will not come from the White House, but from every house in America.”

We know the strength of America. We are strong. We can regain our unity. We can regain our confidence. We are the heirs of generations who survived threats much more powerful and awesome than those that challenge us now. Our fathers and mothers were strong men and women who shaped a new society during the Great Depression, who fought world wars and who carved out a new charter of peace for the world.

We ourselves are the same Americans who just ten years ago put a man on the moon. We are the generation that dedicated our society to the pursuit of human rights and equality. And we are the generation that will win the war on the energy problem and in that process, rebuild the unity and confidence of America.

We are at a turning point in our history. There are two paths to choose. One is a path I’ve warned about tonight, the path that leads to fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure.

All the traditions of our past, all the lessons of our heritage, all the promises of our future point to another path -- the path of common purpose and the restoration of American values. That path leads to true freedom for our nation and ourselves. We can take the first steps down that path as we begin to solve our energy problem.

Energy will be the immediate test of our ability to unite this nation, and it can also be the standard around which we rally. On the battlefield of energy we can win for our nation a new confidence, and we can seize control again of our common destiny.

The nation chose slavery over freedom! The speaker was President Carter.

Economic advice from the worst economic president ever...:laugh2:

[April15]

I got concrete to finish so i will be gone for an hour or so.

[MtnBiker]

Here is a good line from the speech;


That path leads to true freedom for our nation and ourselves. We can take the first steps down that path as we begin to solve our energy problem.

To have a growing economy we will need more energy. And I will reiterate, a sunny sky or a windy day will not grow our economy.

[MtnBiker]

Some day the piper will come to get his due.

So you don't agree with President John F Kennedy? He gave that speech in 1962 at the Economic Club of New York, December 14th.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asset+Viewers/Audio+Video+Asset+Viewer.htm?guid=%7BA138FFB8-5B6A-4C6A-A8CC-70C6E4FF39DA%7D&type=Audio

He also raised government revenue.

[Little-Acorn]

"Cutting taxes to shrink government doesn’t work—

Of course it doesn't. Nobody ever said it did. At least, no conservative said so.

Cutting taxes boosts economic activity, which boosts economic growth. And those two things boost the amount of money that gets taxed... so that even at the lower tax rate, more money is collected as tax revenue.

And the last time I checked, increasing tax revenue lets liberals (in both parties) expand government.

[April15]

So you don't agree with President John F Kennedy? He gave that speech in 1962 at the Economic Club of New York, December 14th.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asset+Viewers/Audio+Video+Asset+Viewer.htm?guid=%7BA138FFB8-5B6A-4C6A-A8CC-70C6E4FF39DA%7D&type=Audio

He also raised government revenue.And the piper came for his due in the mid seventies.

[April15]

Economic advice from the worst economic president ever...:laugh2:The economic advise was tossed aside and we went on with rayguns spending spree along with dismissal of fuel mileage concerns. Well that is one that has come home to roost.

[Kathianne]

And the piper came for his due in the mid seventies.

If you are correct, which you give no links to, it wasn't because of this:


...In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the Federal Government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.

Under these circumstances, any new tax legislation--and you can understand that under the comity which exists in the United States Constitution whereby the Ways and Means Committee in the House of Representatives have the responsibility of initiating this legislation, that the details of any proposal should wait on the meeting of the Congress in January. But you can understand that under these circumstances, in general, that any new tax legislation enacted next year should meet the following three tests:

First, it should reduce net taxes by a sufficiently early date and a sufficiently large amount to do the job required. Early action could give us extra leverage, added results, and important insurance against recession. Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues--but the greatest danger is a tax cut too little or too late to be effective.

Second, the new tax bill must increase private consumption as well as investment. Consumers are still spending between 92 and 94 'percent of their after-tax income, as they have every year since 1950. But that after-tax income could and should be greater, providing stronger markets for the products of American industry. When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases and profits are high.

Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. The Government has already taken major steps this year to reduce business tax liability and to stimulate the modernization, replacement, and expansion of our productive plant and equipment. We have done this through the 1962 investment tax credit and through the liberalization of depreciation allowances--two essential parts of our first step in tax revision which amounted to a 10 percent reduction in corporate income taxes worth $2.5 billion. Now we need to increase consumer demand to make these measures fully effective--demand which will make more use of existing capacity and thus increase both profits and the incentive to invest. In fact, profits after taxes would be at least 15 percent higher today if we were operating at full employment.

For all these reasons, next year's tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes, for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.

Third, the new tax bill should improve both the equity and the simplicity of our present tax system. This means the enactment of long-needed tax reforms, a broadening of the tax base and the elimination or modification of many special tax privileges. These steps are not only needed to recover lost revenue and thus make possible a larger cut in present rates; they are also tied directly to our goal of greater growth. For the present patchwork of special provisions and preferences lightens the tax load of some only at the cost of placing a heavier burden on others. It distorts economic judgments and channels an undue amount of energy into efforts to avoid tax liabilities. It makes certain types of less productive activity more profitable than other more valuable undertakings. All this inhibits our growth and efficiency, as well as considerably complicating the work of both the taxpayer and the Internal Revenue Service.

These various exclusions and concessions have been justified in part as a means of overcoming oppressively high rates in the upper brackets--and a sharp reduction in those rates, accompanied by base-broadening, loophole-closing measures, would properly make the new rates not only lower but also more widely applicable. Surely this is more equitable on both counts.

Those are the three tests which the right kind of bill must meet and I am confident that the enactment of the right bill next year will in due course increase our gross national product by several times the amount of taxes actually cut. Profit margins will be improved and both the incentive to invest and the supply of internal funds for investment will be increased. There will be new interest in taking risks, in increasing productivity, in creating new jobs and new products for long-term economic growth.

...

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asset+Viewers/Audio+Video+Asset+Viewer.htm?guid={A138FFB8-5B6A-4C6A-A8CC-70C6E4FF39DA}&type=Audio

[April15]

Here is a good line from the speech;



To have a growing economy we will need more energy. And I will reiterate, a sunny sky or a windy day will not grow our economy.The easy solutions have been used up. Wind and solar as feeble as they may seem, can and do contribute to our energy. Hydrogen is most likely the best bet for the future of transportable energy.

[PostmodernProphet]

Economic growth comes from disposable income that is made by working people. Wages in real terms have not kept up with prices of anything.
The national debt is a load on Americas financial solvency and as such a detriment to credit ratings.
and the solution is not to raise taxes and reduce that disposable income....

[April15]

If you are correct, which you give no links to, it wasn't because of this:



http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asset+Viewers/Audio+Video+Asset+Viewer.htm?guid={A138FFB8-5B6A-4C6A-A8CC-70C6E4FF39DA}&type=Audio

Kathianne, It will take me some time to read and digest. Also your post made the age bigger than my screen so i have to slide back and forth to read. I was told once how to fix this but don't remember. Do you know what to do?

[April15]

and the solution is not to raise taxes and reduce that disposable income....
The solution in part is to reduce the national debt thereby reducing interest paid and allowing more of the tax monies to be spent on programs.

[Yurt]

The easy solutions have been used up. Wind and solar as feeble as they may seem, can and do contribute to our energy. Hydrogen is most likely the best bet for the future of transportable energy.

right, you're still blaming ronny....

[Missileman]

The solution in part is to reduce the national debt thereby reducing interest paid and allowing more of the tax monies to be spent on programs.

You send more money to Washington and it won't be used to pay down debt. They'll just come up with ways to spend more.

[Mr. P]

The solution in part is to reduce the national debt thereby reducing interest paid and allowing more of the tax monies to be spent on programs.

I'll go with reducing the national debt, but no amount of money spent on a "program" will create real growth in the economy.

[Kathianne]

Kathianne, It will take me some time to read and digest. Also your post made the age bigger than my screen so i have to slide back and forth to read. I was told once how to fix this but don't remember. Do you know what to do?

Sorry, it's not happening to me, that does happen with pics, but I don't know how to fix. Perhaps dmp or MtnBiker can help both of us?

[manu1959]

I can not see how else to pay down Bush's debts. The nation needs more income and like any business raising prices/taxes is how its done.

you could cut expenses......