A great find by Jack Liberty:
In tonight “Talking Points” segment, he argued that government spending is a bad idea to revitalize the economy because its cost will add to the deficit.
Fine so far, but he then says that Obama should push tax cuts to individuals and businesses because that wouldn’t add to the deficit.
According to Wikipedia, O’Reilly finished university, but for some reason he doesn’t understand that if government A cuts 100 million in taxes and nothing in spending, and government B doesn’t cut taxes but adds 100 million in spending, they’ll both be indebted by the same ammount.
…
I could go one with the list that we could do if we raise taxes on those who got the big cuts under Reagan and Bush.
Here’s the little secret: balanced budgets, funded infrastructure and social programs ARE FANTASTIC FOR BUSINESS.
It far offset the mild discomfort that these taxes cost the rich, despite how their howling about it.
#32, Polemics is your answer?
#36, Yeah! Dumb liberals! Lets all vote Republican!
Think outside the square.
There are more options than just Ds and Rs.
#38, Fair enough.
Finally. Someone with a pair.
Unfortunately, you aren’t thinking rationally. You are listing symptoms, not the causes. That’s like asking someone, “why do we need another air conditioner?” and getting the answer, “because John left the window open.”
Close the damned window!
The government has spent too much money!
Next question:
Why have they been allowed to do it and why are they allowed to continue doing it?
#41, Here’s the little secret: balanced budgets,
Agreed.
funded infrastructure
Agreed. Perhaps we should ask them contribute.
and social programs ARE FANTASTIC FOR BUSINESS.
Disagree. Social programs only rob the poor and make them dependent on someone else. How would you like it if your mother moved back in and started taking care of you, started making sure you made your bed, washed behind your ears, etc.?
How about spending cuts?
Lets stop being a military empire for starters.
Then lets stop giving money to the wealthy.
Then lets eliminate campaign contributions over $200 per person. Corporations and PACs can’t contribute anything, suck it.
And finally lets stop globalization. I’m tired of chinese goods on american shelves, we have been beaten at our own game.
Many posters to this article have said cut taxes to raise revenue; it happened when RR, JFK, etc did it.
Fine, if you can answer this question in anything other than a generality. At what point does more tax cuts NOT result in more revenue?
At some point cutting the tax rate will not result in more revenue unless you believe that a 0.00% tax rate will result in infinite revenue.
#14, was 1986 an economic downturn? How about 1997 when they passed a capital gains tax cut?
They actually raised taxes during the 1982 downturn. That’s what caused Newt Gingrich to label Bob Dole the tax collector for the welfare state.
Spending increases the deficit one for one. Tax cuts also increase the deficit, but not as much, if the tax cut generates some economic growth.
Perhaps instead of $100 billion you only lose $90 billion. You could then borrow the $100 billion at 4% interest, and you are up 6 billion for the first year.
If the spending is useful it might also reduce the deficit by less than $100 billion. Such cases are rare.
He knows this works better to get the economy going that make work projects or putting people on the dole.
Thus he is being pragmatic.
Okay maybe I can explain it better. What Obama wants to do amounts to giving a man a fish. That’s nice but he’s going to need another fish every day.
What O’Reilly wants amounts to teaching a man how to fish. That is a real job in the private sector after which he can make it on his own without any more government handouts.
Tax cuts stimulate the economy? I suppose that’s why the economy plunged just as Reagan’s and Bush’s terms were winding up…
Some people here have the right idea. If we had a flat tax rate of 75%, and cut it to 50%, we’d absolutely see more revenue (eventually) as the incentive to create wealth tips the balance of the risk vs reward equation.
If we were at a 1% tax rate and cut it to 0.5%, you’d have declining revenues, as nobody’s incentive to go out there and take risk, make investment, etc., would have substantially changed.
The complex reality is that the balance is not easy like the extremes. Anyone who tells you that you will always get more revenue by moving in either direction is a fraud or an idiot.
The irrefutable reality, however, is that it is the deficit and debt that are the problem. And that the previous Republican Congress and Administration passed the largest entitlement program expansion in modern history (see Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit), and have lost credibility on the being the party of fiscal responsibility. It is particularly horrid that they now are taking the very deficit problem that their party spearheaded and making the gaps it causes an attack point on the current administration.
Too bad the Democrats suck too. I’ve become a fan of term limits watching the last 12 years or so of American politics.
#52, doill,
What O’Reilly wants amounts to teaching a man how to fish. That is a real job in the private sector after which he can make it on his own without any more government handouts.
Big mistake. We already have a lot of people that know how to fish. And weld, design, hammer, craft, assemble, etc. The problem is all the jobs that disappeared to China left these trained people with no jobs. The answer is NOT to teach them to service computers or answer phones, it is to bring those jobs back.
As Obama said, we need to tax the windfall profits of those companies that shipped the jobs overseas.
#37, Loser,
You still haven’t your question. Quit pussin’ out and grow a pair.
Yes, we want to know, why do you hate America so much?
#56, There you go, changing the subject again. When confronted with facts, deflect and attack the source.
You’ve said you would do anything within your power to save your wife.
We want to know why?
#54, And that the previous Republican Congress and Administration passed the largest entitlement program expansion in modern history (see Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit), and have lost credibility on the being the party of fiscal responsibility.
Agreed.
These two parties are identical. It reminds of watching a game of dodge ball. Same game, different teams.