Buftex Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Democrats get everything they want, Republicans get nothing, so the Democrats can win both halves of Congress and the White House in '12 and fix all the damage the Republicans have cause the past four years. From what I have read, Obamas grand plan would have cut $3 spending for every $1 collected in new taxes. I don't know how anyone can claim the Republicans are serious about wanting to balance things. Obama may have his problems, but the Republican party is a friggin' mess...
1billsfan Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) From what I have read, Obamas grand plan would have cut $3 spending for every $1 collected in new taxes. I don't know how anyone can claim the Republicans are serious about wanting to balance things. Obama may have his problems, but the Republican party is a friggin' mess... ...Obamacare, stimulus, tripling the debt... Balance things out? "Everything would be fine if we just got those darn corporate jet taxes from those mean and greedy rich people!" Delusional much. Eat our peas? America has been forced to eat nothing but peas for the last two and a half years since they either don't have jobs or are making a lot less than they once were because you and your policies suck. It's a proven fact now. He sucks. Anyone who wants to follow Obama and thinks we should take any advice or direction from him is completely wacked. Edited July 12, 2011 by 1billsfan
/dev/null Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 From what I have read, Obamas grand plan would have cut $3 spending for every $1 collected in new taxes. I don't know how anyone can claim the Republicans are serious about wanting to balance things. Obama may have his problems, but the Republican party is a friggin' mess... Read the fine print. It's more like $1 of tax increases now for every $3 of tax increases phased in over time. Enough time for politicians to find a way around having to actually implement the cuts
GG Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Read the fine print. It's more like $1 of tax increases now for every $3 of tax increases phased in over time. Enough time for politicians to find a way around having to actually implement the cuts That is if you actually raise those "additional" taxes. Nothing like hoping that the wealthiest class will simply sit by and pony up another $1 trillion without serious effects on the economy. Meanwhile as the economy double dips, unemployment moves to 9.5% and we're loading up on the peas.
Buftex Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) ...Obamacare, stimulus, tripling the debt... Balance things out? "Everything would be fine if we just got those darn corporate jet taxes from those mean and greedy rich people!" Delusional much. Eat our peas? America has been forced to eat nothing but peas for the last two and a half years since they either don't have jobs or are making a lot less than they once were because you and your policies suck. It's a proven fact now. He sucks. Anyone who wants to follow Obama and thinks we should take any advice or direction from him is completely wacked. Yes, the corporate jet tax was the key to the whole thing! Funny you bring that up, because it only further illustrates how set the Republican party is, they are backing themselves into a corner, and very little of it has to do with what is best for the country. No, better to go along, waiting for all these "job creators" to invest back into the American economy...or buy an extra sweater for the chilly fall... Edited July 12, 2011 by Buftex
Wacka Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Dems have no memory whatsoever. Remember the yacht tax? It decimated the yacht building industry for years. Same thing will happen to all the engineers, mechanics, etc in the private jet industry. But those rich are so greedy.
GG Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Yes, the corporate jet tax was the key to the whole thing! Funny you bring that up, because it only further illustrates how set the Republican party is, they are backing themselves into a corner, and very little of it has to do with what is best for the country. No, better to go along, waiting for all these "job creators" to invest back into the American economy...or buy an extra sweater for the chilly fall... One would figure that after 30 months of beating up on the productive class, which has given you a remarkable sub 2.0% rebound from the worst recession in memory and 9.2% unemployment, someone will learn a lesson that this demographic doesn't like the beating and will just wait things out. You can harp on the evil rich all you want, but in the end, they have the capacity to be patient. It's remarkable that the incompetence in the White House makes Bachmann a vialble candidate to some people.
Buftex Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) One would figure that after 30 months of beating up on the productive class, which has given you a remarkable sub 2.0% rebound from the worst recession in memory and 9.2% unemployment, someone will learn a lesson that this demographic doesn't like the beating and will just wait things out. You can harp on the evil rich all you want, but in the end, they have the capacity to be patient. It's remarkable that the incompetence in the White House makes Bachmann a vialble candidate to some people. Well, John Boehner claims that "the American people do not want more taxes"...which is only partly correct. They don't want more taxes for everyone, just the extremely weatlthy (you know, the phantom "job creators"), and every poll shows this...so, when the Republicans blow a missed opportunity, I suspect they will change their tune, once again...the fact that Bachmann is a viable candidate says more about the make-up of the Republican party than anything. It appears, Republicans, and most PPP'ers are very out of touch with this country. Patience may be good for them, but I wouldn't recommend holding their breaths. At some point, the "needs of the many" will outweigh the "benefits of the few". btw- "beating up on the productive class" is hilarious...wtf are you talking about? Edited July 12, 2011 by Buftex
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Well, John Boehner claims that "the American people do not want more taxes"...which is only partly correct. They don't want more taxes for everyone, just the extremely weatlthy (you know, the phantom "job creators"), and every poll shows this...so, when the Republicans blow a missed opportunity, I suspect they will change their tune, once again...the fact that Bachmann is a viable candidate says more about the make-up of the Republican party than anything. It appears, Republicans, and most PPP'ers are very out of touch with this country. Patience may be good for them, but I wouldn't recommend holding their breaths. At some point, the "needs of the many" will outweigh the "benefits of the few". btw- "beating up on the productive class" is hilarious...wtf are you talking about? I think most PPPers are perfectly in touch - spending needs to be cut, taxes need to be raised. It's Congress that's out of touch.
GG Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Well, John Boehner claims that "the American people do not want more taxes"...which is only partly correct. They don't want more taxes for everyone, just the extremely weatlthy (you know, the phantom "job creators"), and every poll shows this...so, when the Republicans blow a missed opportunity, I suspect they will change their tune, once again...the fact that Bachmann is a viable candidate says more about the make-up of the Republican party than anything. It appears, Republicans, and most PPP'ers are very out of touch with this country. Patience may be good for them, but I wouldn't recommend holding their breaths. At some point, the "needs of the many" will outweigh the "benefits of the few". btw- "beating up on the productive class" is hilarious...wtf are you talking about? Because the promise of getting the extra $1 trillion from the super rich is super empty, as the super rich have the resources to ratchet down their income. And your post highlights the stupidity of the current tax policy. When 50% of the population pays no income tax, they're perfectly willing to pass on the costs to the payers, while expecting greater benefits paid for by others. This system is untenable, and no matter how much moralizing you do, the system will go bankrupt because you can only fleece the rich so much. Obama's gambit is purely superficial, and it will not produce the desired tax revenues nor cost savings. But he may have enough gullibles following him around to eek out an election victory. Yet there will still be the unanswered questions of why does unemployment hover at 10% and the economy doesn't grow.
erynthered Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 It appears, Republicans, and most PPP'ers are very out of touch with this country. btw- Really? Is that what happened last November. Seems to me the party that had their asses handed to them were the ones "out of touch" with this country.
Adam Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Because the promise of getting the extra $1 trillion from the super rich is super empty, as the super rich have the resources to ratchet down their income. And your post highlights the stupidity of the current tax policy. When 50% of the population pays no income tax, they're perfectly willing to pass on the costs to the payers, while expecting greater benefits paid for by others. This system is untenable, and no matter how much moralizing you do, the system will go bankrupt because you can only fleece the rich so much. Obama's gambit is purely superficial, and it will not produce the desired tax revenues nor cost savings. But he may have enough gullibles following him around to eek out an election victory. Yet there will still be the unanswered questions of why does unemployment hover at 10% and the economy doesn't grow. I agree with your concept, but I don't think we are at the ceiling on what we can get from them. The problem is thinking they can fix the debt problem by themselves.
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 12, 2011 Author Posted July 12, 2011 Because the promise of getting the extra $1 trillion from the super rich is super empty, as the super rich have the resources to ratchet down their income. And your post highlights the stupidity of the current tax policy. When 50% of the population pays no income tax, they're perfectly willing to pass on the costs to the payers, while expecting greater benefits paid for by others. This system is untenable, and no matter how much moralizing you do, the system will go bankrupt because you can only fleece the rich so much. Obama's gambit is purely superficial, and it will not produce the desired tax revenues nor cost savings. But he may have enough gullibles following him around to eek out an election victory. Yet there will still be the unanswered questions of why does unemployment hover at 10% and the economy doesn't grow. Or, the revenues will flow and the jobs will be created even with higher taxes. The GOP will have to flush all their arguments down the memory hole once again and start over.
IDBillzFan Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Or, the revenues will flow and the jobs will be created even with higher taxes. Can you explain how taxing the job producers even more than they currently pay is going to create more jobs?
erynthered Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Can you explain how taxing the job producers even more than they currently pay is going to create more jobs? See that?! Thats a perfect example of the logic the left has. None. Zero. Nada. Nill.
Peace Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Well, John Boehner claims that "the American people do not want more taxes"...which is only partly correct. They don't want more taxes for everyone, just the extremely weatlthy (you know, the phantom "job creators"), I'm OK with some more taxes for poor people too. In fact, it's less likely to hurt the economy since poor people don't create as many jobs. I hate this spare the poor and middle class bull ****. Everyone needs to bite the bullet. Rich and poor. Can you explain how taxing the job producers even more than they currently pay is going to create more jobs? It won't. This is about debt reduction, not job creation. Paying off the debt means among other things, high unemployment stays around, no dramatic increase in social spending, infrasturcture spending, etc...and a huge uptick in whiney bitches. Edited July 12, 2011 by Peace
Adam Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 If we have to add thousands of jobs to keep unemployment at its current rate to compensate for people entering the workforce at a higher rate than people are leaving it, how can we expect it to go down much, if at all? Maybe if we want to decrease unemployment, we need to make it more expensive to have kids.
Magox Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Or, the revenues will flow and the jobs will be created even with higher taxes. The GOP will have to flush all their arguments down the memory hole once again and start over. Except that won't happen! I'm not being pessimistic, just realistic. Also for all those pundits I always use to hear, in how under clinton the tax rate was at 39% and they would say "look at the economy then, the economy was booming with that higher tax rate!" I would always think to myself, "Who are they fooling?" and then I would remember, "oh yeah, the shmo's". Lets be real here, the economy didnt boom because of the tax rate. The economy was booming because of the enormous internet dot com bubble. With all those massive revenues that were streaming into the economy, we were able to easily absorb those tax rates. Comparing that era to today is just plain ignorant. Also, GG makes a good point, liberals can huff and puff and attempt to justify why the economy isn't doing as well as they had hoped, but at some point you have to look in the mirror and say "you know what? maybe there is some truth to all these regulations, pieces of legislation like Dodd Frank (I fall in this camp btw), ObamaCare and demonizations of those corporate jet owners, CEO's, hedgefund managers (you take your pick of choices), evil rich etc etc and say maybe, just maybe these overreaching (yet well-intended) pieces of regulations and legislations are holding back the economy. So the choice is do you continue to keep supporting the failing policies and sink down along the titanic with them, or just admit that the direction we are heading isn't where we should be going. Of course there is the ultra progressive stance of doubling and tripling down on Obama's policies, and admitting that things arent quite working well but only because the stimulus bill should have been even larger, and that Obamacare should have been even more bold (even though its clear that entitlement spending is part of the problem) or that the Dodd Frank Bill didnt punish Wallstreet enough. Of course this is how those pathetic saps justify Obama's failures, they will support their rigid idealogy to the end and would rather blame Obama's timidness. In any case, we wont be seeing a strong economy under this presidents control. You can take that to the bank.
Adam Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Except that won't happen! I'm not being pessimistic, just realistic. Also for all those pundits I always use to hear, in how under clinton the tax rate was at 39% and they would say "look at the economy then, the economy was booming with that higher tax rate!" I would always think to myself, "Who are they fooling?" and then I would remember, "oh yeah, the shmo's". Lets be real here, the economy didnt boom because of the tax rate. The economy was booming because of the enormous internet dot com bubble. With all those massive revenues that were streaming into the economy, we were able to easily absorb those tax rates. Comparing that era to today is just plain ignorant. Also, GG makes a good point, liberals can huff and puff and attempt to justify why the economy isn't doing as well as they had hoped, but at some point you have to look in the mirror and say "you know what? maybe there is some truth to all these regulations, pieces of legislation like Dodd Frank (I fall in this camp btw), ObamaCare and demonizations of those corporate jet owners, CEO's, hedgefund managers (you take your pick of choices), evil rich etc etc and say maybe, just maybe these overreaching (yet well-intended) pieces of regulations and legislations are holding back the economy. So the choice is do you continue to keep supporting the failing policies and sink down along the titanic with them, or just admit that the direction we are heading isn't where we should be going. Of course there is the ultra progressive stance of doubling and tripling down on Obama's policies, and admitting that things arent quite working well but only because the stimulus bill should have been even larger, and that Obamacare should have been even more bold (even though its clear that entitlement spending is part of the problem) or that the Dodd Frank Bill didnt punish Wallstreet enough. Of course this is how those pathetic saps justify Obama's failures, they will support their rigid idealogy to the end and would rather blame Obama's timidness. In any case, we wont be seeing a strong economy under this presidents control. You can take that to the bank. Why not just open the health insurance industry to competition? Although we both know that Congress isn't strong enough to overcome the influence of the insurance lobby to do that. I think that would do a lot more than a repeal of the Patient Affordable Health Care Act- which won't happen either.
GG Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Or, the revenues will flow and the jobs will be created even with higher taxes. The GOP will have to flush all their arguments down the memory hole once again and start over. I'm guessing this will happen just in time to celebrate the Summer of Recovery? Any day now. Just around the corner. When temperatures hit high 80's. Right around July 4.
Recommended Posts