Who else noticed their paycheck is smaller?

[GatorAbe7]

So I get paid tomorrow and noticed the check is thirty bucks less than last year's. Had no idea I was among the evil rich needing to pay more. Maybe next time I'll know and go buy myself a Caddy STS.

[wgbgator]

Maybe you should have gotten your congressman to support a payroll tax holiday extention?

[QGator2414]

So I get paid tomorrow and noticed the check is thirty bucks less than last year's. Had no idea I was among the evil rich needing to pay more. Maybe next time I'll know and go buy myself a Caddy STS.

We need to know how often you get paid so our resident professors of "fairness" can determine whether you are "rich" or not... ;)

[Dreamliner]

I think we're fixing to find out that we're all rich (or used to be).

[ThePlayer]

Your paychecks have been targeted to maximize fairness.

[wgbgator]

My God, the anti-tax fanaticism has gotten to the point where even the expiration of a temporary, stimulative tax reprive (that the GOP had to be shamed into extending last year) is your paycheck being "targeted" by the money hungry government for "fairness."

[philnotfil]

My God, the anti-tax fanaticism has gotten to the point where even the expiration of a temporary, stimulative tax reprive (that the GOP had to be shamed into extending last year) is your paycheck being "targeted" by the money hungry government for "fairness."

I think has more to do with ignorance about why the paycheck is smaller than anti-tax fanaticism. (I hope)

[ChartsandGrafs]

My God, the anti-tax fanaticism...

Yes, these people have some nerve to be resistant to having their money stolen from them at the point of a gun by a rapacious, corrupt government! People should be pro-extortion!

[g8rjd]

The Social Security tax holiday has sunset and was not extended. In 2010, the wage tax was 6.2%, but in 2011 through 2012, it was reduced 2% to 4.2%. Because that holiday was not extended, the wage tax returned to 6.2%, which, with the 1.45% Medicare tax, makes the federal withholdings 7.65%, the 2010 tax year rate, rather than the 5.65% federal withholding during the holiday.

[bluelang]

Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.

[g8rjd]

Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.

True. The change appears for me on 1/11/13.

[GatorAbe7]

Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.

That's correct, I wasn't clear enough. Tomorrow's check is for a period ending on the last Friday of December. However, the next check (Jan 18th) is already posted given I work the projected hours. The Jan 18th check shows the reduction.

[Row6]

The Social Security tax holiday has sunset and was not extended. In 2010, the wage tax was 6.2%, but in 2011 through 2012, it was reduced 2% to 4.2%. Because that holiday was not extended, the wage tax returned to 6.2%, which, with the 1.45% Medicare tax, makes the federal withholdings 7.65%, the 2010 tax year rate, rather than the 5.65% federal withholding during the holiday.

To add to your correct post, employers still paid in the same 6.2% as their share of your FICA over the last 2 years, for a combined 10.4%. This had nothing to do with higher tax rates which will show up in withholding for any of those making above $450,000 who are actual "wage slaves".

[wygator]

Of course, if you're self-employed, you're paying the 15.3% along with income taxes and whatever new Obamacare requirements are kicking in.

A couple of hidden Obamacare regs that will hit the chronic sick the worst is raising the percent of income for being able to deduct health costs fro 7.5% to 10%. They are also limiting flex spending accounts to only $2,500.

Edit: additional text below

And who do you think will be paying the new 2.3% excise tax charge against the gross revenue of medical device manufacturers...yes, it's the patients.

[wgbgator]

Yes, these people have some nerve to be resistant to having their money stolen from them at the point of a gun by a rapacious, corrupt government! People should be pro-extortion!

Cool man. I see your time in exile hasnt changed you at all. Rock on.

[busigator96]

We are just going back to clintonian levels of taxes.

[busigator96]

Well the good news is the Florida minimum wage went up 12 cents an hour. Be positive! ;)

[busigator96]

Cool man. I see your time in exile hasnt changed you at all. Rock on.

I agree with charts. The sole purpose for income tax was to appease the banking cartel known as the federal reserve....to be able to make our debt service payments.

[Matthanuf06]

Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class

[supagator]

64.00 less

[wargunfan]

Well the good news is the Florida minimum wage went up 12 cents an hour. Be positive! ;)

In response prices are gonna go up at McDonalds and Burger King.

[gator1986]

In response prices are gonna go up at McDonalds and Burger King.

Milk will be 8$ a gallon.... God "fairness"? America is turning into one big giant land of soccer... You know? The sport where everyone wins!!!

[gator10010]

Well the good news is the Florida minimum wage went up 12 cents an hour. Be positive! ;)

This is not good news.

If there is one single law that keeps people poor its the minimum wage law.

[gator10010]

Maybe you should have gotten your congressman to support a payroll tax holiday extention?

Payroll tax holiday as if the government actually cut tax revenues to help the working man out.

This "payroll tax holiday" was nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

[wygator]

Payroll tax holiday as if the government actually cut tax revenues to help the working man out.

This "payroll tax holiday" was nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Accelerated the SS shortfall in ability to pay benefits.

[wargunfan]

Pay up suckers. Keep the SS checks flowing. Need to raise the SS tax to 10% employee and 15% employer. Oh, and raise the retirement age for newbies to 72. Yuk yuk yuk.

[gatordowneast]

I've always felt like we should have to cut checks to the IRS on each payday. It would make the typical taxpayer aware of how much they are actually paying and perhaps cause them to keep the DC thiefs accountable. Today, most taxpayers focus on their "take home". Those of us that are self employed are also cutting quarterly checks, which in good years can be substantial. Gets my attention.

[wygator]

I've always felt like we should have to cut checks to the IRS on each payday. It would make the typical taxpayer aware of how much they are actually paying and perhaps cause them to keep the DC thiefs accountable. Today, most taxpayers focus on their "take home". Those of us that are self employed are also cutting quarterly checks, which in good years can be substantial. Gets my attention.

I've often advocated the same thing. By making employers de facto tax collectors, most Americans are numbed to the total taxes they pay.

Govt is shifting collection costs and administration to business.

Same thing with the "employer portion" of the SS tax. That could be additional funds in the pocket of the worker. Doesn't Obama care about the worker?

[g8rjd]

Pay up suckers. Keep the SS checks flowing. Need to raise the SS tax to 10% employee and 15% employer. Oh, and raise the retirement age for newbies to 72. Yuk yuk yuk.

Um. Just to make sure this is clear, the GOP position was to end the holiday, which was part of the stimulus package, LAST YEAR.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/27/kyl-gop-may-not-support-extension-payroll-tax-holiday/

Or is Fox News not an accurate reflection of the GOP's position?

[wargunfan]

I'd love to see a consumption tax replace the income tax. At least that way you wouldn't pay taxes until you spent money and no tax returns. If we had a 15% consumption tax you could calculate the gross cost of purchases and decide whether or not to spend the money. I would exempt food and medical.

Oh, and as a bonus, all the folks who are currently paying zero income tax would start to pay their share.

[philnotfil]

I've always felt like we should have to cut checks to the IRS on each payday. It would make the typical taxpayer aware of how much they are actually paying and perhaps cause them to keep the DC thiefs accountable. Today, most taxpayers focus on their "take home". Those of us that are self employed are also cutting quarterly checks, which in good years can be substantial. Gets my attention.

Yes.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Cool man. I see your time in exile hasnt changed you at all. Rock on.

Why would it? The truth doesn't change just because you leave the room and come back.

[philnotfil]

I've often advocated the same thing. By making employers de facto tax collectors, most Americans are numbed to the total taxes they pay.

Govt is shifting collection costs and administration to business.

And yes.

[Row6]

Of course, if you're self-employed, you're paying the 15.3% along with income taxes and whatever new Obamacare requirements are kicking in.

A couple of hidden Obamacare regs that will hit the chronic sick the worst is raising the percent of income for being able to deduct health costs fro 7.5% to 10%. They are also limiting flex spending accounts to only $2,500.

Edit: additional text below

And who do you think will be paying the new 2.3% excise tax charge against the gross revenue of medical device manufacturers...yes, it's the patients.

The self-employed pay their payroll tax on 92.3% of their payroll income. Of course if suitably organized a fairly large portion of income can be dividends not subject to social security and Medicare.

[Row6]

Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class

Obama and the democrats wanted to extend the payroll tax cuts but gave it up in negotiations. Republicans never wanted them and traded it for extending the Bush tax cuts in Jan 2011.

[Row6]

I've often advocated the same thing. By making employers de facto tax collectors, most Americans are numbed to the total taxes they pay.

Govt is shifting collection costs and administration to business.

Same thing with the "employer portion" of the SS tax. That could be additional funds in the pocket of the worker. Doesn't Obama care about the worker?

Just to be clear here, for those who think everything they don't like started with Obama, employer's withholding FICA and contributing 1/2 the burden is not something new but has been part of SS and Medicare since their inception.

[Row6]

Milk will be 8$ a gallon.... God "fairness"? America is turning into one big giant land of soccer... You know? The sport where everyone wins!!!

Farm bill fix was part of the deal.

[gator1986]

Farm bill fix was part of the deal.

Nice no 8$ gallons... Either way were screwed

[QGator2414]

Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.

Depends if your company is cash or accrual basis.

[QGator2414]

I've always felt like we should have to cut checks to the IRS on each payday. It would make the typical taxpayer aware of how much they are actually paying and perhaps cause them to keep the DC thiefs accountable. Today, most taxpayers focus on their "take home". Those of us that are self employed are also cutting quarterly checks, which in good years can be substantial. Gets my attention.

This!

[gatorpa]

Accelerated the SS shortfall in ability to pay benefits.

yup

[gatorpa]

I'd love to see a consumption tax replace the income tax. At least that way you wouldn't pay taxes until you spent money and no tax returns. If we had a 15% consumption tax you could calculate the gross cost of purchases and decide whether or not to spend the money. I would exempt food and medical.

Oh, and as a bonus, all the folks who are currently paying zero income tax would start to pay their share.

I wish

[viningsgator]

Can you envision the Zombie Obama voter going into their HR dept this week wondering why their paycheck has shrunk? Poor HR dept.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Can you envision the Zombie Obama voter going into their HR dept this week wondering why their paycheck has shrunk? Poor HR dept.

Yeah, but that's nothing another cutesie "hope and change" propaganda slogan won't fix. The American people have a history of eating that kind of crap up ("the war to end all wars!", "making the world safe for democracy (lol)!", "remember the (false-flagged) Maine!").

[GatorFanCF]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluelang
Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.
Depends if your company is cash or accrual basis.


Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=253198&page=2#ixzz2GyIhWvec

Incorrect on both counts - the IRS doesn't care if the wages earned were from August 2012, if the check date is 1/4/13 it is 2013 earned income and taxed accordingly.

[GatorAbe7]

Can you envision the Zombie Obama voter going into their HR dept this week wondering why their paycheck has shrunk? Poor HR dept.

I'm not even kidding when I say I see an Obama poster and several Obama screensavers in the cubicles of our payroll/etc department on the fourth floor when I go up there to take new employees for their bank routing info. Nice people, but clearly only voting democrat because that's who scares them to vote that way. All Obama has to do is mention the new deduction being given back in their tax refund and I guarantee because most want to believe him they'll blindly latch on to that one comment without caring to check once their refund come in.

[g8rjd]

Can you envision the Zombie Obama voter going into their HR dept this week wondering why their paycheck has shrunk? Poor HR dept.

Considering that the GOP wanted to sunset the Social Security holiday that was part of the stimulus LAST YEAR, the Obama voter got a year more of 2% less in Social Security withholdings than the GOP wanted.

[Row6]

Can you envision the Zombie Obama voter going into their HR dept this week wondering why their paycheck has shrunk? Poor HR dept.

No offense, but it seems like the zombie Romney voters on TH are the most confused by this event.

[Row6]

Considering that the GOP wanted to sunset the Social Security holiday that was part of the stimulus LAST YEAR, the Obama voter got a year more of 2% less in Social Security withholdings than the GOP wanted.

Hey man, quit bothering us with facts. We're all congratulating ourselves on how much smarter we are than those dummies who only care about their tax cuts.

[neisgator]

Cool man. I see your time in exile hasnt changed you at all. Rock on.

Well, his post is spot on.

You can't refute a word of it.

[AndyGator]

Mine was $300 less. Twice monthly sucks.

[QGator2414]

Mine was $300 less. Twice monthly sucks.

Careful.

The libs will tell you that you can afford it because you make plenty...

[mastoidbone]

Paid once per month---SS will take $180 a month from what i calculated, CA new income tax will take $500 more per month, loss of deductions and new rates $700 a month.

As stated on another thread--- i have adjusted---less cable/internet service, less hours to housekeeper, less landscaping, 1 lost vacation, 1 extra week of work.....at end of day I will save the same and put same away for kid education----but i have decided to SPEND less---i think the persons who will feel it the most are my household employees and the place i would have vacationed at.

But easier for me to spend less then save less----my priority is disciplined investments and child's future. In the end if i take home x amount less, i spend x amount less. I wont borrow to fund that activity and I wont save less.

I also reduced my charitable plans.

This is what and will happen when taxes go up---and it should. And taxes should go up with DECREASED govt spending----dems only got half of it right.
Obama always talks about reducing GROWTH of govt, but never about CUTTING it.

In fact he just raised govt pay---to a people ALREADY making more then private sector for same job according to CBO.

[ufhomerj31]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluelang
Any paycheck you get tomorrow should - in any normal company - be your last paycheck of 2012. So whatever tax implications occur should be in your next check.
Depends if your company is cash or accrual basis.


Read more: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=253198&page=2#ixzz2GyIhWvec

Incorrect on both counts - the IRS doesn't care if the wages earned were from August 2012, if the check date is 1/4/13 it is 2013 earned income and taxed accordingly.

good. I was worried that my paycheck would be smaller in 2 weeks

[rpmGator]

Republicans would not support a continuation of the 2% payroll tax roll back, so perhaps some of you need to stop blaming the other side for what we do.

There shoud be no blame at all as the good news is, that 2% goes into SS and medicare, so the fund will now increase its revenue.

[northgagator]

I've always felt like we should have to cut checks to the IRS on each payday. It would make the typical taxpayer aware of how much they are actually paying and perhaps cause them to keep the DC thiefs accountable. Today, most taxpayers focus on their "take home". Those of us that are self employed are also cutting quarterly checks, which in good years can be substantial. Gets my attention.

Could be a matter if trust between the gov't and the people. Too bad we put too much trust in the gov't and the gov't not enough trust in us.

[cocodrilo]

We are just going back to clintonian levels of taxes.

I hope we're not going back to Clintonian levels of murder and rape.

[vaxcardinal]

Paid once per month---SS will take $180 a month from what i calculated, CA new income tax will take $500 more per month, loss of deductions and new rates $700 a month.

As stated on another thread--- i have adjusted---less cable/internet service, less hours to housekeeper, less landscaping, 1 lost vacation, 1 extra week of work.....at end of day I will save the same and put same away for kid education----but i have decided to SPEND less---i think the persons who will feel it the most are my household employees and the place i would have vacationed at.

But easier for me to spend less then save less----my priority is disciplined investments and child's future. In the end if i take home x amount less, i spend x amount less. I wont borrow to fund that activity and I wont save less.

I also reduced my charitable plans.

This is what and will happen when taxes go up---and it should. And taxes should go up with DECREASED govt spending----dems only got half of it right.
Obama always talks about reducing GROWTH of govt, but never about CUTTING it.

In fact he just raised govt pay---to a people ALREADY making more then private sector for same job according to CBO.

He didnt raise government pay. Federal pay has been frozen for the past 2 years. He put into the budget last year a .5% pay raise which was to go into effect on Jan 1st but part of the last minute deals last october (or somewhere around there) the raise was pushed back to March. The raise is now been proposed to be pushed back till Oct. And the CBO doesnt necessarily compare apples to apples but thats a different story.

[g8rjd]

I hope we're not going back to Clintonian levels of murder and rape.

You know that crime rates, including violent crime rates dropped during the Clinton administration, right? :huh:

While I think there are factors other than who was President that caused that to happen, I don't think your attempt at a sound-byte is particularly wise.

[ChartsandGrafs]

You know that crime rates, including violent crime rates dropped during the Clinton administration, right? :huh:

While I think there are factors other than who was President that caused that to happen, I don't think your attempt at a sound-byte is particularly wise.

Something just flew over your head, bud.

[g8rjd]

Something just flew over your head, bud.

Perhaps. Every once in a rare while that happens. ;)

I considered that he was implying that Clinton tax levels were murder and rape (thus the reference to sound-byte), but that seemed kinda silly too...so I went with the literal. :)

[fredsanford]

Perhaps. Every once in a rare while that happens. ;)

I considered that he was implying that Clinton tax levels were murder and rape (thus the reference to sound-byte), but that seemed kinda silly too...so I went with the literal. :)

Coco was referring to the baseless Vince Foster/Paula Jones type stuff.

[viningsgator]

Coco was referring to the baseless Vince Foster/Paula Jones type stuff.

Just like the dress of Lewinski. Some people are naive. Dude is and will always be a perv

[fredsanford]

Just like the dress of Lewinski. Some people are naive. Dude is and will always be a perv

Perv does not equal killer/rapist.

[viningsgator]

Perv does not equal killer/rapist.

It's always good to know that such an esteemed man is the featured speaker at the Dem convention. Wonder if he will ask Nobama to spend at his levels? We could only wish.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Perv does not equal killer/rapist.

In Clinton's case it does.

How many people did Clinton kill in Kosovo?

[texigator]

We are just going back to clintonian levels of taxes.


Those taxes were in place during a boom period and it didn't hurt people like it will now. Also the boom collapsed the last year of Clinton's second term, if you recall.

[g8orbill]

I find it amusing (and sad) how libs will defend a guy like Clinton who was a p*ssyhound and who denigrated women and demonize a real family man like Romney because he was successful in business

[DSRrg]

I think we're fixing to find out that we're all rich (or used to be).

Dream, if you get a check at all you are rich. Bottom line...

[g8rjd]

Those taxes were in place during a boom period and it didn't hurt people like it will now. Also the boom collapsed the last year of Clinton's second term, if you recall.

Funny, I recall rounds of 4 tax cuts during the Bush administration under the reasoning that we had a surplus.

[Matthanuf06]

Funny, I recall rounds of 4 tax cuts during the Bush administration under the reasoning that we had a surplus.

Clinton was POTUS during the tech revolution. Hugo Chavez couldn't have even screwed that up.

[PSGator66]

Obama broke his promise? The only time he lies is when his lips are moving.

[g8rjd]

Clinton was POTUS during the tech revolution. Hugo Chavez couldn't have even screwed that up.

Thank you for your completely irrelevant response.

[Matthanuf06]

Thank you for your completely irrelevant response.

How is the whole reason why our budget was the way it was irrelevant?

[fredsanford]

It's always good to know that such an esteemed man is the featured speaker at the Dem convention. Wonder if he will ask Nobama to spend at his levels? We could only wish.

Is that why the pubs kept the drunk driving former coke hound GWB from speaking at the RNC?

[108]

McDonald's sells hamburgers for $1. For two weeks, they decide to sell them two for $1 (or $.50 each). When the sale is over after two weeks and prices revert back to $1... has McDonald's raised their prices?


No.


A temporary sale is simply that. Temporary.

[108]

My God, the anti-tax fanaticism has gotten to the point where even the expiration of a temporary, stimulative tax reprive (that the GOP had to be shamed into extending last year) is your paycheck being "targeted" by the money hungry government for "fairness."

the irony here about the "anti-tax fanatics" who oppose letting temporary tax cuts expires, is that they are no different than the "free-loaders" who have their hand out and don't want to give it up

the lack of revenue from a tax cut that isn't offset is no different than spending...it all goes to the nations CC if we are in the red

2 sides of the same coin

[DaveFla]

Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class

Only but ONE promise broken by an administration that can easily be judged and THE most corrupt this country has ever seen (or ever WILL see)...

[DaveFla]

You know that crime rates, including violent crime rates dropped during the Clinton administration, right? :huh:

While I think there are factors other than who was President that caused that to happen, I don't think your attempt at a sound-byte is particularly wise.

I think he meant within the White House itself.

[DaveFla]

Funny, I recall rounds of 4 tax cuts during the Bush administration under the reasoning that we had a surplus.

Then you recalled wrong...

[g8rjd]

Then you recalled wrong...

Hmmm...let's take a look back then...

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-274334.html)

Bush: Bigger surplus makes tax cuts okay (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/e98/e1686.htm)

Bush Defends Size of Surplus and Tax Cuts (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/22/us/bush-defends-size-of-surplus-and-tax-cuts.html)

''The federal budget will have the second largest surplus in history,'' Mr. Bush told an audience of several thousand people at Harry S. Truman High School, referring to figures for the current fiscal year to be released on Wednesday by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

The report, Mr. Bush said, will ''show in plain terms that we have fully funded and will be able to fund our nation's priorities and that we have enough money to preserve and protect Social Security'' while safeguarding Medicare and reducing the federal debt. He said this was possible despite a sluggish economy, in part because his administration ''took exactly the right action, at the right time, by pushing the largest tax cut in a generation.''

Bush Defends Tax Cut as Democratic Snipe (http://articles.cnn.com/2001-08-26/politics/bush.surplus_1_budget-surplus-federal-budget-medicare-trust-funds?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS)

President Bush defended his administration's tax cut as "the right thing to do" Sunday as Democrats argued it eroded the federal budget surplus and threatens Social Security and Medicare.

During a tour of a Pittsburgh steel plant, Bush said little he has not said before. But his new defense of the tax cut suggested that Democratic attacks, including a recent critical television ad, are getting the attention of the White House.

"You see, there's a big debate in Washington about the money in Washington. Sometimes folks up there lose sight about whose money it is," Bush said. "That money's not the government's money. It's the people's money. And we did the right thing with sharing that money with the people who pay the bills."

For weeks, Democrats have charged that Bush will have to dip into the Social Security and Medicare trust funds because the economy is slowing and because the budget surplus is shrinking -- a fact they blame on the Bush tax cut.

The White House estimates this year's budget surplus will be $158 billion, down from an earlier estimate of $281 billion. Nearly all of that is money devoted to Social Security.

It was only after those shrinking surpluses became deficits and it was clear that the economic cooldown was becoming a recession that the "new" justification for the same policy was "economic stimulus."

Bush Presses for Tax Cut (http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=121888)

Changing Rationale, But the Plan Remains the Same

Even as Bush remains firmly committed to the tax cut, his rationale for enacting it has changed. During the campaign, when economic projections were rosier, Bush said a reduction in the basic income tax rates would be a way of giving citizens money that was rightfully theirs.

“The surplus is the people’s money,” Bush said frequently during his stump speeches.

But after Election Day — and even before the outcome of the presidential race was fully resolved — Bush and his running mate, Dick Cheney, had begun saying that a tax cut would be necessary to stoke an economy showing signs of cooling, a position they continue to play up.

“I think it’s really important for members of the Congress to understand that the tax relief plan I put forward is an integral part of economic recovery,” Bush said Wednesday.

So if you are suggesting that my recollection is incorrect because the same policy was justified by what I said and, when that justification couldn't be maintained anymore, a new one, then I admit all rounds were not under the justification of returning the surplus. But if you are suggesting, as the post I responded to was, that we were running deficits and the economy began receeding before Bush's presidency, then, no, my recollection is correct.

[Matthanuf06]

Hmmm...let's take a look back then...

Bush: Surplus Justifies Tax Cut (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-274334.html)

Bush: Bigger surplus makes tax cuts okay (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/e98/e1686.htm)

Bush Defends Size of Surplus and Tax Cuts (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/22/us/bush-defends-size-of-surplus-and-tax-cuts.html)

Bush Defends Tax Cut as Democratic Snipe (http://articles.cnn.com/2001-08-26/politics/bush.surplus_1_budget-surplus-federal-budget-medicare-trust-funds?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS)

It was only after those shrinking surpluses became deficits and it was clear that the economic cooldown was becoming a recession that the "new" justification for the same policy was "economic stimulus."

Bush Presses for Tax Cut (http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=121888)

So if you are suggesting that my recollection is incorrect because the same policy was justified by what I said and, when that justification couldn't be maintained anymore, a new one, then I admit all rounds were not under the justification of returning the surplus. But if you are suggesting, as the post I responded to was, that we were running deficits and the economy began receeding before Bush's presidency, then, no, my recollection is correct.

I'm not sure of the point though. If you have a good economy, don't need spending, with a surplus, then tax cutting is exactly what a Keynesian would do. It's almost definitional: return money back to the people when you don't need it.

Deficit problems are different because raising taxes can be harmful to an economy as well as encroach on the liberty of its citizens. The Keynesian dream would be to spend more in such an environment, but a good chunk of the reasons why we are struggling is due to government expenditures. The typical Keynesian model breaks down when this occurs.

[philnotfil]

I'm not sure of the point though. If you have a good economy, don't need spending, with a surplus, then tax cutting is exactly what a Keynesian would do. It's almost definitional: return money back to the people when you don't need it.

Deficit problems are different because raising taxes can be harmful to an economy as well as encroach on the liberty of its citizens. The Keynesian dream would be to spend more in such an environment, but a good chunk of the reasons why we are struggling is due to government expenditures. The typical Keynesian model breaks down when this occurs.

Paying down the debt would be the first step while the economy is good. If the debt is paid off and the economy is strong, then a Keynesian would lower taxes.

[gatorpa]

I find it amusing (and sad) how libs will defend a guy like Clinton who was a p*ssyhound and who denigrated women and demonize a real family man like Romney because he was successful in business

Disgusting actually, worse that so many just eat it up.

[gatorpa]

Is that why the pubs kept the drunk driving former coke hound GWB from speaking at the RNC?

Or the Dems nominating a drinking cokehead twice for POTUS, or electing a drunk driving Alcoholic who never repented to the Senate from Mass for how many terms? Not to mention one how was likely guilty of vehicular manslaughter.