Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
NCB....thats an interesting way to pose the question. It sounds like a Republican push poll question.
What is likely is that the Dems will not introduce any bills to make all of the Bush tax cuts permanent(they are currently set to expire in 2010), but offer an alternative that will include some of the Bush tax cuts and refocus others more on the middle class (those in your range of the $50-80,000 single/$150-$200,000 couple) AND at the same time have a less draconian long term fiscal impact.
The CBO projected several years ago that implemeting the full Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 is unsustainable without drastic cuts in discretionary spending - an estimated loss of revenue of over $1.5 trillion between 2001 and 2010.
BTW, the proposed cuts for the very top tax bracket (ie...the "rich") havent even been applied yet..they were planned to be phased in slowly in the outyears (2006-2010) so that they wouldnt impact the budget deficit during his term.
|
Thanks for answering the question. Everyone seems to be ducking and dodging. Why, I dont know.....
I think one of the problems a lot of liberals have when it comes to fiscal policy is that they tend to think of the tax revenue pie as a fixed entity. As the tax cuts have proven, that is not the case at all.
Also, you stated that the cuts are unsustainable. However, you seem to rather sacrifice tax cuts for wealth redistribution. I guess I really shouldnt be surprised, but I do at least appreciate that brute honesty. I tend not to see that among liberals when it comes to this issue and I appreciate your honesty. We'll just agree to disagree