Wednesday, January 28, 2009
|
|
A Republican Stimulus Package
|
|
Posted by:
Michele Bachmann at
2:44 PM
|
Today, Congressmen Dave Camp (R-MI) and Eric Cantor (R-VA) will be offering a Republican substitute to the Democrats' trillion-dollar spending bill. So you're not confused, this substitute is different from the RSC's Economic Recovery bill I've talked about in recent posts, but still very effective in reducing tax rates for all Americans and stimulating the economy. It's certainly a better cure for what ails us than the Democrats big spending package.
Below are a few of the highlights of the Camp/Cantor substitute, and how it will impact Minnesotans and families across America .
The legislation will reduce the lowest individual tax rates from 15% to 10% and from 10% to 5%.
As a result, every taxpaying-family in America will see an immediate increase in their income with an average benefit of $500 in tax relief from the drop in the 10% bracket and $1,200 for the drop in the 15% bracket. A married couple filing jointly could save up to $3,200 a year in taxes.
And according to research done by The Heritage Foundation, 272,306 filers in Minnesota’s 6th District will benefit from the reduction in the 10% bracket and 228,926 filers will benefit from the reduction in the 15% and the 10% brackets.
The legislation allows small business to take a tax deduction equal to 20% of their income.
In fact, small businesses (those employing less than 500 individuals) employ about half of all Americans, yet they can be subject to tax rates that siphon away one-third or more of their income. This legislation will immediately free up funds for small businesses to retain and hire new employees.
In Minnesota, there are 498,606 small businesses with 500 or fewer employees and according to the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy, they represent 98.0% of the state’s employers while having created 78.4% of the state’s net new jobs from 2004 to 2005. It's vital that we lower the tax burden on these small businesses.
The legislation also includes a home-buyers credit of $7,500 for those buyers who can make a minimum down-payment of 5%.
This credit will go a long way in giving potential buyers the incentive they need to purchase homes now to help turn around our stagnant real estate market.
For more information about the plan, check out the website for the Office of the Republican Whip.
|
|
Listen Scarey you're either really stoooopid or just an idiot working for OWhaaaamie.
History and economics lesson:
Its a known fact (historically and economically) that when you reduce taxes on businesses individuals you provide opportunities for spending on a household scale and a business scale. You allow those businesses to grow when they need to such that unemployment rates go down and taxes actually do go up (tax revenue that is).
You know why? More people are employed and thus paying their federal taxes. If they are unemployed they are either 1) receiving unemployment checks (a reimbursement they paid into while employed, receiving food stamps (gov't freebie courtesy of those working)) or 2) Aren't drawing anything because they arent eligible.
Either way the gov't can't receive taxes from those people who are unemployed. Annnnnnnd, the economy suffers because those who are unemployed dont spend money. Stoooooopid!!!!
Economics 102...(101 is basic supply and demand). Stay tuned for the 103 course...however there is a test on 101 and 102 soon....pay attention.
Lowering the tax rate as opposed to providing a rebate or coupon will stimulate spending more on average. Its the equivalent of getting a pay raise, versus an unexpected bonus.
So, what is being proposed here is a real plan. Not just crap spending. All the spending being proposed is based on campaign promises.
Emanuel said that an economic crisis is a terrible opportunity to waste. And that is EXACTLY what is happening. This ENTIRE BILL IS NOTHING BUT FLAT EARMARKS!!!!!
|
|
control by those in Washington who are there due to the ignorance of Americans who voted them into office with their eyes wide shut.
Obama just swore in as the Secretary of the Treasury, was a member of the FED, who's organization was supposed to keep the economic disaster that has "committed" against the citizens of this country from happening in the first place! (and now he's going be be in charge of the Treasury Department?) The very same individual who has just committed fraud against the citizens of this country and violated many felony laws, yet was approved by the Congress to be in charge of all of this nations money supply anyway! What's wrong with this picture? The citizens of this country are in more trouble than they know!
Pelosi: Nationalization of Banks Possible
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says that the idea of nationalization, or perhaps partial nationalization, of America's leading banks is gaining currency among U.S. policymakers.
"Whatever you want to call it," Speaker Pelosi told ABC News, "If we are strengthening them (the banks), then the American people should get some of the upside of that strengthening. Some people call that nationalization."
Problems with Citigroup and with Bank of America may well require further infusions of federal funds into the banking system, according to news reports. Already, more than $300 billion has been given by the government to those two banks and to hundreds of others.
"I'm not talking about total ownership," said Pelosi. "Would we have ever have thought we would see the day when we'd be using that terminology? Nationalization of banks?"
President Barack Obama and his aides are not employing the same language but are apparently thinking along the same lines.
|
|
A report in The New York Times says that the administration is considering creating one, large "bad bank," which would nationalize the worst underperforming loans. This would take away the bad loans from the bank without actually nationalizing the institutions.
One of the reasons the Obama administration is moving cautiously on nationalization is that if the government owns the banks there would be political pressure to stop foreclosures of distressed loans.
But nationalization remains alluring for the Obama team as the move would halt the failure of large banks, allowing them to start raising money and begin lending money once again.
The concept of nationalization is quite foreign to Americans. Yet during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s the very economists who are discussing possible nationalization, among them Treasury nominee Tim Geithner and Obama adviser Lawrence Summers, told overseas governments they had to be willing to let major banks fail.
"We told the Asians that they had to be willing to let banks and companies fail," Jeffrey Garten, a professor at the Yale School of Management, and former Clinton administration official, told The New York Times.
"We warned that there was a great moral hazard if governments just bailed them out. And now, we are doing the polar opposite of our advice."
|
|
I have (female dog in heat) slapped you on this issue over and over again. Do I have to post all the data again about the Reagan years and the positive outcome of marginal tax rate reductions yet AGAIN? 25 plus years of prosperity due to supply side economics....You are demonstrably wrong on this point.
Funny thing is you have yet to answer my question in several threads lately so I will ask again.
Are you for Obama's stimulus package as it is presented today? It is an easy yes or no answer. |
|
"Are you for Obama's stimulus package as it is presented today? It is an easy yes or no answer."
Save your keystrokes DoR. S. O'Haha only uses cliche laden boilerplate, ad hominem attacks and never responses to challenges, even when it is a simple yes or no answer. It is the coward's way out. I recently discovered that if you poke S. O'Haha hard enough and often enough, Frank will respond. |
|
|
|
You are a complete embarrassment, really. Do us all a favor and get a life LOL...
Here's a quick thought about you: IRRELEVENT. |
|
|
Do you support the Stimulus as written? Yes or No? |
|
Dose of Reality writes: Wednesday, January, 28, 2009 11:02 PM
Scarlett
Do you support the Stimulus as written? Yes or No?
Answer his question. |
|
|
Can we stop giving this idiot attention? |
|
Sample Letter To E-Mail, Fax or mail to your Senators. Here is the link to get their contact info- by State
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_ cfm.cfm" target="_blank">http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_ cfm.cfm
January 29, 2009
Dear Senator _____________________,
I want you to be aware that myself and many of your constituients in the great State of ________________, are vehemently opposed to the "Economic Recovery Bill" which you are about to vote upon.
NO!
This vulgar ridiculous bill is laden with pork- nothing to stimluate jobs:
60 million dollar "Smoking Cessation" program
Millions to fund ACORN
Sodding the Mall in Washington
Fighting STDs
Funding AMTRACK
Endow The Arts
Federal Buildings
Federal CARS
Increase Welfare Benefits
$400 BILLION FOR GLOBAL WARMING RESEARCH !!!
Federal moneys promised to bailout individual states (taxation without representation).
ATV Trails?
And on and on and on.
Crazy, "social programming and engineering" and infrastructure spending, NOT CREATING JOBS!
We cannot have this frivolous spending bill bankrupt this country- and put debt on the heads of our children and grand-children.
Tax Breaks and Tax holidays make much more sense !!!
VOTE NO on the "Economic Stimulus Bill- or Economic Recovery Bill"-
And while you are at it NO "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE or LOCALISM" rules for talk radio either !
We are contacting our elected officials to let the know- that we, the American people, are fully aware of what is contained in this bill and are keeping a sharp eye on who votes for or against it.
And our displeasure will be reflected at the polls next election!
Respectfully submitted,
Name ______________________
Address____________________
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_ cfm.cfm" target="_blank">http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_ cfm.cfm
_________________________________________________Proud Member:
http://www.TeamSarah.org |
|
If the truth hit her in the fact and knocked out all of her teeth, she would still be in denial about anything relating to the GOP.
The only thing Scary can do is attack, attack, attack. She cannot debate because that requires facts. She can only call people names.
She is just not worth it guys. Maybe if we ignore her long enough she might just go away (or re-invent) herself like she does every couple of weeks. |
|
|
i think i have a way to tell if tax cuts create jobs.all we have to do is look at how many jobs were created after 8 years of the bush tax cuts and how many were created under,say bill clinton or jimmy carter.that ought to give us a rough idea right? |
|
What does Michelle think will happen if sellers know that buyers have an extra $7500 to spend?
Yep, that's right. The price of the home will go up. So we'd be giving away billions of taxpayer dollars to artificially inflate the price of homes.
Republican will have a hard time understanding this until I explain that it's the same thing that happens when the government gives student aid for college: the price of college goes up.
Michelle Bachman is a brain dead ideological extremist. |
|
What a joke! It appears the GOP's solution to every single problem facing Americans is TAX CUTS. Can they provide any additional solutions? Do they have any?
And by the way, the wealthy tend to not 'spend' their tax cuts. Instead they invest in speculative bubbles, which only help themselves and not America! So to those people that believe, as fact, that cutting taxes is the answer, they are wrong! |
|
Why are you leftists so bent out of joint? Poor Michelle and Cantor can't hurt you. The fact is tax cuts work every time they're tried. The democrats can't let that happen or acknowledge it. They have to pay back the people that funded them by the millions last fall. Let the light shine on this spending spree and WHO it's going to.
The left is committed to green, although it will cost us all so much more than even $4 per gallon gas. Nobody asks that question. I also don't want to fund ACORN but Qbama does --- by the millions.
The rich will stay rich. Liberalism always hurts the little guy. Huge inflation won't hurt the rich. But the little guy still has his satisfaction out of despising the rich and hating George Bush. How pathetic! |
|
Brent wrote, "And by the way, the wealthy tend to not 'spend' their tax cuts. Instead they invest in speculative bubbles, which only help themselves and not America! So to those people that believe, as fact, that cutting taxes is the answer, they are wrong!"
Brent, what facts are you quoting? Do you even have a job? What "speculative bubbles" are you referring to? In reality, in the grown up world the rest of us live in, it is a documented proven historical fact that dropping the tax rate revives the economy? Geez, haven't you dealt with taxes before? Time for you to go to bed; it's way past your bedtime.
|
|
Pelosi and crew put their brains on paper and do they look stupie, even to the Senate.
PresidentialBalls.com |
|
I'm all for the ships, but the Air Force fleet is aging at an unacceptable rate. We must not lose our air superiority. The AFA has details here
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2008 /October%202008/1008aircraft.aspx
on how we need to be replacing the fleet at 200 a year or continue to erode our air capabilities. The reality is both the Air Force and Navy have fallen behind in funding as their weapons programs aren't the immediate need on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the Air Force and Navy's systems are both relevant to a military that intends to project global power in the decades ahead.
Aircraft factories have a multiplying factor too. So for the infrastructure side of this let's build ships and planes.
|
|
http://minnesotaindependent.com/26721/bachmanns-statements- on-stimulus-raise-a-few-eyebrows
Michelle Bachmann again proved how unintelligent she is. She says that this new stimulus bill has enough money in it to write a check to every man, woman, and child in the world for the amount of $1,430. So I got my 50 cent calculator out and divided 787 billion (amount of dollars in the stimulus bill) by 6.8 billion (amount of people currently in the world) and I came up with $115.74. I calculated it three times to make sure I was correct. I’m not sure how Michelle learned to do simple math but she really needs to go back to elementary school to get it right. We need intelligent people who can not only do simple math but can also comprehend stimulus bills far beyond our expertise in office. |
|
|
|