Anybody that argues that the stimulous bill did not have any positive affect is also criticizing tax cuts. 40% of the stimulus bill was tax cuts.

Try tax CREDITS, Tina.

Personally, I'd love to go back to the dismal days of 4.6 unemployment and multi-billion dollar deficits.

For that you can REALLY blame Bush.

Tina S ...

tax credits are not tax cuts and they are temporary anyway ... economists will tell you that temporary tax credits / cuts are useless for long term stimulus ...

either way
THEY
DID
NOT
WORK ...

by the way what were those Tax Cuts in the Stimulus ?

I guess we shouldn't be too hard on Tina ... she believes that the government can take 1 dollar out of your left pocket and by the time it reaches your left pocket its worth $1.60 ...

Tina S, here is an answer to your comment, from the perspective of business owners:

"Vague gestures towards a few thousand dollars of tax credits to stimulate job growth don't even begin to cover the risks."

Risks, that is, brought about by the Obama Administration's starkly crony-capitalist attitude, and the most aggressive public sector take-over of private enterprise in our lifetimes, plus the enormous costs imposed by the 2000 page ObamaCare and financial reform bills, and the enormous tax increases that will hit when the Bush tax rate reductions expire on Dec. 31. And then there's the threat of "cap and trade" and God only knows what else this Congress will come up with in a lame duck session.

Romer is a well-qualified economist who knew, or should have known, that her projections were based in fantasy. She obviously wasn't having much of an adult influence on the drug-addled Obama economic team. But now the only sober one left on board is Larry S., and he's a couple of shooters away from joining the happy fizzies party already in progress.

Actually I was going to originally say that I still don't believe that the Patricians in DC are deliberately trying to wreck the country.

I think a more plausible answer is a combination of greed (the Democrats gained complete control of the government for the first time in 14 years, and they had 14 years worth of pet projects burning holes in their pockets) and cronyism (they were able to finally reward loyal constituencies and local party machines with a hefty amount of pork).

Add all that together, and it worked out to just a little over $800 billion.

Because we are in recession, they had to disguise it as "stimulus." Otherwise it would have been "giving back to the poor their fair share that the evil Republicans took away from them" or some similar BS. Bottom line is, they were going to spend that money regardless of the state of the economy.

"the stimulus bill has proven to be an extraordinary waste"

What a coincidence. So has this presidency.

Remember...there are an EXTRAORDINARY number of stupid people in this country. After all, the left has been BREEDING them for decades. What better way to insure the perpetual re-election of thugs, criminals, thieves and America hating bums than to pay people to remain uneducated, unemployed, ignorant and pregnant with endless generations of the same!

Don't forget that most of the stimulus isn't slated to be spent until just before the 2012 election, either.

OK, I have to quibble. The Monkees were the mid-sixties made-for-TV musical group with Micky Dolenz, Michael Nesmith, Peter Tork Davy Jones. Monkeys are any cercopithecoid (Old World monkey) or platyrrhine (New World monkey) primate that is not a prosimian (e.g. a lemur) or an ape.
The government should not be subsidizing research into the cocaine sniffing habits of either.

The Democrat took what they saw as a pretty easy gamble. Every other recession in the past had lasted approximately 18 months and then there was a quick turn around for the economy. They saw this as an opportunity to pass a bill full of pork, call it a stimulus bill, and when the economy roars back, they can then take the appreciative applause of an adoring public for "saving them from the horrors of the recession."

The problem was - it did not work! And now they are catching hell for it - and they are desperate enough to trying to tell all that they did not get the level of spending they really needed and the Republicans kept them from doing that.

Obama's initial request for the stimulus Bill was $750 Billion. The bill as passed was $872 Billion. And this was at a time when the Democrats had a huge majority in the House and control of 60 votes in the Senate. The bill passes without a single Republican vote in either house - but none were needed for the Dems to pass anything they wanted.

The long and short of it is they bet on the come and they lost!

C'mon the best use of the stimulus was the $2.6 million of U.S. tax dollars to teach prostitutes in China the danger of drinking on the job.

So let me get this straight. You guys are saying that the type of tax cuts that Obama gave were a waste of money and did not have a positive affect on the economy. If in the future a republican proposes short term tax cuts to stimulate the economy, will you guys speak out against it? Will you also apply your critisizm to past republicans that have implemented short term tax cuts/credits to stimulate the economy?

Has anyone surveyed the San Francisco Bay Marsh Mouse to see if they're happy with the $116 MILLION habitat restoration they got?

I'm sure it's generated THOUSANDS of permanent jobs. Maybe I'll email Nancy and ask her.

Calling that porkpie union handout an "extraordinary waste" really is an insult to extraordinary wastes.

Tina -

Do you see any difference at all between a tax credit and a tax cut?

Just wondering...

Jlawson, Tina doesn't know tax cuts from spaghetti sauce, and cares less.

Talking points are talking points.

Tina,

To be fair did not "Conservatives", notice I didn't say Republicans, criticize and downplay the Bush economic policies of the his last 2 years?

Those idiots in Washington with the R after their name carried his water and were rewarded for their dismal efforts by losing their jobs. It seems to me that Conservatives are much more likely to hold their leaders accountable than their counter parts on the other side

So let me get this straight. You guys are saying that the type of tax cuts credits that Obama gave were a waste of money and did not have a positive affect on the economy.

Yes Tina S, they were a total waste of money as well as redistributive to people who did not earn them.

jlawson: "Do you see any difference at all between a tax credit and a tax cut?"

J, you don't understand.

TinaS has been told by various libs that Tax Credits are exactly like Tax Cuts.

Of course, they're not. Especially when trying to understand how businesses, in particular, small businesses are affected by them.

Since 75% of all individuals earning more than $250,000 per year are actually small business owners, and since most jobs are created by small businesses (not large businesses like Government Motors), the difference between tax cuts and tax credits and their relative impact on the economy are huge.

But TinaS hasn't been told that by libs.

So she doesn't believe it.

In fact, she won't even respond to it.

Because she hasn't been told to.

And she's too lazy/dumb to look into herself.

Drago, are carbon credits really a tax?

"Drago, are carbon credits really a tax?"

Let's ask the businesses that will have to "pay" them.

Poor Tina. The world is so confusing. Up is down, right is wrong, stimulus doesn't, all HIS promises have an expiration date.

But hey! "It's Recovery Summer!" Look at all those MILLIONS going back to work. Look at all that tax money coming in! Happy Days are here again! Barry said so.

Tina -

If you've got to pay anything to the government (or some government authorized agency) to buy a carbon credit for your business, then it's a tax. Doesn't matter that you call it a 'credit', a tariff or 'licensing fee', a 'processing fee', an 'inspection fee' or whatever - it's a tax. It's money taken from you by the government so they'll let you keep operating.

A tax CREDIT means that you can apply such fees as they see fit to give you credit on against the total amount of taxes you owe. You'll still have to pay them, of course, and likely you won't get a credit of the full amount you paid for the thing you're getting the credit on.

A tax CUT means that you don't have to pay as much in the first place.

There is a pretty huge difference between tax cuts and tax credits. They are not interchangeable terms. For example the 900+ billion dollar stimulus plan did not contain any tax cuts in it. Obama and the media over and over talk about "tax cuts" in the stimulus plan, when there were none (they know the difference BTW). Repeating the lie over and over again does not make it true. So what is the difference? Tax cuts apply to everyone equally, and the tax is never collected. They simply starve the government of some revenue. Tax credits are more like legislating (spending) through the tax code. You pay your normal tax like everyone else, but then you get a credit back from the Treasury for fitting into some special class that the government wants to spend money to incentivize. For example if you offered a 10k tax credit for installing solar panels on your roof, you pay your normal taxes like everyone else, but then you get paid back out of the treasury pool the 10k. The government has just redistributed 10k from everyone else to you, because you did something they wanted you to do. Lets say this program costs 1 billion per year, you could also do a tax cut to the lowest marginal rate that would cost the same amount instead. As a result every tax payer would be able to keep their money instead of paying for a handful of solar panel installations. If everyone got to keep there money instead, they would spend it more efficiently and for things that they actually want and need, instead of what the government wants.

Tina, do you really not know these things?

Tina,
I work in the power industry... carbon credits are a tax

"Has anyone surveyed the San Francisco Bay Marsh Mouse to see if they're happy with the $116 MILLION habitat restoration they got? I'm sure it's generated THOUSANDS of permanent jobs. Maybe I'll email Nancy and ask her."

Yes, do that. Then come back and apologize for spreading bullshit.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/feb/13/mike-pence/no-money-stimulus-san-francisco-mice/

Tina must be a poster child for government education.

Poor gal - she can't help being stupid, but she could keep a lower profile . . .

JLawson,

A carbon credit is a permit not a tax. There are similarities between the two but they are not the same. Just because two things are similar does not make them the same.

I will concede on the point that I said tax cut when I was referring to tax credits. You got me.

Since tax credits are now considered ineffective, do you support allowing all of the tax credits that are part of the Bush Tax Cuts to expire?

Tina - If you cannot operate your business without paying for a carbon credit - how is it different from being shut down for not paying your taxes?

If carbon credits were voluntary, with no penalty for NOT having them - you might have a point. The government requiring them, mandating their purchase - it's taxation, just disguised. It's money going to the government, so they will let you stay in business.

A tax credit is not the same thing as a tax cut - it's that simple. You can call a chicken a vegetable - but the two are not the same, and it's pretty hard to mistake a chicken for a tomato or green bean.

You really don't get the difference between a cut and a credit, do you? Sure, roll back all the CREDITS and leave the CUTS - and we'll be a lot better off.

The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (Pub.L. 107-16, 115 Stat. 38, June 7, 2001), was a sweeping piece of tax legislation in the United States. It is commonly known by its abbreviation EGTRRA, often pronounced "egg-tra" or "egg-terra", and sometimes also known simply as the 2001 act (especially where the context of a discussion is clearly about taxes). The Act made significant changes in several areas of the US Internal Revenue Code, including income tax rates, estate and gift tax exclusions, and qualified and retirement plan rules. In general, the act lowered tax rates and simplified retirement and qualified plan rules such as for Individual retirement accounts, 401(k) plans, 403(b), and pension plans. The changes were so large and numerous that many books and analysis papers were published regarding the changes and how to best take advantage of them. All the 2001 tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2010 unless Congress acts to extend them.[1]

Many of the tax reductions (that means 'cut', not 'credit', Tina) in EGTRRA were designed to be phased in over a period of up to 9 years. Many of these slow phase-ins were accelerated by the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA), which removed the waiting periods for many of EGTRRA's changes.

A "CUT" means you pay less NOW, and aren't liable for it down the line.

A "CREDIT" means you pay the same amount (or more) and get to deduct part of it later. A credit may or may not be extended over multiple years.

The two aren't the same - either legislatively or in accounting practices. Even Wikipedia understands the difference.

Tax credits may be granted for various types of taxes (income tax, property tax, VAT, etc.) in recognition of taxes already paid, as a subsidy, or to encourage investment or other behaviors.

A tax cut is a reduction in taxes.

You're just pullin' my chain at this point, ain't ya? ;)

Speaking of pulling chains, I'm waiting for just one of the Obama economic team to pull a Steve Slater AND for it to make MSM headlines.

[crickets]

26. Posted by Dane

Better READ the article Dane.

Read it. Your statement is bullshit.

"So Pelosi did not put an earmark in the bill to save the mice. In fact, there's no money in the bill for mice. For this reason, we rate Pence's remark False"

False. As in bullshit.

JLawson,

I already conceded that I used the term tax credit when I was referring to tax cuts. I was pulling Drago's chain a little when I asked him if a carbon credit is really a tax cut. But that is more an argument over semantics.

The question that nobody seems willing to reply to is:

Since tax credits are now considered ineffective, do you support allowing all of the tax credits that were packaged with the Bush Tax Cuts to expire?

JLawson,

Heres something to think about. Have you ever heard conservatives criticize a republican administration tax credit (republicans have passed many tax credits)? Why is it that the same conservatives that will argue over the benefits of a repubublican adminitrations tax credits now suddenly denounce Obama's tax credits as innefective? If you can't answer this off the top of your head than most likely your criticizing Obama's policies not on merit but because of a bias against liberals. If a liberal administration passes a tax credit it has to be bad because liberals just can't do anything right. Is that the way you really want to think?