The tax holiday proposal by Louie Gohmert

[thrustbucket]

I keep hearing about this and think it's worthy of some discussion.

In a nutshell, Rep. Louie Gohmert (Texas) is proposing to use the $350 billion left over from the allocated bailout money to use instead of taxing Americans temporarily. Some say

January and February could be tax free. Others say just drastically cut taxes for the whole year.

It's a pretty weird, yet appealing idea, on the surface. None of us will pay taxes for approximately two months. Now that would be a stimulus package! Or would it?

I guess the big question is - Is that 350 billion better spent bailing out more corporations or better spent giving us all some relief for a spell?

Here are a few links on this, if you are hearing this for the first time:

Link (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29700)
Link (http://gohmert.house.gov/Article.aspx?NewsID=1355)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvbKRTVXxQM

Of course, even if most Americans wanted to do this, I doubt Congress would pass it. Just like most Americans didn't want the bailout, Congress knows what's better for us than we do....

[mykevermin]

It's not money we have to give to anyone in the first place. I don't know that I have an opinion either way, though, since it's going to be spent. It'll go to the wealthy anyway, so why bother?

Who needs a billion? Trump? CBS? Microsoft? or myke?

[thrustbucket]

Yeah I don't really have an opinion on this either.

I just find the whole thing interesting. Given the choice between a tax holiday or greasing the wheels of money lenders. There are so many pros and cons for each it's almost too overwhelming to calculate.

[dmaul1114]

I'm not sure it would help a ton. People are nervous and would probably be more likely than in the past to just save the money they have left from the tax holiday vs. blowing it all and injecting it into the economy.

I also don't know that it would do a lot to save the failing banks, mortgage companies, auto makers etc.

But I'm not an economist and don't know much about it so maybe I'm 100% off on that.

[mykevermin]

It amounts to $1166 and change for each and every American citizen (at a base rate of 300 million, and not discounting those in prison or children).

Is that enough to matter to you individually?

[cochesecochese]

No.

[thrustbucket]

It amounts to $1166 and change for each and every American citizen (at a base rate of 300 million, and not discounting those in prison or children).

Is that enough to matter to you individually?

Well isn't that just if you pay out the 350 billion?

The proposal would be harder to calculate because everyone pays different amounts of tax each paycheck.

[KingBroly]

When you say Americans didn't want the bailout, I must ask which bailout?

The 750 billion? The 350 billion? The 500 billion? Or one of the other ones that just keep coming because the other ones aren't working.

[Koggit]

If anything we're gonna need to raise taxes...

State & fed entities alike are all facing huge deficits and budget constraints, even necessary investments in our future like transportation are seeing massive cuts, we're shooting our future selves in the foot right now because we're trying to squeeze each penny too tightly, our priorities are a little fucked (end the fucking war you jackasses) but in essence there just isn't enough money right now to secure our future.

My school, one of the top universities in the world, is facing budget cuts of up to 25% -- $600m. That's on top of the massive losses our endowment took due to shitty market conditions (and we were lucky, relative to endowments like Harvards that lost ~30%). This is at a time when we're overenrolled by 1,000 students, after one of the most competitive application cycles in decades. Tuition will go up a lot next year, financial aid will be more scarce, and there will be fewer seats and fewer faculty, fewer research teams -- fewer patents being filed by Americans, fewer scholars being trained to instruct our future generations, fewer engineers being trained for our America companies, fewer business executives to start the next Microsoft, fewer lawyers, fewer doctors (we're the #1 med school)... our fucked up country thinks you solve economic problems by taking money away from the government, when they don't even have enough funding to keep our universities open to inquisitive minds?

We don't need a tax holiday. We need higher taxes. We need less consumerism and more investment in our future. This is a tough time, we've got to weather it and persevere, the future will be better if we take the hit now, worse if we squander what resources we have on maintaining this consumer whore McDonald's lifestyle.

Fuck Americans.

[cochesecochese]

What school do you go to? University of Washington?

[Koggit]

Yeah

[lilboo]

Now what's the other idea? I haven't kept up with shit lately, sorry--(<3 Animal Crossing)-- but I heard that this was one of the ideas and the other is a year long tax reduction that we would see in our paychecks.

Personally, I much rather take home some extra money each and every week. (Well 2 weeks since I'm paid bi-weekly). Even if my increase was $50 a week ($100 paycheck), that would help ME out alot.

Getting a lump sum is nice, but, it's scary because it can go so fast. You can easily just use that big chunk of change to.. pay off a credit card. Or put that towards your vacation. Something.

More money showing up in my paycheck gives ME more disposable money. If you're a couple and you'r able to bring home an additional income of like.. $500 a month.. doesn't that make it easier for them to lease a new car? Be able to make payments on their mortgage?

[GuilewasNK]

Neal Boortz said this on the radio the other day. He also said the problem is that the people will see how much the government jacks us for, which is why it may not happen.

[fatherofcaitlyn]

Now what's the other idea? I haven't kept up with shit lately, sorry--(<3 Animal Crossing)-- but I heard that this was one of the ideas and the other is a year long tax reduction that we would see in our paychecks.

Personally, I much rather take home some extra money each and every week. (Well 2 weeks since I'm paid bi-weekly). Even if my increase was $50 a week ($100 paycheck), that would help ME out alot.

Getting a lump sum is nice, but, it's scary because it can go so fast. You can easily just use that big chunk of change to.. pay off a credit card. Or put that towards your vacation. Something.

More money showing up in my paycheck gives ME more disposable money. If you're a couple and you'r able to bring home an additional income of like.. $500 a month.. doesn't that make it easier for them to lease a new car? Be able to make payments on their mortgage?

Yes, but we didn't donate enough to campaigns to rate another bailout.

A reduction on taxes doesn't help an unemployed person. There is going to be a lot more of them before there is a lot fewer of them.

A lump sum would be wasted on things like food, electric bills and rent or mortgage instead of parked into borderline insolvent banks.

What the government needs right now is for people to save until it hurts. We need people to eat ramen even if they can afford steak. We need people to set the thermostat to 40. Better yet, we need families to move into their SUVs. This holiday season we need to exchange US bonds, not consumer goods.

[thrustbucket]

When you say Americans didn't want the bailout, I must ask which bailout?

The 750 billion? The 350 billion? The 500 billion? Or one of the other ones that just keep coming because the other ones aren't working.

The 700 billion, I read somewhere, was opposed by more than 90% of of people polled. But, of course, still passed. Government of the people my ass.

Koggit, as much as I've been agreeing with you lately, I could never agree to what you are saying. I could never agree that higher taxes was a good idea for a number of reasons; but most importantly raising taxes to help fix the governments size/spending problem is, in essence, bailing them out and telling them the behavior that got us here is acceptable. The first answers are audit, audit, audit. By private entities. The government operates like a corporation with a blank check because we let them be one.

We need to start treating government more like a snotty nosed spoiled kid. Because it really is. When the kid throws a tantrum that, even after he has more toys than any other kid on the block, he still doesn't have everything he wants, you don't start giving in. You teach him how to make more of the toys he has and/or sell them and get new ones.

[dmaul1114]

A lump sum would be wasted on things like food, electric bills and rent or mortgage instead of parked into borderline insolvent banks.


And HDTVs. I remember reading an article after the stimulus checks last year showing a spike in flat screen TV sales. :D

[Dr Mario Kart]

There isnt a problem with the size of government, nor is there a problem with the amounts they are spending, unless you mean they arent spending enough.

The real problem is HOW you spend it. The money needs to be invested, and I dont mean in the stock market. Invested in the country. Infrastructure, health care, education. These are things which are paid back many times over.

Now borrowing and deficit spending is bad, which is one of the reasons why we've kicked conservatives out recently. No one is advocating a blank check. We want balanced budgets, and we had them when taxes were higher.

Not only do we need to let the Bush tax cuts expire, we need to roll back the REAGAN tax cuts. The top tax rate needs to go back to at least 70% where it served us well in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and early 80's, where we had sustained and STABLE growth, not crazy growth leading into a bubble and burst - such is the case every time we've dropped income taxes since its advent in 1913.

[dmaul1114]

I'd agree with DMK moslty, though I'm not sure the highest tax bracket needs to go back up that much.

The real key is for Obama to keep his word of reviewing the budget with a scalpel, scrapping ineffective programs and finding ways to make the ones that do work work better and more efficiently.

And DMK is spot on that the spending really needs to be focused on things like infrastructure, education (reforms are needed more than just spending though), etc. that pay off going forward.