T Nation

Sequestration Budget Cuts Will Deepen Recession - Both Parties Reject Stimulus

The austerity hawks get there way? Get ready for a shiitier economy if this comes to fruition.

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=9763#.US74JBxo-PM

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
The austerity hawks get there way? Get ready for a shiitier economy if this comes to fruition.

It’s ok…I’m sure someplace this is the GOP’s fault…Right?

And we can just borrow more money on the national credit card and keep things humming along while the deficit continues to grow at a ridiculous rate…Right?

This whole thing is a joke. In six months the WH and Congress will try and spin this to show they actually cut spending like they said they would. Tens of thousands will eat it up too.

Agree with Palin on this one.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
This whole thing is a joke. [/quote]

Correct.

All the “sky is falling” nonsense from the left is the product of idiots.

I mean the same god damn thing happened in the 80’s, and it was so awful no one remembers it, and congress voted overwhelmingly to keep it after the SCOTUS overturned the orginal.

History, why do people ignore it?

So there is no actual cut in any spending, just a reduction on projected spending, and 10’s of thousands of people will be out of work, planes will fall out of the sky, local budget spending will be impacted by federal budgets…

The real cause for concern is the tax and spend folks (D’s) don’t want to see this decrease in projected spending impact nothing, showing that there is room for budget spending cuts.
The spend and spend crowd (R’s) lack balls.
Just cut the Dept of Education, Energy, Commerce, EPA, and IRS. Flat tax. 1 tier or maybe 2 at most.

[quote]jp_dubya wrote:

Just cut the Dept of Education, Energy, Commerce, EPA, and IRS. Flat tax. 1 tier or maybe 2 at most. [/quote]

You’d better overturn Obamacare first, IRS is hiring because of it. Cutting the others will only result in higher state taxes is my guess.

Also, I’ve come to realize, a flat tax will fuck the poor and working class hardest. Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, seems counter intuitive to me.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, [/quote]

You would do it however you could and we would end up right back at the progressive system we have.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Also, I’ve come to realize, a flat tax will fuck the poor and working class hardest. Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, seems counter intuitive to me. [/quote]

That’s like asking how you would make a square round…it’s a flat tax, that means everyone pays 15% no matter what level of income they are at…

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, [/quote]

You would do it however you could and we would end up right back at the progressive system we have. [/quote]

That’s basically what I was getting at :slight_smile:

Time will tell because I am pretty sure the cuts will happen

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, [/quote]

You would do it however you could and we would end up right back at the progressive system we have. [/quote]

That’s basically what I was getting at :)[/quote]

I agree , but we could simplify the code , I do know it would not be good for business:)
I personally think a progressive flat tax would do society the most fairess. Everybody’s first $30,000 isn tax free then from (30 to 50 k @ %10 )50 to 100 k %20 and so on

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Also, I’ve come to realize, a flat tax will fuck the poor and working class hardest. Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, seems counter intuitive to me. [/quote]

You assume that it needs to be tiered, it doesn’t. A flat tax, by it’s own design, is “progressive”.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, [/quote]

You would do it however you could and we would end up right back at the progressive system we have. [/quote]

That’s basically what I was getting at :)[/quote]

I agree , but we could simplify the code , I do know it would not be good for business:)
I personally think a progressive flat tax would do society the most fairess. Everybody’s first $30,000 isn tax free then from (30 to 50 k @ %10 )50 to 100 k %20 and so on
[/quote]

Pitt, that’s basically how it is, unless you mean you pay that % without any deduction, is that it?

Look at page 4, the annual table. It goes 0%, 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, 35, and 39.5%. So for example, if you make $90,050 you pay 0% on the first $2,200, 10% on the next $8,925, 15% on the next $27,325, and 25% on the next $51,600.

Total earnings (2,200 + 8,925, 27,325, 51,600) = 90,050.

Tax liability (892.5 + 4098.75 + 12,900) = $17,891.25, which equals the base for the 28% bracket. That’s roughly 20% of your income.

That’s basically what you’re saying just with different steps.

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Also, I’ve come to realize, a flat tax will fuck the poor and working class hardest. Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, seems counter intuitive to me. [/quote]

You assume that it needs to be tiered, it doesn’t. A flat tax, by it’s own design, is “progressive”.
[/quote]

I was responding to another poster who mentioned a tiered flat tax, which logically speaking makes no sense.

Edit:
jp-duya’s post

Oh man those budget cuts are gonna really crush us!

"Two high-tech luxury jets that the FBI convinced Congress were needed for the fight against global terrorism have instead been used to ferry around Attorney General Eric Holder and his predecessors, as well as FBI Director Robert Mueller, according to a government report released Thursday.

Those officials – which included Holder and Mueller, as well as former Attorneys General Michael Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales – racked up nearly 700 “nonmission” trips between 2007 and 2011, at a cost of $11.4 million, according to the Government Accountability Office."

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Everybody’s first $30,000 isn tax free then from (30 to 50 k @ %10 )50 to 100 k %20 and so on
[/quote]

As was pointed out, that is how it works now.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/the-overhyped-overblown-overly-politicized-sequester-fears-20130227

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Not sure how you’d tier a flat tax, [/quote]

You would do it however you could and we would end up right back at the progressive system we have. [/quote]

That’s basically what I was getting at :)[/quote]

I agree , but we could simplify the code , I do know it would not be good for business:)
I personally think a progressive flat tax would do society the most fairess. Everybody’s first $30,000 isn tax free then from (30 to 50 k @ %10 )50 to 100 k %20 and so on
[/quote]

Pitt, that’s basically how it is, unless you mean you pay that % without any deduction, is that it?

Look at page 4, the annual table. It goes 0%, 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, 35, and 39.5%. So for example, if you make $90,050 you pay 0% on the first $2,200, 10% on the next $8,925, 15% on the next $27,325, and 25% on the next $51,600.

Total earnings (2,200 + 8,925, 27,325, 51,600) = 90,050.

Tax liability (892.5 + 4098.75 + 12,900) = $17,891.25, which equals the base for the 28% bracket. That’s roughly 20% of your income.

That’s basically what you’re saying just with different steps.

[/quote]

I might even buy keeping our present system and doing away with ((((ALL DEDUCTIONS))))Our code should be able to be understood by anyone that has to pay them . We should not have to go to bean counters to cover our asses .

They would have to change the laws gradually . In the 80s you could buy an investment property , run it in the red and still make a profit because of the way the tax laws were worded.

When they changed that law it caught Bill Clinton and Fife Symington and I am sure many more . It probably percipitated the S and L collapse