MetaFilter posts tagged with taxes and Economy

Economic Consequences

homunculus — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 00:35:28 -0800

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush. "The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup." [Via Firedoglake.]

Is the U.S. Bankrupt?

ikkyu2 — Sun, 16 Jul 2006 20:34:26 -0800

Is the U.S. Bankrupt? [332Kb PDF] Laurence Kotlikoff, writing in this month's Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, says "yes" - to the tune of $66 trillion! [more inside]

Is this a good idea?

Smedleyman — Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:41:20 -0800

It's the stupid, economy. I'm no economist, but I'm reminded of the underpants gnomes business strategy when I read this. Obviously there is a political component (to the story) but what the $!@(# are the nuts and bolts? Why is pressuring economic engine states (California, New York) a good thing? (registration to the L.A. Times ... sry) Pretty much the same story here.

Tax Man

Postroad — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:16:54 -0800

Tax Man Bush says tax cuts stimulate the economy. Unfortunately, he's fallen more than 2.2 million jobs short of the projection made by his own economists.

Where is the federal reserve leading us?

H. Roark — Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:58:07 -0800

Monetary Policy in a Zero-Interest-Rate Economy [pdf] This report written by the Dallas Fed is amazing. Amongst other things, it outlines a plan to tax your savings as a way to continue to stimulate consumption should rates fall to zero. While opinions of the 'fed range from worship to outrage, their actions raise some serious questions. Why does this unelected group wield so much power? At what point are their actions (taxing savings) a violation of our property rights? If our economy is built on capitalism, why can we not be capitalists and embrace the opportunity presented by both boom and bust? At what point are we a command economy?

Tax Cut? You're Soaking In It!

owillis — Wed, 28 May 2003 19:10:56 -0800

Quick, Hide The Body! "...But the Bush administration chose to keep the findings out of the annual budget report for fiscal year 2004, published in February, as the White House campaigned for a tax-cut package that critics claim will expand future deficits. The study asserts that sharp tax increases, massive spending cuts or a painful mix of both are unavoidable if the US is to meet benefit promises to future generations. It estimates that closing the gap would require the equivalent of an immediate and permanent 66 per cent across-the-board income tax increase."

Bush Cited Non-Existent eport

orange swan — Mon, 24 Feb 2003 07:19:15 -0800

Bush Cited Non-Existent eport There was only one problem with President George W. Bush's claim Thursday that the nation's top economists forecast substantial economic growth if Congress passed the president's tax cut: The forecast with that conclusion doesn't exist.

the_0ne — Tue, 09 Apr 2002 10:01:22 -0800

I'm curious, isn't this exactly opposite of what we're being told? I'm always hearing the wealthy are benefitting somehow from GWB's new tax plan. I'm certainly no-where near the top 5%, and now I don't want to be.

McBain — Fri, 22 Feb 2002 09:02:57 -0800

Are we sending our $300 rebate checks right back this year? According to MIT economist and New York Times writer Paul Krugman, line 47 of the 2001 1040 will be designed to do just that. NYTimes.com so you know the drill u:metafilter p:metafilter.

phooey — Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:33:37 -0800

"Tax Clarity was created to help you decipher what the tax plans by both presidential candidates mean to you personally." Enter some information from your paycheck and find out how much you'd save using either Bush's or Gore's tax plans. via dandot.