Is the democratic party stupid, blind, clueless or is it based on ideology?

[Serapis]

where were you when Bush was outspending ronald Reagan? Were you shouting out against bigger government and spending then? If you were, my hat is off to you. If you are like any other republican voter, you didn't get sticker shock until the spender was out of office.

I'm not jealous of the rich. They can afford easily to pay the tax level they were at ten years ago, as the rich have never been richer than they are today.

Yes, it is the SPENDING.... then why are you guys just now tallying up the bill? The majority of deficit spending was going on years ago....

 

[Serapis]

Hey Serapis,

You asked for links and I provided them. You attacked the source of the links. Did you even bother reading them? They contained facts that conflicted with your perfect world view.

Here, let me help you....



Now, the FACT is that the lowest bracket will go from 10% to 15%. That is not for people making 250K or more like you stated. I guess I could call you a LIAR as well huh?

So, as I correctly stated. If the congress does not extend any of the tax cuts it will affect people making less than 30K. You can appologize at any time.

When you spend all of your time reading liberal left leaning class warfare stuff, you tend to miss little facts like the truth...

But hey, happy to help you out....

What you keep forgetting to advise everyone is, that this information is only relevant if congress does NOTHING. How likely do you think it is for either party to allow the cuts to expire all together? Political suicide, so your information is moot....

 

[NLXSK1]

Hey, I was against Iraq, I was against TARP, I am not a big defender of president Bush. Clinton managed to turn toward the middle and pass welfare reform and other legislation that made him popular enough for a 2nd term. I dont see Obama heading in that direction. In fact, I havent heard much about Obama's direction lately.

But lets focus on the point of my post.

Why would the democrats let that sticker shock physically hit people's paychecks in early January? Why dont they seem to be making a priority of extending the tax cuts? The financial accounting paycheck system does not turn on a dime. The new rates are being programmed into systems now to be reflected in about 6 weeks. If the Democrats dont get this legislature pushed out before the end of the year they face a backlash. The only thing I can think of is that they are gonna blame the Republicans but at this time it is a lame duck Democratic controlled congress which can pretty much do what it wants.

So again, WTF??

 

[NLXSK1]

What you keep forgetting to advise everyone is, that this information is only relevant if congress does NOTHING. How likely do you think it is for either party to allow the cuts to expire all together? Political suicide, so your information is moot....

No, I expect the lame duck congress to convene and the tax cuts repealed retroactively in the new congress giving republicans credit for fixing it. That is what has me so puzzled.

 

[londonfog]

Hey Serapis,

You asked for links and I provided them. You attacked the source of the links. Did you even bother reading them? They contained facts that conflicted with your perfect world view.

Here, let me help you....



Now, the FACT is that the lowest bracket will go from 10% to 15%. That is not for people making 250K or more like you stated. I guess I could call you a LIAR as well huh?

So, as I correctly stated. If the congress does not extend any of the tax cuts it will affect people making less than 30K. You can appologize at any time.

When you spend all of your time reading liberal left leaning class warfare stuff, you tend to miss little facts like the truth...

But hey, happy to help you out....

Man you stuck in a bubble...The only tax that they will let expire if any will be the one on the top percent..Obama himself has stated the only tax cuts he wants to let expire is one anyone making 250,000..Now the talk is about maybe those making 500,000...and I hope you understand that we talking profits here...not if your business made 250,000 gross before payout ( overhead, payroll, etc...)...Thats 250,000 PROFIT

 

[NLXSK1]

And what gives the government a right to more of their profit?

 

[medicineman]

I think that was his point Dan. The poor person is not going to start a business to create ANY job. The rich do that and for whatever their purpose, the end result is tax income from not only the business, but all the workers that populate the business.

Whether "tax cuts" are productive or not, there is a lot of evidence that high taxes equate to lower tax revenue. When you remove the incentive for people to build businesses that generate them, you have no base. Sure, you can hate the rich and try to take more from them, but that is a single gain.

Obama is no longer in a position to break further or fix anything. Relying on him will be a waste of time.

So tell me, why haven't the rich people been creating jobs? The Bush tax cuts are in place and have been since 2001. 8 Million jobs have been lost, uhhhh.....seems like the creating jobs thing is bullshit. Here's what I don't get about you guys on the right: Unless you are making in excess of 250K, the tax cuts for the wealthy won't affect you in any way. By keeping the tax cuts for those from 250K down and letting those above expire, it will only affect the wealthiest 2%. Are you righties in that tax bracket?? I doubt all of you are. You are just wannabees, and with this economy, Your chances of getting rich are slim to none, so mellow out. Everyone, including those with incomes over 250K, will get a tax break on the first 250K, so if you make 300K, you would only get a 3% increase on the amount of taxes paid over 250K or 50K, seems like a no brainer to me. Keep the cuts for the poor and middle class and fuck the rich, just like they have been fucking us for ever. The rich need to pay, they have been getting exponentially richer for the last 50 Years. Just how much is enough? 10 million, 100 million, a billion, a trillion?? there is no end to their greed. They want to eliminate all benefits to the workers and return to a slave state, where they are the slave masters, although they already are in the sense of their control over the government, this one and all the rest, basically the world, they own the businesses, the corporations, the banks, wall street, governments, about the only thing we have left is our dignity and they want all of that also. Fuck the rich!

 

[Serapis]

The Democrats have no intention of letting the lower and middle income tax break brackets expire. They have stated all along that they intend to extend them. Why won't you acknowledge that? It is the Republicans that are threatening to block it unless the rich are extended as well. Maybe the Democrats should call their bluff, and see if they would truly deny the rest an extension of cuts.

Since when does a lame duck congress do what it wants? You continue to remind Democrats that they hold a majority, yet your party was successfull in blocking legislation and a treaty. It is a slim majority, not a 2/3 majority as your party would like to portray.

Let's see what the party for the rich does when the dems try to bring up tax cuts.... You know as well as i do that they plan to block, unless the rich get a cut too.... I say that the rates need to be reinstated for all and the revenue used to pay down Reagan's and Bush windfall debt, but now is not the time to increase the taxes of the middle class. The rich aren't going to miss it.

 

[NLXSK1]

The Democrats have no intention of letting the lower and middle income tax break brackets expire. They have stated all along that they intend to extend them. Why won't you acknowledge that? It is the Republicans that are threatening to block it unless the rich are extended as well. Maybe the Democrats should call their bluff, and see if they would truly deny the rest an extension of cuts.

Since when does a lame duck congress do what it wants? You continue to remind Democrats that they hold a majority, yet your party was successfull in blocking legislation and a treaty. It is a slim majority, not a 2/3 majority as your party would like to portray.

Let's see what the party for the rich does when the dems try to bring up tax cuts.... You know as well as i do that they plan to block, unless the rich get a cut too.... I say that the rates need to be reinstated for all and the revenue used to pay down Reagan's and Bush windfall debt, but now is not the time to increase the taxes of the middle class. The rich aren't going to miss it.

*sigh* one more time.

The longer the Democrats delay the vote on the tax cut extensions the less time the accountants will have to change the withdrawl tables. This means that people in America will see a smaller paycheck in early January even if it is retroactively put back. The Democrats have control of the legislative schedule. They could have voted on this already. It is this type of politics over policy that is causing so much uncertainty in the markets.

The Democrats tell me that it only affects 2% of the people and wont hurt anything. These are the same democrats that said unemployment would not go over 8% and that if we spent a trillion dollars things would be so much better. Yeah, how's that working out... Pardon me if I dont really have any confidence in the fact that this administration has a clue how to help out the economy. Obama is so busy playing class warfare and punishing whatever sector de jour he chooses that there is not much chance of robust economic activity in the forseable future.

 

[brownbearclan]

Troll thread is successful lol... =P

/end

 

[Serapis]

The ONLY reason it HASN'T come up for votes yet is because of blocking Republicans, led by a man who publicly stated after the elections that his number one job was to ensure that Obama only served one term.....

That hardly sounds like a party leader who has taxes and the people he represents on his mind now does it? They won't extend jobless benefits, because they believe that Americans are slothful and lazy and won't look for work as long as they are receiving meager unemployment checks. They'll also let tax cuts expire for all if the rich don't get them.... They refuse to ratify a treaty to reduce nuclear weapons and get inspectors back on the ground, until they win concessions of 80 billion or more to modernize the nuclear weapons we do have.

Don't stand on your podium looking down on us..... we are here to do the people's bidding, not coporate America's. It is the republicans that are delaying and blocking important legislation and a treaty!

 

[NLXSK1]

The ONLY reason it HASN'T come up for votes yet is because of blocking Republicans, led by a man who publicly stated after the elections that his number one job was to ensure that Obama only served one term.....

That hardly sounds like a party leader who has taxes and the people he represents on his mind now does it? They won't extend jobless benefits, because they believe that Americans are slothful and lazy and won't look for work as long as they are receiving meager unemployment checks. They'll also let tax cuts expire for all if the rich don't get them.... They refuse to ratify a treaty to reduce nuclear weapons and get inspectors back on the ground, until they win concessions of 80 billion or more to modernize the nuclear weapons we do have.

Don't stand on your podium looking down on us..... we are here to do the people's bidding, not coporate America's. It is the republicans that are delaying and blocking important legislation and a treaty!

The Republicans dont have control of the House yet. Maybe you could blame it on bush instead. Harry Reid is busy trying to get the Dream Act - amnesty for illegals passed right now. He doesnt seem to interested in the tax cuts.

You called bullshit in post #26 and I proved I was correct in my statement. The least you could do is retract your statement or give me some rep for a good argument...

 

[Dan Kone]

But hey, continue the class warfare. It is easy, it is lazy but unfortunately it leads to economic disaster...

You act if you are not participating in class warfare, yet here you are making a big deal about about an expiring tax cut to the richest people in the country. The same group who are currently making record breaking profits. You seem to want the wealthy to get wealthy so bad you're willing to ignore the fact that this tax cut to the rich comes strait out of deficit spending.

You claim to be against deficit spending, and here you are advocating for more of it. It's not like the wealthy are doing bad right now, quite the opposite. Considering all of that I've got to wonder why you want the rich to have this tax cut so bad that you are supporting something that adds trillions worth of debt to the budget?

 

[Dan Kone]

IF CONGRESS DOES NOTHING AND DOES NOT REPEAL ANY OF THE TAX CUTS PEOPLE AS LOW AS 30K WILL SEE A BIGGER DEDUCTION FROM THEIR PAYCHECKS!!

Reading is fundamental... None of the tax cuts has been made permanent. If congress does nothing then almost everyone will be affected.

That's very misleading. The democrats as well as the republicans support continuing the tax cuts on everyone but the top 1%. Neither party are trying to get rid of the tax cuts on people making under $250k per year.

 

[medicineman]

Why would the democrats let that sticker shock physically hit people's paychecks in early January? Why dont they seem to be making a priority of extending the tax cuts? The financial accounting paycheck system does not turn on a dime. The new rates are being programmed into systems now to be reflected in about 6 weeks. If the Democrats dont get this legislature pushed out before the end of the year they face a backlash. The only thing I can think of is that they are gonna blame the Republicans but at this time it is a lame duck Democratic controlled congress which can pretty much do what it wants.


Except by holding out for the cuts for the rich, in effect, the republicans are basically holding the middle class hostage. I wonder if the full tax cuts are allowed to expire the American people will be dumb enough to believe it was the democrats fault. Going by this last election cycle, they must be pretty dumb. They must not know that every bill the senate tried to pass to bolster the economy the Republicans filibustered, unfuckingbelievable.

 

[NLXSK1]

I never claimed to be against deficit spending. I want government to slash spending.

Why do we have to add trillions to the budget. I continue to talk about cutting spending and you continue to act as if I didnt say anything.

Add means testing to social security. Raise the age of social security rapidly and admit it is a ponzi scheme and phase it out. I am in my 40's and I dont expect to get anything anyway.

Cut defense spending, pull the troops back from all these countries and reduce our force size along with improving training and equipment. We should be able to cut every department.

Actually go after the 20% fraud that the government admits is happening with medicare.

Eliminate all subsidies including domestic and international. We are subsidizing the price of sugar while waging a campaing against sugar. How insane is that?

There are thousands of ways the government can cut spending to reduce the needs of the government.

 

[medicineman]

I never claimed to be against deficit spending. I want government to slash spending.

Why do we have to add trillions to the budget. I continue to talk about cutting spending and you continue to act as if I didnt say anything.
It's not cutting but cutting what. Any country that can afford 2 wars and yet has hungry people and people without medical, is fucked up, IMHO.
Add means testing to social security. Raise the age of social security rapidly and admit it is a ponzi scheme and phase it out. I am in my 40's and I dont expect to get anything anyway.
No need to raise retirement age, just remove the cap from SS deductions. Yes means testing, why would people making over a set amount, say 250K, need a measly 1800 a month from SS. You would get your SS 100 years from now. I can't understand why the voters (Which outnumber millionaires by 98 percent) can't realize this blatant thing.

Cut defense spending, pull the troops back from all these countries and reduce our force size along with improving training and equipment. We should be able to cut every department.
I agree totally. Yes stop the insane wars for the elites. Some of us know the truth about war, it is a for profit entity, and the profiteers want eternal war. I wonder how many of their kids end up on the battlefields?

Actually go after the 20% fraud that the government admits is happening with medicare.
I agree totally. This needs help from recipients. Report Dr.s that commit fraud

Eliminate all subsidies including domestic and international. We are subsidizing the price of sugar while waging a campaing against sugar. How insane is that?
Yes and no, cut subsidies but allow tarrifs on those companies that go abroad for cheaper labor and taxes.


There are thousands of ways the government can cut spending to reduce the needs of the government.

Agreed, farm subsidies is a big one, corporate tax breaks another, bridges to nowhere, etc. As far as cutting the deficit, 70+billion per year by letting the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire, also the Capital gains tax, the "death tax" etc.

 

[Dan Kone]

Why do we have to add trillions to the budget. I continue to talk about cutting spending and you continue to act as if I didnt say anything.

Yes I am. That is because you're claiming to want to cut spending and to not want to add trillions onto the budget, then supporting giving money to the rich in a way that adds trillions to the budget. It's not really a coherent position to take.

Want tax cuts? Great, pay for them first. Instead you are supporting something that is extremely expensive and is not paid for. How is that any better than what the people you oppose are doing? It's simply not enough to claim you support cutting spending, then support tax cuts which are not paid for. It's meaningless because you are still advocating things that would cost trillions of dollars and are not paid for.

Why not instead reject the Bush tax cuts and instead only support such things if they are paid for. Otherwise you are saying one thing and doing another. Supporting only tax cuts which are paid for by spending cuts would be a much more consistent conservative position than supporting tax cuts to the rich that are paid for by your grandchildren.

 

[NLXSK1]

Yes I am. That is because you're claiming to want to cut spending and to not want to add trillions onto the budget, then supporting giving money to the rich in a way that adds trillions to the budget. It's not really a coherent position to take.

Want tax cuts? Great, pay for them first. Instead you are supporting something that is extremely expensive and is not paid for. How is that any better than what the people you oppose are doing? It's simply not enough to claim you support cutting spending, then support tax cuts which are not paid for. It's meaningless because you are still advocating things that would cost trillions of dollars and are not paid for.

Why not instead reject the Bush tax cuts and instead only support such things if they are paid for. Otherwise you are saying one thing and doing another. Supporting only tax cuts which are paid for by spending cuts would be a much more consistent conservative position than supporting tax cuts to the rich that are paid for by your grandchildren.

The tax cuts cost 70 billion dollars a year.

I recommend a balanced budget amendment. That means I want the government to cut over 1 trillion dollars out of the budget through reduced spending. I am talking crash course here. The 70 billion is not the governments, it is income produced by people. The government has no right to the money.

 

[Dan Kone]

The tax cuts cost 70 billion dollars a year.

That's 700billion dollars you want to add to the deficit so billionaires can have more yachts. Hard to take anything you say seriously about fiscal responsibility or reducing the deficit while supporting this massive increase in deficit spending.