The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

October 9, 2011

Some among upper-middle class don’t pay income taxes, either

  • 4,025 number of people among the $75,000-$100,000 tax bracket who didn’t pay income taxes in 1996
  • 476,624 number of people among the same tax bracket who didn’t pay income taxes in 2009 … wait a second source

» Beyond numbers, into percentages: Now, if you break this down by percentages among tax brackets, it’s still a fairly small number — 1 percent of the total number, versus 76 percent of people who made less than $25,000. But there’s a difference here — the people making between $75,000 and $100,000 can generally afford to pay taxes, and they’re the largest-growing group of the bunch. Now, what’s the reason for all this? Well, between 1996 and 2009, a couple of presidents (whom you might know as Bush and Obama) enacted a series of changes to the tax code which effectively made it possible for more people to receive tax cuts that whittled the amount owed down to nothing. They most likely pay taxes in other ways — payroll and sales tax, for example — however. Force them to pay, you take money out of the pockets of the poor. So, what’s the balance?

Read ShortFormBlogFollow

22:45 // 3 years ago
August 7, 2011
soupsoup:

Helpful reminder from Clusterstock that Bush drove us into this ditch, and a full rundown of downgrade reporting.

Very helpful indeed.

soupsoup:

Helpful reminder from Clusterstock that Bush drove us into this ditch, and a full rundown of downgrade reporting.

Very helpful indeed.

12:07 // 3 years ago
July 26, 2011

On that New York Times chart we posted a bit ago

jvbrewer said: My problem with this graph is that it misrepresents presidential decision-making as the creation of new initiatives. President Obama has chosen to continue many of President Bush’s military and tax policies, yet this is not indicated in the graphic.

markreagan said: Also important to note is 8 years of spending compared to three years. It’s really not fair to use projections for a fair comparison. I am not a Bush lover, or Obama lover … just saying … this is data manipulation…

» SFB says: We got a handful of interesting responses to this post, and just wanted to note them. (This one too.) This chart does note some interesting things — and it does put into perspective some interesting numbers, particularly comparing the various stimulus measures and such. But you do have to be aware that there are always caveats when dealing with charts like these — especially when comparing actual numbers to things that haven’t happened yet (projections vs. history). Who knows? Maybe in a year or two Obama will come up with some insane stimulus bigger than the Bush tax cuts, throwing this chart out of whack. Maybe health care will turn out to save money in the long run. Either way, it’s good to emphasize that there are dissenting opinions to the New York Times’ chart. — Ernie @ SFB

0:14 // 3 years ago
July 25, 2011
A little perspective on this whole deficit mess
This graph, courtesy of the New York Times, has been making the rounds today, and it’s worth examining. Note that health care reform, much-maligned by the right as deficit-killer, cost less than even the most inexpensive of George W. Bush’s policies (that policy being Medicare Part D). Note also that the Bush tax cuts alone added more to the deficit than all of President Obama’s new policies combined — and that’s including projected spending over the course of a theoretical second term.  source
Follow ShortFormBlog

This graph, courtesy of the New York Times, has been making the rounds today, and it’s worth examining. Note that health care reform, much-maligned by the right as deficit-killer, cost less than even the most inexpensive of George W. Bush’s policies (that policy being Medicare Part D). Note also that the Bush tax cuts alone added more to the deficit than all of President Obama’s new policies combined — and that’s including projected spending over the course of a theoretical second term.  source

Follow ShortFormBlog

23:09 // 3 years ago
July 13, 2011
I’ve reached my limit. This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this.
President Obama • Toward the end of a budget meeting with Republicans. It’s not clear what policy he won’t yield on, but from the texture of the debate thus far, we’re guessing it’s the inclusion of revenue increases in the deal to raise the debt-ceiling.source (viafollow)
22:34 // 3 years ago
June 15, 2011

Pawlenty’s extreme tax proposal

  • 73% Pawlenty’s tax cut for the 400 richest Americans source

» During his time as Minnesota’s governor, Tim Pawlenty staked out a few moderate stances. This is understandable, as Minnesota is a moderate state. But moderation doesn’t fly in the current incantation of the Republican party (just ask Mike Castle or Bob Bennett). It especially doesn’t fly for Republicans who want to be President, and perhaps no position is as sacrosanct to the modern Republican party as that of low taxes. Still, Pawlenty’s proposed tax plan is really extreme, even by supply-sider standards; for example, he proposes that millionaires alone receive a 41% tax cut. So, while it’s understandable that T-Paw wants quell the concerts of Republican primary voters by tacking to the right, we wonder if he really needed to adopt a tax plan that, in the words of Ezra Klein, “makes George W. Bush look like Robin Hood.”

Read ShortFormBlogFollow

22:15 // 3 years ago
April 12, 2011
inothernews:

“What if we attack the deficit by getting rid of the Bush tax cuts?  OH, LOOK AT THAT!”

— Jon Stewart, offering an alternative to Paul Ryan’s proposed slashing to, among other things, Medicare and Medicaid to rein in spending, on The Daily Show

inothernews:

“What if we attack the deficit by getting rid of the Bush tax cuts?  OH, LOOK AT THAT!”

Jon Stewart, offering an alternative to Paul Ryan’s proposed slashing to, among other things, Medicare and Medicaid to rein in spending, on The Daily Show

23:28 // 3 years ago
April 6, 2011

Paul Ryan: Tax the rich? Nah, just cut services for the poor

  • 67% of Paul Ryan’s spending cuts hit poor Americans source

» But don’t worry, not everyone gets the shaft under Ryan’s proposal. Although 2/3 of the savings derived from his plan come by cutting services for poor people, his budget does firmly protect—surprise!—George Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. In all fairness, letting those cuts expire would increase tax rates for the highest earners by an appalling 4%, but it would also save the country an additional $1 trillion over the next ten years. So let’s get this straight: Ryan wants to cut services for the poor and retain absurdly-low tax rates for billionaires. Wasn’t this guy supposed to be the new face of the Republican party?

Read ShortFormBlogFollow

23:26 // 3 years ago
January 3, 2011

Poll: Start cutting the deficit by raising rich people’s taxes

  • 61% of respondents would prefer that taxes increase for the rich to help cut the deficit
  • 20% of respondents say that defense spending would be a better first choice to hack away at
  • 4% of respondents would prefer instead that we took the scalpel to Medicare source
20:45 // 3 years ago
December 17, 2010

Obama gets his tax compromise, pulls off triangulation hat trick

Alright guys. Time to rock and roll. Obama got his tax compromise, even after House Democrats got all uncomfortable about it towards the end there. The process was a little tense, but eventually the House passed it as-is, 277 to 148. Obama learned the art of triangulation well from Master Sensei Bill Clinton, and will now be in the good graces of the GOP for approximately ten minutes. Savor them, Barack, because you’ve earned them. You only had to sell out the estate tax and a number of your people in your own party to do it. But sometimes, to Get Things Done, you have to do some selling out. This is why Superdrag isn’t on the radio anymore and Weezer is still going strong. Weezer Got Things Done. source

Read ShortFormBlogFollow

0:27 // 3 years ago