panader0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:24 PM
Original message |
I don't understand- How can tax cuts be "permanent"? |
|
Even if they are enacted, can't they be repealed later?
|
NewJeffCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message |
|
but, it is harder to repeal them later than it would be to just let them expire. Expiration requires them to do nothing. To repeal the tax cuts means they have to go through the whole process of proposing a revision to the current tax law, debating it the various subcommittes and then voting on it in the House & Senate.
|
sweetheart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Federal chapter 7 is permanent |
Gothmog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Current tax cuts expire at different times |
|
The GOP used some accounting gimmicks to understate the costs of the current tax cuts including having these tax cuts automatically go away on certain dates. That is why the bushies want to make these tax cuts permanent. These tax cuts were passed based on projections that showed these tax cuts going away and thereby understated the costs of these tax cuts. Now that bush does not care about the budget and deficits, he is willing to make the tax cuts permanent by eliminating the phase out provisions.
|
Tace
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:28 PM
Response to Original message |
4. It's Because They Were Sold As "Only Temporary" |
|
In your basic bait and switch, the GOP wants to make those "temporary" tax cuts "permanent."
It's all bullshit.
|
emulatorloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:28 PM
Response to Original message |
|
the same place where a rich connecticut frat boy can be a "Texas Rancher"
|
Recursion
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:33 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Yes, but that would be a "tax increase" |
|
In fact, even not making them permanent will be called a "tax increase" (possibly even "the biggest tax increase in history").
|
pinto
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 05:33 PM
Response to Original message |
7. In Bush land, there's no tomorrow. |
|
(Yeah, "permanent" is rhetorical BS....)
|
Yupster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-06-06 09:07 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Bush made his tax cuts temporary |
|
with the idea that they wouldn't look like they cost so much and also he assumed at some point the congress would make them permanent or if not, it would be another chance to fight the "they want to raise your taxes," fight.
The estate tax is the silliest. The estate tax exemption had always kicked in at $ 600,000. In my opinion that was too low. I have already gotten bit by the estate tax and I'm not in the top 1 % of anything. So Bush gradually raises the estate tax excemption until the tax goes away entirely in 2010. Then it comes back at $ 1 million in 2011 and thereafter. Well that's just stupid. If that were to happen, we're going to have lots of old people killing themselves in December 2010 to save their estates hundreds of thousands of dollars.
So what's reasonable?
What about a compromise at about $ 5 million? I bet they could get a majority of both parties to go for that.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 08:49 PM
Response to Original message |