We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Taxes
Details
Submitted by[?]: Paraplu party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2353
Description[?]:
| Lower taxes on corps=> corps can afford more jobs=> More tax revenue So it's win-win! We get more rev, and they get more jobs! |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 30
Current: 0
Proposed: 28
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:35:47, January 30, 2007 CET | From | Socialist Party of Baltusia | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | We are not a lot convinced of this thing. It will not be, perhaps, a way to earn more from part of the corporations? |
| Date | 02:03:52, January 30, 2007 CET | From |  Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | There's nothing presented in your argument that necessitates that lower taxes does in fact mean greater employment. It could just as easily be: Lower taxes on corps=> corps profit more Your second point is dependent on the fact that an expansion of the economy could offset the 2% drop in taxation. Have you really looked at what's required for that to happen? |
| Date | 03:55:26, January 30, 2007 CET | From | Paraplu party | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | "Your second point is dependent on the fact that an expansion of the economy could offset the 2% drop in taxation. Have you really looked at what's required for that to happen?" elaborate. "There's nothing presented in your argument that necessitates that lower taxes does in fact mean greater employment. It could just as easily be: Lower taxes on corps=> corps profit more" It's pretty much been proven that tax revenue and jobs go up when taxes go down. |
| Date | 21:23:10, January 30, 2007 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | Our being lower then our surrounding nations argument was much better then this. |
| Date | 02:35:41, January 31, 2007 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | "It's pretty much been proven that tax revenue and jobs go up when taxes go down." By who and where? |
| Date | 04:07:40, January 31, 2007 CET | From | Paraplu party | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | I saw it on a fox show one time, and then I looked it up, but now I lost the source, but here is an example: 2006 Tax Revenue Up and Budget Deficit Down to $248 Billion "Since the federal government fiscal year ends on September 30, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson reported the final deficit figures on Oct. 12, 2006. He was clearly pleased to report a 12% increase in tax revenue that reduced the budget deficit. He noted, "This year we saw revenues at historic levels, with annual receipts up 12% and single-day corporate and total receipts hitting all-time highs on September 15. In the past two years we've seen the highest year-over-year revenue growth in 25 years. This good news has allowed us to exceed the President's target of cutting the deficit in half while maintaining a strong and growing economy." For the full fiscal year 2006, federal spending was $2.65 trillion and federal tax revenue was $2.41 trillion. The historic average deficit is often measured as a percent of the total economy or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). For the past four decades, the average budget deficit has been 2.3% of the U.S. economy. During the past year, the economy grew to over $13 trillion, and the deficit was about 1.9% of this number. The budget improvement was a combination of higher than expected tax revenue and lower expenditures. Total revenue increased by nearly 12%, while budget expenditures rose 7.4%. These budget increases were largely for defense, emergency aid for Hurricane Katrina victims, Social Security and Medicare." This was after the president cut taxes. |
| Date | 03:22:36, February 01, 2007 CET | From | Baltusian Pantian Alliance | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | First off theres people that take fox seriously, and then theres the world beyond the special ed room. Secondly the increase in revenue for companies does not nessesarily mean more jobs in fact in most employers eyes that is counter productive to ensuring higher profits. It does however make us more of a competitor in the internation market for businesses giving us more money we just have to find out where the middle ground of attracting busineses increased revenue and loss of revenue due to cuts evens out. However since this game doesent allow us to do this I just go with if we are lower then surrounding countries however im to lazy to do that right now :) |
| Date | 04:53:21, February 01, 2007 CET | From | Txurruka/Aperribai/Mayoz's OPX | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | "--stuff said by Paraplu--" Your basic statement is that: *The US President cut taxes *Tax revenue went up *Therefore, as the two events occured near to each other on the timeline, the former caused the latter That's your reasoning? I fail to see where in the article that the tax cuts specifically caused the increase in tax revenue. All it says is that "we have more money now, despite the tax cuts". It doesn't explain where the money came from. Christ, there could've been some hugeass accounting error at the IRS. More likely, however, is that the US economy was growing and, tax cuts or not, tax revenue would've gone up regardless. In fact, it probably went up less then it could have without the cuts. "First off theres people that take fox seriously, and then theres the world beyond the special ed room." That has to be the funniest thing ever said in this Senate's long, long, long history. |
| Date | 06:54:19, February 01, 2007 CET | From | Revolutionary Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Taxes |
| Message | Thats untrue. By lowering taxes on corps it only goes to boost their profitability. Then to cover the lack of profit the difference is shifted to the people. corporate taxes should be lifted to reduce the pressure on the little people. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 46 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 54 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The influence a bill has on elections decreases over time, until it eventually is no longer relevant. This can explain shifts in your party's position to the electorate and your visibility. |
| Random quote: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes." - Winston Churchill |