Taxes were cut, where are the jobs?

Howey said:
Sure...tell that to the gays, blacks, hispanics, women and poor.
Click to expand...

It's the damn food stamps! And welfare! And social justice! Those fucking democrats get the poor/minority votes because they give a shit about impoverishment and equality. The cunning bastards....
 
Taichiliberal said:
Obama EXTENED the Bush tax cuts as a consession to the GOP blockade, you stupe! He did that when they were scheduled to sunset, or wehre you on a bender when the press was covering that?

As for the Kennedy tax cuts,

There's a final problem with portraying Kennedy as the ideological kin of Reagan and Bush on tax policy. Kennedy, it turns out, initially wanted to use government spending, not tax cuts, as the means to put dollars in people's hands. But that idea ran aground in 1962 because conservatives in Congress opposed it, while the president's aides feared that the bond market might respond to additional spending with higher rates that could offset their gains. Still, even as Kennedy accepted tax reduction as the first step along the route to growth, he never gave up his spending idea. "First, we'll have your tax cut," he told Heller; "then we'll have my expenditures program."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2004/01/tax_cuts_in_camelot.2.html


Get the WHOLE story, ya neocon/teabagger bar fly!
Click to expand...


BUSH tax cuts ended in DECEMBER, 2008 along with his presidency....they had done the job they were meant to do. Their effectiveness was done and over with.
You can't rewrite history just because you don't like it....
The undeniable fact is.....the Bush tax cuts ended in 2008......What Obama did was NOT CHANGE the existing tax rates....
He wanted desperately to raise the taxes and the GOP stopped that stupidity, so he let them exactly where they were, changing nothing.

NOT CHANGING the tax rates does not equal a tax cut....the rates remained the same and that has proven inadequate to revive HIS economy.
The present tax rates are Obamas tax rates....and have nothing to do with Bush.....
That logic is as stupid as changing the rates to 1993 levels and claiming they are the Clinton's tax cuts....
or 1981 and claiming they are the Reagen tax cuts....

What was proposed and passed in 2001 and 2003 dealt with the economy of that time and not to cure the circumstances of today.....the plain fact is...Obama did nothing to rectify the economy he presided over in 2009 and has done nothing to help the economy 4 years into his failing presidency.....I wish he had.

As for JFK.....facts are facts.....he proposed cutting taxes when he was president and his successor, LBJ carried through on that policy......no amount of your bullshit spin will change those FACTS.....
Do us a favor an fuckoff until you learn the facts
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
BUSH tax cuts ended in DECEMBER, 2008 along with his presidency....they had done the job they were meant to do. Their effectiveness was done and over with.
You can't rewrite history just because you don't like it....
The undeniable fact is.....the Bush tax cuts ended in 2008......What Obama did was NOT CHANGE the existing tax rates....
He wanted desperately to raise the taxes and the GOP stopped that stupidity, so he let them exactly where they were, changing nothing.

NOT CHANGING the tax rates does not equal a tax cut....the rates remained the same and that has proven inadequate to revive HIS economy.
The present tax rates are Obamas tax rates....and have nothing to do with Bush.....
That logic is as stupid as changing the rates to 1993 levels and claiming they are the Clinton's tax cuts....
or 1981 and claiming they are the Reagen tax cuts....

What was proposed and passed in 2001 and 2003 dealt with the economy of that time and not to cure the circumstances of today.....the plain fact is...Obama did nothing to rectify the economy he presided over in 2009 and has done nothing to help the economy 4 years into his failing presidency.....I wish he had.

As for JFK.....facts are facts.....he proposed cutting taxes when he was president and his successor, LBJ carried through on that policy......no amount of your bullshit spin will change those FACTS.....
Do us a favor an fuckoff until you learn the facts
Click to expand...
.

Think it through.
 
bravo said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Obama EXTENED the Bush tax cuts as a consession to the GOP blockade, you stupe! He did that when they were scheduled to sunset, or wehre you on a bender when the press was covering that?

As for the Kennedy tax cuts,

There's a final problem with portraying Kennedy as the ideological kin of Reagan and Bush on tax policy. Kennedy, it turns out, initially wanted to use government spending, not tax cuts, as the means to put dollars in people's hands. But that idea ran aground in 1962 because conservatives in Congress opposed it, while the president's aides feared that the bond market might respond to additional spending with higher rates that could offset their gains. Still, even as Kennedy accepted tax reduction as the first step along the route to growth, he never gave up his spending idea. "First, we'll have your tax cut," he told Heller; "then we'll have my expenditures program."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...camelot.2.html


Get the WHOLE story, ya neocon/teabagger bar fly!
Click to expand...


BUSH tax cuts ended in DECEMBER, 2008 along with his presidency....they had done the job they were meant to do. Their effectiveness was done and over with.
You can't rewrite history just because you don't like it....
The undeniable fact is.....the Bush tax cuts ended in 2008......What Obama did was NOT CHANGE the existing tax rates....
He wanted desperately to raise the taxes and the GOP stopped that stupidity, so he let them exactly where they were, changing nothing.

NOT CHANGING the tax rates does not equal a tax cut....the rates remained the same and that has proven inadequate to revive HIS economy.
The present tax rates are Obamas tax rates....and have nothing to do with Bush.....
That logic is as stupid as changing the rates to 1993 levels and claiming they are the Clinton's tax cuts....
or 1981 and claiming they are the Reagen tax cuts....

What was proposed and passed in 2001 and 2003 dealt with the economy of that time and not to cure the circumstances of today.....the plain fact is...Obama did nothing to rectify the economy he presided over in 2009 and has done nothing to help the economy 4 years into his failing presidency.....I wish he had.

As for JFK.....facts are facts.....he proposed cutting taxes when he was president and his successor, LBJ carried through on that policy......no amount of your bullshit spin will change those FACTS.....
Do us a favor an fuckoff until you learn the facts
Click to expand...

I love it when dumb clucks like Bravo wail their revisionism with pride. A quick reality check for our intellectually impotent Bravo and his Dixie Dumb supporter:

In 2001 and 2003, Congress passed tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. At the time, Mr. Bush and the Republican leaders of Congress certainly believed they were rewriting the tax code permanently, but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010.The question of what would happen then became more relevant after Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, and the two parties have been fighting about them ever since, with Republicans pushing to make them permanent and Democrats seeking to end them for upper-income households. Their fate now seems likely to play a significant role in the 2012 presidential campaign.

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to roll back the high-end cuts, but a Democratic Senate balked at muscling through that change. After making huge gains in the November 2010 midterm elections, Republicans announced they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session that followed until all the cuts were extended.

In December 2010, Mr. Obama reached a deal with Republicans that extended the tax cuts at all income levels through the end of 2012 (they expire Jan. 1, 2013) as part of a package that would also keep benefits flowing to the long-term unemployed, cut payroll taxes for all workers for a year and take other steps to bolster the economy. It also continued tax breaks on dividends and capital gains, and lowered the estate tax.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/taxation/bush_tax_cuts/index.html

As for Kennedy, the article I sourced clearly showed that his tax cut plan was LESS than Reaganomics and came with some domestic program spending that he never got to implement (and of which the GOP was diametrically opposed). Reaganomics had no such part B plan.

Back to the barstool with ya, Bravo!
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
I love it when dumb clucks like Bravo wail their revisionism with pride. A quick reality check for our intellectually impotent Bravo and his Dixie Dumb supporter:

In 2001 and 2003, Congress passed tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. At the time, Mr. Bush and the Republican leaders of Congress certainly believed they were rewriting the tax code permanently, but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010.The question of what would happen then became more relevant after Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, and the two parties have been fighting about them ever since, with Republicans pushing to make them permanent and Democrats seeking to end them for upper-income households. Their fate now seems likely to play a significant role in the 2012 presidential campaign.

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to roll back the high-end cuts, but a Democratic Senate balked at muscling through that change. After making huge gains in the November 2010 midterm elections, Republicans announced they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session that followed until all the cuts were extended.

In December 2010, Mr. Obama reached a deal with Republicans that extended the tax cuts at all income levels through the end of 2012 (they expire Jan. 1, 2013) as part of a package that would also keep benefits flowing to the long-term unemployed, cut payroll taxes for all workers for a year and take other steps to bolster the economy. It also continued tax breaks on dividends and capital gains, and lowered the estate tax.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/taxation/bush_tax_cuts/index.html

As for Kennedy, the article I sourced clearly showed that his tax cut plan was LESS than Reaganomics and came with some domestic program spending that he never got to implement (and of which the GOP was diametrically opposed). Reaganomics had no such part B plan.

Back to the barstool with ya, Bravo!
Click to expand...
First, one must research the reason WHY Bush's tax cuts had an expiration date. It's telling.

Top marginal rates were 90% when Kennedy was in office. There was plenty of room for cutting taxes on top earners.

Although, his policy mainly created demand side cuts.

Vastly different than the Bush plan.
 
bravo said:
He wanted desperately to raise the taxes
Click to expand...

bravo said:
NOT CHANGING the tax rates does not equal a tax cut...
Click to expand...

Which is it? If one's a tax cut, doesn't the other have to be a tax increase? You can't have your cake and eat it too, nincompoop!



bravo said:
.

Think it through.
Click to expand...

I love it when the Goon Brothers (Bravo and Yurt) have to quote themselves to prove a point because it's so ridiculous nobody cares. Sometimes I wonder if they're even trying to convince themselves!

Dixie said:
Therefore, in Chicklet's mind, it was Republicans who blocked the repeal.
Click to expand...

Yet, on Thursday, the Republicans in the Senate voted with the Democrats to extend the cuts solely for those making under 200k.

Are you and the Goon Brothers going to chastize them for raising taxes?
 

Unemployment is above 8%, U6 above 15%. Economic growth is 1.5% down from last report which was revised up to 2%. 24 million people out of a job. Businesses not hiring. and all Dear Leader has to offer is the same rhetoric on class warfare of soaking the rich, and raising taxes? The last time Dear leader went down this road he caused a downgrade to our credit rating....Obama is a one note hack, and come November he is outta there...He'd better start packing now.
 
j-mac said:
The last time Dear leader went down this road he caused a downgrade to our credit rating
Click to expand...

Bullfuckinshit!

What caused the downgrade of the credit rating was the obstinance of the Republicans in Congress. Christ on a stick, lil mac, when will you quit lying and back up your bullshit with a link?

It is clear from Standard & Poor’s statement downgrading the federal government’s credit rating that it places the blame squarely on Republican actions and policies. Two of S&P’s biggest concerns about whether the United States will pay off its debt are whether Republicans will be so insane as to refuse to lift the debt ceiling, a possibility Republicans intentionally stoked fears of, and whether the United States will raise much-needed tax revenue. Specifically, S&P changed its baseline assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire on schedule in 2012 because Republicans are so insistent that they must be renewed. “We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues,” wrote S&P. That adds $4 trillion over ten years to the projected deficits
Click to expand...
 
Howey said:
Bullfuckinshit!

What caused the downgrade of the credit rating was the obstinance of the Republicans in Congress. Christ on a stick, lil mac, when will you quit lying and back up your bullshit with a link?
Click to expand...


:rofl2::rofl2:the Nation? BWHAAAAAAA! :rofl2: Now that is funny....


Allow me to give an equal opposite opinion from that of the vitriolic Katrina Van den Hoover!

Another exciting historic first for President Obama!

The venerable Standard & Poor's has officially downgraded the U.S. government's credit rating from AAA to AA-plus for the first time ever.

The effect on worldwide markets will be immediate.

There will be much gnashing of teeth on both the right and the left.

Obama and the Democrats and a chorus of economic illiterates promised that the phony spending reductions in the debt ceiling increase deal would preserve the federal government's creditworthiness. Republicans for the most part fell for Obama's lies and caved after only a brief period of holding out.

The great unraveling, so long predicted by those who grasp the iron truths of economics, has begun.

Only fools and partisans will blame the Tea Party for the downgrade. Markets see through the Enron-style accounting used by the federal government, this colossal fraud called baseline budgeting.

Unfortunately, Speaker John Boehner and his sycophants did not. They had a chance to at least try to hold the line on spending, but they failed.

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/08/05/obama-lied-americas-credit-rat
Click to expand...
 
Taichiliberal said:
I love it when dumb clucks like Bravo wail their revisionism with pride. A quick reality check for our intellectually impotent Bravo and his Dixie Dumb supporter:

In 2001 and 2003, Congress passed tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. At the time, Mr. Bush and the Republican leaders of Congress certainly believed they were rewriting the tax code permanently, but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010.The question of what would happen then became more relevant after Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, and the two parties have been fighting about them ever since, with Republicans pushing to make them permanent and Democrats seeking to end them for upper-income households. Their fate now seems likely to play a significant role in the 2012 presidential campaign.

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to roll back the high-end cuts, but a Democratic Senate balked at muscling through that change. After making huge gains in the November 2010 midterm elections, Republicans announced they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session that followed until all the cuts were extended.

In December 2010, Mr. Obama reached a deal with Republicans that extended the tax cuts at all income levels through the end of 2012 (they expire Jan. 1, 2013) as part of a package that would also keep benefits flowing to the long-term unemployed, cut payroll taxes for all workers for a year and take other steps to bolster the economy. It also continued tax breaks on dividends and capital gains, and lowered the estate tax.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/taxation/bush_tax_cuts/index.html

As for Kennedy, the article I sourced clearly showed that his tax cut plan was LESS than Reaganomics and came with some domestic program spending that he never got to implement (and of which the GOP was diametrically opposed). Reaganomics had no such part B plan.

Back to the barstool with ya, Bravo!
Click to expand...


Nice speech...you waste our time telling us what we all ready know and have been aware of since Bush, when it happened....
=============================
"but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010."

Wellllll, no shit Dick Tracy....exactly what I posted......T W I C E....it finally got through your thick skull....
=============================
BUSH tax cuts ended in DECEMBER, 2008 along with his presidency....they had done the job they were meant to do. Their effectiveness was done and over with.

AND Obama has changed nothing about those tax rates during his entire 4 years in office......but HE owns them now, its his administration, the buck DOES stop with him
He stopped them from expiring.....
SO....thanks for nothing but wasting your time by rewriting my post in your words.....
==============================
Kennedy ?....No one ever said JFK's tax cuts had ANYTHING to do with Reaganomics...(or Bushonomics or Obamanomics)....That YOUR mischaractization of my words....
(the chronology of the posts will prove that, and show you've been schooled again and caught lying)

I love the way you try to put words in the mouths of others in a lame attempt to win a debate......its the one trait common to the left that you all use.....

the 60's were not the 80's and 2001-2008 is not the 2009-2012
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
the Nation? BWHAAAAAAA! :rofl2: Now that is funny....


Allow me to give an equal opposite opinion from that of the vitriolic Katrina Van den Hoover!
Click to expand...

Umm...Katrina vanden Heuvel (note spelling retard) didn't write that article. Ben Adler did.

And he DIRECTLY quoted the S&P. Are you saying they're not a credible source?

“We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues,”
Click to expand...

And you quote (finally, a source!) Matthew Vadumb, best known for saying it's unamerican to allow poor people to vote? Really???

Yet inside the Newsweek article Matthew Vadumb linked to is this post. VERIFYING WHAT I SAID!

“The majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues,” the firm said.

S&P’s downgrade served as an indictment of the gridlock that sent the nation to the edge of defaulting on its debt obligations. It is also striking in part because it reflects the tremendous power of a small group of financial analysts employed by a New York company — part of McGraw-Hill. Credit-rating companies’ reputations were sullied during the financial crisis.
Click to expand...

:rofl2::rofl2: NOW THAT REALLY IS FUNNY!


You really, really need to go back to whatever forum that was that kicked you off. You obviously don't have the smarts to play with the big boys and girls here.
 
Howey said:
And he DIRECTLY quoted the S&P. Are you saying they're not a credible source?
Click to expand...

actually, he didn't quote them, but I will...
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as
America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective,
and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt
ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in
the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our
view, the differences between political parties have proven to be
extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting
agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program
that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and
Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on
discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have
dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions
only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements,
the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key
to long-term fiscal sustainability.
Click to expand...
http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

Howey said:
You obviously don't have the smarts to play with the big boys and girls here.
Click to expand...

what you need most to play here, Howie is honesty.......you suck at that.....
 
bravo said:
Nice speech...you waste our time telling us what we all ready know and have been aware of since Bush, when it happened....
=============================
"but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010."

Wellllll, no shit Dick Tracy....exactly what I posted......T W I C E....it finally got through your thick skull....
=============================
BUSH tax cuts ended in DECEMBER, 2008 along with his presidency....they had done the job they were meant to do. Their effectiveness was done and over with.

AND Obama has changed nothing about those tax rates during his entire 4 years in office......but HE owns them now, its his administration, the buck DOES stop with him
He stopped them from expiring.....
SO....thanks for nothing but wasting your time by rewriting my post in your words.....
==============================
Kennedy ?....No one ever said JFK's tax cuts had ANYTHING to do with Reaganomics...(or Bushonomics or Obamanomics)....That YOUR mischaractization of my words....
(the chronology of the posts will prove that, and show you've been schooled again and caught lying)

I love the way you try to put words in the mouths of others in a lame attempt to win a debate......its the one trait common to the left that you all use.....

the 60's were not the 80's and 2001-2008 is not the 2009-2012
Click to expand...

And there you have it folks, this dumbass Bravo BELIEVES something, and that trumps reality in his intoxicated mind. Someone needs to pull this dumb SOB aside and explain to him that laws do not automatically terminate with a President's term. if Bravo was indeed correct, then there would have been no DOCUMENTED attempt by the GOP to EXTEND....they would have had to vote to RE-INSTATE.

Once more for our intellectually impotent Bravo:

In 2001 and 2003, Congress passed tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. At the time, Mr. Bush and the Republican leaders of Congress certainly believed they were rewriting the tax code permanently, but the laws they passed actually gave the cuts an expiration date at the end of 2010.The question of what would happen then became more relevant after Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, and the two parties have been fighting about them ever since, with Republicans pushing to make them permanent and Democrats seeking to end them for upper-income households. Their fate now seems likely to play a significant role in the 2012 presidential campaign.

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to roll back the high-end cuts, but a Democratic Senate balked at muscling through that change. After making huge gains in the November 2010 midterm elections, Republicans announced they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session that followed until all the cuts were extended.In December 2010, Mr. Obama reached a deal with Republicans that extended the tax cuts at all income levels through the end of 2012 (they expire Jan. 1, 2013) as part of a package that would also keep benefits flowing to the long-term unemployed, cut payroll taxes for all workers for a year and take other steps to bolster the economy. It also continued tax breaks on dividends and capital gains, and lowered the estate tax. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/refere...uts/index.html

And as the chronology of teh posts shows, our barfly Bravo did indeed bring Kennedy into the conversation. Proven wrong, he tries to back off and deny his previous assertion like the gutless little neocon flunky that he is.


So unless Bravo CAN DOCUMENT his assertion beyond his opinion, I won't waste time responding to his rantings, and will sit back and laugh as he pontificates from the barstool. Carry on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top