Where were you motherfuckers when the CBO said that the tax cuts would cause a

[Javier]

huge deficit?  WHERE?!  We could have avoided a whole lot of fucking problems, if more people were outspoken about it.  But now, people are crying all over the place about what the CBO reported. 

[virtuoso]

From what I understand the tax cuts are mostly not aimed at the lower class and middle class, true or false?

Tax receipts are going to be far less because of a drop in income

The deficit continues to widen because the federal reserve continues to rampantly print money

Unemployment has exploded by millions

The economy is falling apart, banks have been given trillions of future tax payer dollars, so obviously the deficit is going to rise hugely.

You are a bit late to be sounding off about this now, the horse has already bolted

[Javier]

I'm not late at all.  The libertarian crowd was very fucking quiet during the Bush tax cuts, now you see them questioning the CBO left and right.  Where were they during the Bush Tax Cuts? 

[virtuoso]

You haven't answered my question, so I will ask again, those tax cuts were mostly not aimed at middle class and lower class right? so if that's the case, then no, it's not surprising there been no welcome improvements as a result of that. In fact I will bet my bottom dollar, that taxes have risen and income has fallen during the last 7 years.

[Javier]

It doesn't matter who they were aimed at, the point is that the CBO made a report saying that it was going to cause a huge deficit.  Nobody questioned them, but now people are wah wah ing all over the place because the CBO said that the health care law is going to save money. 

[Javier]

And also, the reason California is in such a mess is because of Prop 78 which created a cap on Property taxes.  We've been fucked over so hard because of that shit, but of course not a word from people that think taxes are the devil's work. 

[virtuoso]

You are marginalising issues instead of looking at the bigger issues, the glass steagalaz act, the emergence of the derivatives market, the casino banks deliberately destroying the very thing they have built it in order to profit further and yet you are blaming it on a property tax cap now? I don't think you will find many people that supported that tax cuts brought in under George Bush because they were not tax cuts that would benefit most people. So therefore I am confused about the purpose of your original post, since the implication seemed to be that tax cuts are somehow bad? The tax cuts have not worked because they were designed to not benefit the majority and yet you are suggesting they were welcomed when I would suggest from what I have read, that most people did not welcome them because they were just another sweetheart crony deal.

[Javier]

It really isn't up for discussion, Prop 78 is the main reason California is where it is today.  

[the ghost]

It really isn't up for discussion, Prop 78 is the main reason California is where it is today.  

No the simple fact is that California spends more than it takes in.  Everything else is just a cause to that effect.  So just as much as no increased property taxes is a cause, so is increases in spending.  And property tax increases have been sidestepped by Mello Roos taxes. 

[virtuoso]

A property tax cap is not a tax cut anyway, so the title of this thread is even more baffling.

[Javier]

A property tax cap is not a tax cut anyway, so the title of this thread is even more baffling.

I was adding something else to my point. 

[Javier]

It really isn't up for discussion, Prop 78 is the main reason California is where it is today.  

No the simple fact is that California spends more than it takes in.  Everything else is just a cause to that effect.  So just as much as no increased property taxes is a cause, so is increases in spending.  And property tax increases have been sidestepped by Mello Roos taxes. 

And guess why the "takes in" part of the equation is lacking?  Because of Prop 78. 

[the ghost]

It really isn't up for discussion, Prop 78 is the main reason California is where it is today.  

No the simple fact is that California spends more than it takes in.  Everything else is just a cause to that effect.  So just as much as no increased property taxes is a cause, so is increases in spending.  And property tax increases have been sidestepped by Mello Roos taxes. 

And guess why the "takes in" part of the equation is lacking?  Because of Prop 78. 

I may be wrong but are you referring to prop 13?  And that is just one of many reasons the budget is fucked.  I'm not sure how you can single out one event.  Every dollar spend has the same effect.

[you gon always be my latin queen bitch]

people spoke up about this....but as usual the gov't dont listen....the gov't dont care and its a business..simple as that

[Javier]

It really isn't up for discussion, Prop 78 is the main reason California is where it is today.  

No the simple fact is that California spends more than it takes in.  Everything else is just a cause to that effect.  So just as much as no increased property taxes is a cause, so is increases in spending.  And property tax increases have been sidestepped by Mello Roos taxes. 

And guess why the "takes in" part of the equation is lacking?  Because of Prop 78. 

I may be wrong but are you referring to prop 13?  And that is just one of many reasons the budget is fucked.  I'm not sure how you can single out one event.  Every dollar spend has the same effect.

Yeah, sorry about that it was passed in 1978 that's why I got confused.  Prop 13 also needed the state congress to pass any raise in taxes to have a 2/3rd vote.  Recently, it was changed in 2000 but that still has caused a lot of problems.  It's the root of the problem.  Why should any program that needs government funding should suffer because of the taxpayers revolt in the 70s?