What do you think of this alternative proposal for stimulus?
Would this do more to stimulate the economy? http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN2853502020090128 (I am not sure why, but ...
Would this do more to stimulate the economy?
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN2853502020090128
(I am not sure why, but some bot deleted this question)
* Cut the lowest two income tax rates for 2009 and 2010, from 15 percent to 10 percent and from 10 percent to 5 percent.
* Extend through 2010 a patch to the Alternative Minimum Tax, which was originally designed to ensure that wealthy people pay taxes, but instead would hit millions of middle-income families with higher taxes.
* Expand the ,500 first-time homebuyers tax credit for a principal residence to all homebuyers while limiting it to purchasers who can make a down payment of at least 5 percent of the purchase price.
* Provide a tax deduction for small businesses with less than 500 employees equal to 20 percent of their income.
* Offer new tax deduction for those who do not receive tax-preferred, employer-sponsored health care coverage. And provide assistance to the unemployed who do not qualify for a COBRA premium subsidy.
* Give tax exemption on unemployment benefits and extend temporary federal unemployment benefits through 2009, phasing it out through mid-2010.
* Allow companies to write off current losses against previous tax years for up to five years. Companies now can only "carry back" losses for two years. The tax break would not be available to banks and other companies receiving help from the 0 billion bailout package.
* Extend through 2009 a break for small businesses that allows them to immediately write off up certain capital expenditures. (Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky, editing by David Wiessler)
Seems to be the only logical approach. Give people more of their money.
People are set on this pig bill — whether it be party loyalty or the inability to actually read through the bill, it’s reckless.
Forget war — why you gotsta spread them thar lies?
Tax-cuts: I’m assuming you’re talking about Bush tax-cuts which generated revenue for 7 years which exceeded Clinton’s tax-hike approach?
As for state funded building — the plan above proposes 18 million jobs in 10 years. Obama’s take and spend proposes 3,000,000 in 3 years (in a good year). So really — the question is to we want to generate a greater tax-revenue through deficit-backed tax cuts and provide 18 million jobs in the long run…
Or do we want to bury the American public in debt w/ deficit-backed spending which will produce 9 million jobs over the course of those same 10 years?
Seems obvious to me. (Unless of course you benefit directly from infrastructure building?)
The current bill is the biggest pig I’ve ever seen.
Tax cuts did little last year to stimulate the economy and have less ‘bang for your buck’ than things like infrastructure spending.
"Pork pork pork said the Bill", I squeal with delight at your ideas!!!