Bob Corker Speaks Out Against the $150 Billion Stimulus Package

[waynesan]

I can't imagine working in the Senate and trying to deal with the trillions upon trillions of debt this country finds itself in today. Here is Sen. Corker's speech on why he will not support the Stimulus Package being considered.

http://corker.senate.gov/News/record.cfm?id=291515

“Mr. President, I know that my time is drawing to a close. And I know that I'm probably a voice in the wilderness. And I'm very discouraged about the wind that I see blowing at this time. And I'm very discouraged about a package that I think many people, if not most, in this body doubt is going to have any long-term effect on our economy.

[The Rabbi]

Geez, what a windbag. While I'm not happy with the package either he didnt make any good points or propose something better.

But he's still not Harold Ford.

[Mike.357]

I am no genius, obviously, nor a financial wizard but where is this money coming from?

Are they just going to print some up, borrow, use monoply money?

Isn't there already more going out than is coming in? Is this the same gov't who wants individuals to use restraint with borrowing and living over their heads?

Corker might be a windbag, but at least someone is coming out against this.

[Guest ACMM]

Make no mistake, this is going to pass. However I am surprised that Sen. Corker would be the one to come out against it. It's just not what I would have expected from the one of the three Republican senatorial candidates I saw as the LEAST conservative in the last election. One more attempt from the .gov to pay people to like them.

I would also like to know where this money is coming from Mike, I'm not sure how we can afford it when:

"In the current issue of Manufacturing & Technology News, Washington economist Charles McMillion observes that seven years of Bush has seen the federal debt increase by two-thirds while US household debt doubled."

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Here's the full article, it's very interesting IMO: How Bush Destroyed the Dollar

[saintsfanbrian]

This exemplifies the reason we need a fair/flat tax on products and services purchased as opposed to an income tax.

[towerclimber37]

Make no mistake, this is going to pass. However I am surprised that Sen. Corker would be the one to come out against it. It's just not what I would have expected from the one of the three Republican senatorial candidates I saw as the LEAST conservative in the last election. One more attempt from the .gov to pay people to like them.

I would also like to know where this money is coming from Mike, I'm not sure how we can afford it when:

"In the current issue of Manufacturing & Technology News, Washington economist Charles McMillion observes that seven years of Bush has seen the federal debt increase by two-thirds while US household debt doubled."

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Here's the full article, it's very interesting IMO: How Bush Destroyed the Dollar

actually ACCM, Corker is from my district and whenever he votes, I get a report on which way both he and senator Davis voted (I have it set up that way with congress.gov) Corker is pretty dang conservative!!!

Davis is more so..but in the last year I have only seen 2 or 3 bills where Corker voted differently than I did.

as for President Bush, he's been doing things that I haven't liked for awhile now. I'm pretty put out by the GOP..but I'm in no way enticed to vote for the other side..

[The Rabbi]

This exemplifies the reason we need a fair/flat tax on products and services purchased as opposed to an income tax.

Why?

It actually reveals the limitation of the fair tax. How will you use the tax code to stimulate business when there is just a sales tax?

The problem with this isn't the idea of using fiscal policy to influence the economy--that's fine. The problem is the proposal itself with its gimmicky "rebate". If they used the money to cut marginal tax rates, esp on business, that would be fine.

[saintsfanbrian]

Using a flat/fair tax allows me the individual to decide how much I want to spend in taxes. It allows the government to collect taxes from people that don't work in industries where taxes are levied against income. Drug dealers/prostitutes/illegals etc. would all be paying their fair share of taxes every time they make a purchase of goods.

Having an income tax only taxes those of us that do things by the book. Wesley Snipes-Multimillionaire skips out on paying his taxes and then uses it to help further the cause of the IRS being racist or some crap.

Giving me more money in my paycheck will stimulate me to spend more instead of hindering my ability to purchase the things I would like because I don't have any "left over" money after income tax/social security and bills/savings are paid.

[The Rabbi]

That doesn't really answer the question.

The economy runs in cycles. Part of gov't (a large part) is spent smoothing out those cycles. If you institute a tax on sales alone, how can you change it to get the desired kind of behavior you want?

[saintsfanbrian]

Well, along with the flat tax I would like to get rid of half of the government. The half that is duplicated on the state level.

[Guest db99wj]

Does anyone know how much money would be raised with a flat tax on sales just from drug dealers/prositutes/illegals?

I would guess it would be a huge amount, but I have know idea, might not.

[The Rabbi]

Well, along with the flat tax I would like to get rid of half of the government. The half that is duplicated on the state level.

I'd like to shoot every public sector union leader too.

People in hell want ice water.

And?

[dariks]

At the beginning of Bush's first term in office, wasn't the national deficit somewhere close to $0? I thought that at some point in the last 10 years the U.S. had basically paid off the national deficit. I could be wrong (and probably am).

[Guest ACMM]

At the beginning of Bush's first term in office, wasn't the national deficit somewhere close to $0? I thought that at some point in the last 10 years the U.S. had basically paid off the national deficit. I could be wrong (and probably am).

The National Debt is the total amount of money owed by the government; the federal budget deficit is the yearly amount by which spending exceeds revenue.

Clinton stopped the growth but didn't reduce the National Debt:

[Mike.357]

I think i favor the fair tax, I would much prefer a flat tax . Everybody pay the same percent of tax irregardless of how much you earn.

As to your question Rabbi, if their was a fair tax couldn't the gov't stimulate the economy by reducing tax on certain goods for an amount of time? Say reduce tax on clothing items, which is something people by regularly. Or if you were looking to boost other industries couldn't they temporarily lower taxes say on cars? Or lower taxes on guns to help us!!

I am not an economist so tell me why this wouldn't work.

[Guest dotsun]

Rabbi, I'm not particularly fond of the government using the tax code to persuade me on how to live my life. The real behavior they want to encourage is getting your vote on election day, and the tax code provides a marvelous tool for that purpose.

[The Rabbi]

I think i favor the fair tax, I would much prefer a flat tax . Everybody pay the same percent of tax irregardless of how much you earn.

As to your question Rabbi, if their was a fair tax couldn't the gov't stimulate the economy by reducing tax on certain goods for an amount of time? Say reduce tax on clothing items, which is something people by regularly. Or if you were looking to boost other industries couldn't they temporarily lower taxes say on cars? Or lower taxes on guns to help us!!

I am not an economist so tell me why this wouldn't work.

It wouldn't work because the gov't doesnt encourage necessarily one sector or another. Taxes are used as policy tools to encourage or discourage certain kinds of saving and investment. It is similar to calls to go back to the gold standard. Once you do that, you make the economy thrall to the overall gold supply.

With the fair tax you place a heavy tax burden on goods sold. I suppose you could change the rate overall but then you would run a large deficit.

Personally the more I think about Fair Tax the less I like it. There is plenty of tax cheating on sales tax now. I can't imagine what it would be like if you juiced rates to 30%.

[Mike.357]

What about a flat tax on all income?

[Guest jackdog]

If the government had the ability to change the tax on certain items they, could kill the 2A industry in a heart beat 150% on ammo 250% tax on weapons. Guys that is a BAAAAD idea.

[Guest jackdog]

Federal sales tax won't work because you will create a black market for just about everything in the market place.. Fair tax does have some good points.

[dariks]

Clinton stopped the growth but didn't reduce the National Debt:

Thanks for the info ACMM.

[Rightwinger]

The Fair Tax would be more difficult to "juice" than you think Rabbi. This would trully allow market forces to work for us. Prices (the hard rate which includes the cost of materials, production, marketing plus profit rate) for end products would go DOWN after the intial increase which allows for the "tax" to be added at the Point Of Sale. How would the grifters get caught? Easy, all products, widgets, etc, are either final assembled product from parts or a single piece product. They have an inherit cost for basic materials that the price for is market driven. Anything where a competitor can substantially (20-30%) undercut others in the market would have obviously not paid a portion of the fair tax somewhere along the line. This would be instantly obvious and competitors would drop the dime on them. As business reacts to not having to deal with the administrative costs of taxes (payroll and purchasing) they would then begin to compete at the basic levels again, marketing, quality, best business practices that would allow them to lower costs and out compete their counter parts. A 10 foot steel rod costs about the same for any mill to produce. Where they succed in the market place is being able to sell with quality, timeliness and the best price. All the mills are trying to sell their steel rods, when or if someone comes in 20 percent under everyone else, they better be able to prove they had developed a better way to do so with the same raw material, methods, and marketing! If not the only remnant of the IRS, or whatever monitoring body comes from this would deal with them.

I like the fair tax! Read the book(s). More info than I can spill out here in a post.

[The Rabbi]

If the government had the ability to change the tax on certain items they, could kill the 2A industry in a heart beat 150% on ammo 250% tax on weapons. Guys that is a BAAAAD idea.

They already have that ability. Not just the ability, they actually do that. Thus there is an 11% Federal excise tax on firearms and in this state a 10 cent tax on all ammunition (those little greenish stamps you see on ammo boxes).

[The Rabbi]

The Fair Tax would be more difficult to "juice" than you think Rabbi. This would trully allow market forces to work for us. Prices (the hard rate which includes the cost of materials, production, marketing plus profit rate) for end products would go DOWN after the intial increase which allows for the "tax" to be added at the Point Of Sale. How would the grifters get caught? Easy, all products, widgets, etc, are either final assembled product from parts or a single piece product. They have an inherit cost for basic materials that the price for is market driven. Anything where a competitor can substantially (20-30%) undercut others in the market would have obviously not paid a portion of the fair tax somewhere along the line. This would be instantly obvious and competitors would drop the dime on them. As business reacts to not having to deal with the administrative costs of taxes (payroll and purchasing) they would then begin to compete at the basic levels again, marketing, quality, best business practices that would allow them to lower costs and out compete their counter parts. A 10 foot steel rod costs about the same for any mill to produce. Where they succed in the market place is being able to sell with quality, timeliness and the best price. All the mills are trying to sell their steel rods, when or if someone comes in 20 percent under everyone else, they better be able to prove they had developed a better way to do so with the same raw material, methods, and marketing! If not the only remnant of the IRS, or whatever monitoring body comes from this would deal with them.

I like the fair tax! Read the book(s). More info than I can spill out here in a post.

I am not sure how increasing prices 30% will make them go down. Indeed, one of the talking points is that it punishes consumption.

As for compliance, there is massive tax cheating on state/local sales taxes right now. Increase the incentive for that and it will grow at phenomenal rates. Smuggled goods from Mexico and Canada sold via internet would become very popular.

How would you like the price of all guns to increase 30%? So teh Beretta Px4 I am selling now for $550 will suddenly be over $700.

I hate taxes like the next guy but I dont see Fair Tax as a viable solution. I would greatly like to see a Flat Tax, like the dynamic economies of Europe (former Com Bloc) have enacted.

[molonlabetn]

The Fair Tax has many good points... but such a thing would be best implemented by each individual state based on their particular budget.

I could certainly see a low, flat Federal sales tax in conjunction with a low, flat income tax being the most workable replacement for the bloated, progressive IRS monster.