FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Lets not wait for an involuntary tax.
House Democrats defy Obama on tax cut bill (CNN)
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
Lets not wait for an involuntary tax.
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
Actually, it's a proven fact... and I am one who favors allowing the Bush cuts for high earners to expire, so long as it's accompanied by a dramatic cut in spending.
Do you believe Obama's claim that the stimulus has created 3 million jobs?
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
I think you're right.
Just look at that Bernie Sanders.
Oh how vicious he is on how people making $250k, or more a year are not paying enough.
How many hours on the Senate floor, did he attack these people? 8? 10?
Just brutal.
Imagine him talking about minorities that way.
It would be one thing I guess if he were talking about billionairs (not).
But he wasn't.
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
Yes! It did.
My point being that "there is a limit".
You don't set the limit.
Each individual has their own limit.
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
I note that its' consistent with neocon blowhards like yourself to just make generalized personal attacks or non-specific criticisms whenever you're faced with FACTS that don't fit your political/social beliefs. Well, we've had 8 years added to 12 of Reaganomics and the 8 assist from Clinton...and we're living with the results.
But Good Luck trying to prove and live with the "stay the course" mentality. Meanwhile, here's a dose of reality
http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=741611&postcount=15
Last edited:
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
YOU fail to mention the FACT that Obama's Stimulus is actually less than 2 years old and by ALL THE ECONOMIC INDICATORS IS DOING BETTER BY THE ECONOMY....JUST ASK GENERAL MOTORS.
YOU fail to mention the FACT the Stimulus plans actually began under the Shrub...or did you forget those two checks you got in the mail during from 2000 to 2008. Also YOU forgot to mention the FACT of the Shrub's bailout of Wall St. basically forced a stimulus plan to be implemented.....and that projections of a pay down to the deficit in the 10 to 20 term, NOT "double it". (where the hell do you get $270 grand per job from?).
YOU are either ignorant of the facts or in denial....the Bush tax cuts were NOT the great job creators as professed....but don't take my word for it, the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows unemployment going through the roof within the first year of Obama's administration.....that means Obama INHERITED A rise in the unemployment rate from the previous administration, as he would NOT of had time to implement any new legislation or policies.
Hell, even the Wall St. Journal points out the Shrub's lousy job creation record. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/
Oh, since you're obviously ignoring this little fact: The Shrub kept the cost of Iraq OFF THE BOOKS....Obama's stimulus has to address that little fact in his attempts to bring our budget back under control.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
You're "point" is just more vague, generalized bullshit that doesn't address the issue.
Here, learn something and then either have the guts to debate the FACTS or just continue to blow smoke
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/29/battle-looming-over-bush-tax-cuts-what-it-means-to-you/
Schadenfreude
patriot and widower
as do a bunch of repugs as they voted against the original cuts only for the lower and middle classes - the usual war on the middle class by the repubs
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
should we ask the people who used to own general motors or the people who own general motors now?.......because as I recall it was taken away from the people who used to own it and given to the unions and government......
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
"the people"? Are you referring to the jokers who were in charge of GM's decline that were pushed to resign? I seem to recall that being SOP when a corp is failing, and is bailed out in a merge. I guess neocon wonks like you only get upset when the gov't uses the same practices.
Oh and PLEASE show me the documented, valid FACTS that state GM is now "given" to the unions and gov't, as you say. If you can't, then you're just full of PMP shit as usual.
Good Luck
New member
Anyone can tell you that raising taxes during an economic downturn is downright assininely stupid. As such, the republicans have a reasonable explanation for their vote on the democratic party's version of extending the tax cuts.
What is the democrats' excuse? Oh, yea, they are willing to let everyone's taxes go up because they want to raise taxes on the rich during an economic downturn.
And since the original cuts, which are expiring because of the democrats in the first damned place, came from the republican party, and since those cuts reduced taxes on middle income families anywhere from 40% to over 70%, the republicans are supporting the middle class. It's the democrats making war on the middle class. They opposed the original cuts, calling them cuts for the rich when the fact is the middle class benefited by a far larger percentage of their tax burden. For 10 year now they have lied about the effect of the tax cuts on the middle class, and now, only when it is to their advantage, are they finally admitting that if the cuts are not extended it will hit the middle class.
Question: if these cuts only had little or no effect on the middle class, as was originally claimed by the democrats, why will letting the cuts expire have an effect?
Answer: the democrats have lied about the tax cuts from day one. And we're supposed to trust the lying fuckers now?
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
well, the unions hold a 33% stake in GM.....they didn't pay anything for it.....same with the 51% interest they now hold in Chrysler.....you don't really need me to document that for you do you?.....I expect you've read a newspaper sometime this year.....and yes, despite your "", those who used to own GM and Chrysler were people....were you expecting zombies or aliens?.......
Didn't pay anything for it? Basically, the companies unloaded their obligations to pay health benefits for retirees onto the unions in exchange for stock. Given the projected health care costs of those retirees, the UAW paid quite a bit for that stock.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
paid nothing.....what was the value of those obligations in a bankrupt company?......it was the taxpayers who paid for it......
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Once again, I ask for a straight answer and I get MORE Post Modern Foolishness.
Quit your stalling, bunky....YOU stated that GM was "given" to the Union and gov't. I asked for you to support your statement with documentation. YOU CAN'T do that. Maybe because you just don't know WTF is going on besides what you gleam from right wingnut talk radio.
Here genius: in 2009 Bloomberg News gave a quick breakdown as to who owned GM after it declared bankruptcy, note that the UAW is not anywhere near "33%" stake:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily...landscape_special+report+--+auto+bailout+2009
And also note that this year GM paid back a good portion of the loan, and thanks to the deal with the gov't, is NOT going under and making positive steps towards jobs and production
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/21/gm-pays-government-loans-early/
So as usual PMP, you're just full of it.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
actually, they didn't....they used $8billion of the $50 billion bailout to pay back the original bailout.....
http://www.glgroup.com/News/Did-GM-Pay-Back-Its-Loan--Not-Really-47948.html
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
While I applaud your efforts, do you actually think any information you provide is going to prod him into even considering what he has already determined to be actual.
You're trying to convince a 3 year old that eating an entire box of chocolates is not the thing to do.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Yeah, it's a shuffle...but NOT as one sided as either side would have us believe. Observe:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ceo-says-gm-has-repaid-government-loans-full/
The gov't STILL has a hefty share of GM...an probably will for some time. The alternative is/was bankruptcy.
Now, can you produce proof of your UAW "33%" ownership of GM to counter my previous link?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
actually I don't consider that a key point of my argument......17%, 20%, 33%.....does it make a bit of difference?....it's the only way you can argue the point, by bringing up the trivial....the point remains it was an unwarranted gift from the taxpayers to the unions.....and the fact remains that GM "repaid" it's loan by borrowing more money from us......in most financial circles that's referred to as a refinance, not a repayment.....