It 'possible that the nanny state supporters never considered the basic concept that the government has no money of its own, the government has what it takes hard work Americans, and that the amount taken from the rich, the middle class and upper middle class , ie
"Final Net" continues to increase as a percentage of the total charge paid.
The amount of the expropriation and redistribution of dangerously large quantities, severely limits the richnesscreation for the general welfare, while rewarding, among others, dependence on long-term.
DATA ON VS exam discounts. Tax cuts
Since the government has no money of their own, these discounts can only come from what has already collected. Why a budget deficit already existing rebates should be returned on loan with a consequent increase in the deficit. This action does nothing to create wealth and jobs. It recycles the money, but do not create wealth.
In fairness,a certain portion of the reimbursement money will go to those who paid. Unfortunately, Democrats will almost certainly achieve their purposes and give much to those who pay no income taxes, including eliminating all taxes on wages.
This means that do not pay income tax for current operating expenses of the country and beyond who are not paying for the control of social security they receive in retirement, despite the fact that this fund will soon go into deficit.
They alsopay the enormous cost of health insurance, the end use.
Millions of people who receive this massive welfare program generosity obtain a cash refund not only huge, income generated through the Tax Credit. Now, with the recovery plan, beneficiaries will have to work even harder for other "hard-earned money.
This practice Marxist already out of control, only on stilts.
There will be another element unfair by not returning something to those who paydollar amount is higher and higher percentage amount of taxes.
As measured by the Senate, people earning $ 75,000 or more will have their discount reduced with increasing income. Those above that, who really pay through the nose receive nothing.
The nanny state demands his pound of flesh at harvest, but when its time to repay those who deny heavy lifting.
Reducing taxes does nothing for the taxpayers, they reduce future payments
Inthe first phase of the 2001 tax cuts, half year end the $ 600 rebate checks were sent. Costs will not increase. The fourth quarter saw a spending rate of 7% but the annual growth rate (annualized been slow to 1.6%) while capital expenditure fell by 23%.
The economy has been weak throughout 2002.
In 2003, the tax cuts came on the individual rates, capital gains and dividends. It simply means that more than they earn in the private sector for investment and employment remainscreation.
Nanny-state current, these supporters of the reduced fee "payments", as if they were something given to taxpayers, rather than what they are, a reduction in future payments.
If a dealer sells you a piece of bread on Monday of $ 1.50 and the same product is priced at $ 1.25 on Tuesday, he "give" the buyer $ 0.25? No, not taxes.
Tax cuts are no different.
In the six quarters before these payments reduced the GDP grew at a rate of 1.7% after taxcuts, GDP grew by 4.1%. Before the tax cuts, investments declined by 13 consecutive quarters, after the cuts, increasing investment for 13 consecutive quarters.
In the six quarters before the tax cuts, the S & P fell 18% after the cuts, the next six quarters have seen an increase of 32%.
JOBS
In the six quarters prior to the cuts, job losses were 267,000. In the six quarters after the cuts have created 307,000 new jobs. Because the process has accelerated, rising employment rosemore than 8 million in the last census and are now in their 51 months in a row, one of the longest periods of consecutive job creation in U.S. history.
The ups and downs of employment growth, economic factors and business cycles occur with or without government action. However, the slow and we had negative after the correction, but before the tax cut, compared to investment and job growth that followed the tax cuts seem to dispel any doubt that stimulates growth and realityjobs.
The same trend occurred Kennedy tax cuts, the largest in the nation's history, and tax cuts of Reagan. reductions Kennedy gave us the longest peacetime expansion in history until the Reagan cuts have exceeded those of Kennedy.
If George Bush and the Republican Congress to control spending that Congress has very strict in the 1990's, we would enjoy substantial surpluses now.
The redistribution of income from middle class and those slightly above andfewer hands. We must stop electing those who live the religion of victimization and to elect those who insist on the persistence and productivity and the fruits of their labor, not the reward of the work of others.