Europe Recovers as U.S. Lags

[Calabrio]

Really-Obama has lowered taxes... I am sure Merkel will lower some taxes, but they have huge debts to look at, and the EU is pretty picky on how much debt the member nations can hold. She won't be able to significantly lower taxes and stay within the EUs guidelines.

You're efforts to misrepresent and dismiss facts that are inconvenient to your spin are revolting.

Merkel, the elected Prime Minister of Germany, has introduced a Conservative' Alliance Manifesto in advance of the September elections. And her popularity ratings are hitting new highs right now.

I'm sure you'll want to waste my time asking for a link, so:

Berlin - Two months before elections, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is increasingly likely to win a second term, a poll published on Wednesday suggested, with her and her party's popularity hitting new highs.

The parties plan to cut the lowest income tax rate to 12% from 14% at present, raise the threshold for paying the top income tax rate of 42%, and reduce the degree to which a rising income leads to a progressively higher tax rate.

They are may certainly be moving in the right direction, but it's a difficult to overcome the government/welfare culture over there.

And it's simply amazing that you're trying to portray Obama as a "tax cutter."
Are you talking about the expiring $16 a week payroll tax credit that was included with the "stimulus? That's the one that falls to about half that the following year.

 

[fossten]

Really-Obama has lowered taxes... I am sure Merkel will lower some taxes, but they have huge debts to look at, and the EU is pretty picky on how much debt the member nations can hold. She won't be able to significantly lower taxes and stay within the EUs guidelines.

View attachment 46428

Obama has NOT lowered taxes. That 'tax credit' was not part of the tax code and as such does not count as a tax cut. It actually counts as income. And it won't be in effect in 2010.

 

[foxpaws]

You're making busy work for me, I find that offensive because you know what I'm saying is true. You're just looking for some excuse to dismiss or ignore it.

Let's take a look at the:

The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan - Jan 10, 2009​

In it, you'll find that they anticipated 3 to 4 million NEW JOBS by the end of 2010. Do you think we'll create another 3 to 4 million jobs next year, because we're still losing jobs?

Actually, it's Q4 of 2010. But if you think we'll create about 4 million jobs by then.... well,if you do, you're a fool.

I am sorry I guess I should have said by the end of 2010 rather than by 2011 - my error... I think that when most people when they say they will be out of debt by 2010, they mean by the end of 2009... but again - sorry.

Oh, and the study is based on looking to the end of 2010 (just so we are both on the same page Cal ) where the study states about your chart:

As Figure 1 shows, even with the large prototypical package, the
unemployment rate in 2010Q4 is predicted to be approximately 7.0%, which is well below the approximately 8.8% that would result in the absence of a plan.​

Now, is there something to be worried about since they miscalculated the current unemployment by 1 percentage point (at this point they thought we would be a 8.4 and not 9.4). Maybe that would indicate that at the end of 2010 unemployment would be at about 8% instead of their predicted 7% still too high-

It also says that job growth will be in the private sector, but that hasn't been the case either. Healthcare and government are the fastest growing segments right now.... and governments trying to take that over as we speak.

Eventually it might be - we have 3/4 of the time left before we find out. Trends do change, especially early ones.

But how many more are GOING TO FAIL, despite his intervention?
Colonial just failed. So did a number of others.
And what will happen to those banks, where do they go? The will be consumed by the other big banks, the ones that were previously bailed out.... Talk about too big too fail then.

Once again - there could have been many more banks that failed Cal... And isn't that capitalism - the bank fails and someone bigger gobbles it up. Banks are failing because of loans made more than 6 months ago - not because of decisions made during the current administration.

And how would you define your politics?
You don't have to do it in one word, but in a sentence.

I guess I don't understand this... you know I am liberal...

 

[foxpaws]

You're efforts to misrepresent and dismiss facts that are inconvenient to your spin are revolting.

Merkel, the elected Prime Minister of Germany, has introduced a Conservative' Alliance Manifesto in advance of the September elections. And her popularity ratings are hitting new highs right now.

They are may certainly be moving in the right direction, but it's a difficult to overcome the government/welfare culture over there.

Really - did you read the article Cal -

But analysts, including the head of the government's council of economic advisers, have predicted the next government may have no choice but to raise taxes.

However, Germany's widening budget deficit has led to expectations the next government might have to plug the budget gap with higher taxes.​

Merkel maybe popular - but she has made promises that there is no way that she can deliver... Taxes will increase in Germany- already they are planning on raising sales taxes, which feed into their federal coffers.

And it's simply amazing that you're trying to portray Obama as a "tax cutter."
Are you talking about the expiring $16 a week payroll tax credit that was included with the "stimulus? That's the one that falls to about half that the following year.

Again, really Cal? (and I guess I should include Foss on this) The stimulus plan is 1/3 tax cuts - From Reuter's UK...

$787 billion U.S. economic stimulus package contains about $287 billion in tax cuts, according to the latest congressional calculations on the value of the package and its impact on U.S. budget deficits.

President Barack Obama signed the bill on Tuesday, saying he wants quick action to boost the struggling economy.

 

[fossten]

Oh, well, when you take it from Reuters UK... Argumentum Mass Medium?

What Obama passed was a ONE-TIME tax CREDIT. And it counts as INCOME.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of Americans enjoying their small windfall from President Barack Obama’s “Making Work Pay” tax credit are in for an unpleasant surprise next spring.

The government is going to want some of that money back.

The tax credit is supposed to provide up to $400 to individuals and $800 to married couples as part of the massive economic recovery package enacted in February. Most workers started receiving the credit through small increases in their paychecks in the past month.

But new tax withholding tables issued by the IRS could cause millions of taxpayers to get hundreds of dollars more than they are entitled to under the credit, money that will have to be repaid at tax time.

At-risk taxpayers include a broad swath of the public: married couples in which both spouses work; workers with more than one job; retirees who have federal income taxes withheld from their pension payments and Social Security recipients with jobs that provide taxable income.

And it wasn't even a full year tax cut...

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - It took only a matter of weeks for the notoriously slow Congress to pass the $787 billion economic stimulus package. President Barack Obama signed it into law less than one month into his presidency.

So when should people hope to start seeing the benefits of tax cuts in it?

By April 1, according to the president.

“Never before in our history has a tax cut taken effect faster or gone to so many hardworking Americans,” Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address.

He said the Treasury Department has begun directing employers to reduce the amount of taxes withheld from people’s paychecks in accordance with the new law, and that in six weeks, a typical family will start taking home at least $65 more every month.

Obama says his signature “Making Work Pay” tax break will affect 95 percent of working families.

The $400 credit for individuals is to be doled out through the rest of the year. Couples are slated to get up to $800. Most workers are to see about a $13 per week increase in their take-home pay. In 2010, the credit would be about $7.70 a week, if it is spread over the entire year.

That loud enough for you to hear, this time?

By the way, you are aware that Obama has raised taxes on alcohol and tobacco, right?

 

[Calabrio]

Really - did you read the article Cal -

Yes I did. That's why I responded as I did.

Merkel maybe popular - but she has made promises that there is no way that she can deliver...

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
I mean, you wouldn't want to rush to a conclusion prematurely would you?

And to further quote from the same article:

Ms. Merkel has repeatedly ruled out the possibility of tax increases in the event she wins the election, saying the German economy wouldn't be able to deal with the burden of higher taxes when it is struggling to regain some growth momentum.

Again, really Cal?[The stimulus plan is 1/3 tax cuts

More party operative propaganda from foxpaws.
I know you worked hard to get that man elected, but you should have enough integrity to avoid lying in his defensive. Giving money back to some one who doesn't pay federal income tax isn't a tax cut. It's not even a tax credit. It's a government hand out and a redistribution of wealth.

I know, Obama presented such programs as "tax cuts" while selling that horrible stimulus, but that's not what they were. He gave a 'tax cut' to 95% of the population, despite the fact only 62% pay ANY income taxes at all.

$400 per person. $800 per couple, divided over 52 weeks. And it'll be half that amount next year.

And I think the rest of the "tax cuts" were targeted corporate tax cuts, favors to lobbyists and supporters.

But it was a nice try, foxpaws.
Nice try, in the political "truth doesn't matter, just perception" kind of way.

 

[foxpaws]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
I mean, you wouldn't want to rush to a conclusion prematurely would you?

yep - let's see, Germany's elections are next month - I'll gladly give her a year to see how she is doing....

Oh, Cal, all politicians promise to reduce taxes...

Just because you don't like Obama's tax cuts doesn't mean he didn't make them. Talk to a small business that will take a loss this year - they love the 5 year plan to amortize that loss... Or someone with a child in college - a $2500 additional tax credit... The first time home buyer's tax credit of $8000, many people have taken advantage of that, there are lots of great tax cuts that are aimed at very specific problems in the economy.

Oh, Foss - I chose UK Rueters because I thought it would be fairly unbiased - and it gave a nice list of the tax credits... I guess I could have used Huffington...

 

[fossten]

Oh, Foss - I chose UK Rueters because I thought it would be fairly unbiased - and it gave a nice list of the tax credits... I guess I could have used Huffington...

And UK Reuters was incorrect. I rest my case.

A one-time tax credit that counts as INCOME is NOT a tax cut.

 

[shagdrum]

Just because you don't like Obama's tax cuts doesn't mean he didn't make them.

No, the fact that he didn't enact them means he didn't make them. If simply calling something a tax cut makes it a tax cut then politicians can start calling anything a tax cut; even a tax increase.

You do this all the time, respond to an argument in a way that ignores the substance of the argument you are responding to. It is abundantly clear that you don't argue in good faith and can't (or won't) look beyond your own ideology and propaganda. Stop with the false premises/assumptions and attempt to respect someone's argument instead of ignoring it for what you choose to believe.

 

[fossten]

Foxpaws says: Who are you going to believe - me, or your lying eyes?