I don't see the harm is holding a symbolic vote that clearly delineates where the parties stand on the issue. What's the problem? The Republicans don't want to be on record for having voted for their actual policy position? Tough shit.
let the bush tax cuts expire
- Thread starter Schadenfreude
- Start date
I don't see the harm is holding a symbolic vote that clearly delineates where the parties stand on the issue. What's the problem? The Republicans don't want to be on record for having voted for their actual policy position? Tough shit.
Which gives the Rs the leverage to get all of the tax cuts extended. That and the extension of unemployment which will be used as the "form of compromise" to get the Ds to vote for the extension of all the tax cuts...
I am not out to defend the republicans but the notion that the republicans are only for the "rich" is obsolete. I keep hearing it parroted around still...like the [Mr.] Ed Show yesterday afternoon. Republicans are for the rich...the rich republicans, yadda, yadda, yadda. While it may be true that some are there is no way that as a majority the republicans are for the rich only. If one reads the strategy of why the majority of republicans are hanging tough on extending the current tax rate it is that they think it will create jobs...job positions that will be filled by the "not rich." Whether you agree or not (and I admit that I am skeptical), why not have a vote on something that is likely to pass, like the idea chap mentioned, and see if it works. It won't solve everything, but it is a start. And while we are at it, why not hop aboard with support for the deficit commission's recommendations and the bi-partisan support for it. [I'm speaking to representatives and senators in that sentence.] It isn't a "cure all" but at least it is a start.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/02/AR2010120205913.html
The bolded portion is just silly. You cannot be in favor of cutting the deficit while insisting on a tax cut policy that will increase the deficit by $700 billion over the next 10 years. In fact, if one were actually concerned about the deficit the prudent course of action would be to let all of the tax cuts expire.
I am trying to look at it from thier point of view. How many times have I heard pundits of both sides agree that raising taxes in an economic downturn is not prudent? Again, I don't know that I agree with them but that is what they say. Looking at it from thier side, they believe that raising taxes now will decrease employment opportunities. Also, extending the tax rate is not all that they propose...as the deficit commission plan (a bi-partisan effort) shows. They want to decrease spending as well with some [painful] cuts....even in the military (gasp!). Combined, the $700 billion figure comes down. Probably not enough but as I said, it would be a start.
Oh, not extending the tax rate at all would put Obama in a very precarious political position, kind of like with Bush I. I don't want that either. One thing I do not want is complete control of the federal government by either party.
What has to be done is going to be painful I believe. Spending cuts are never good and they affect real people....but we have to have them. Raising the age on SS benefits is something I hate as well but it looks like it is going to happen. There needs to be an amount of economic protectionism, IMO, which will cause prices of certain goods to increase....not a good thing for most of us but we'll never become the producing nation we need to be without it.
And on the one hand you have the party of "no" and on the other you have the party of "tax and spend" with a couple of wars going on costing us billions a week...we can't just do nothing, which is what the vote yesterday amounted to.
Looks like the deficit commission plan failed but drew a majority of support.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/03/news/economy/fiscal_commission_vote/index.htm?hpt=T2
From the article:
"In a strong bipartisan showing, 11 of 18 members voted yes. Five Democrats, five Republicans and one independent voted in favor of the panel's debt-reduction plan. Those who voted against it included four Democrats and three Republicans.
...
The group's final report -- called "The Moment of Truth" -- includes a wide range of suggested spending cuts and tax changes that would slash $4 trillion from projected deficits between now and 2020.
...
Their recommendations include a radical overhaul of the tax code, changes to Social Security and substantial cuts in defense and discretionary spending
Overall the panel's plan would reduce the country's accumulated debt to 40% of the overall economy by 2035, down from the 185% currently projected."
Maybe they'll get something done someday.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/03/news/economy/fiscal_commission_vote/index.htm?hpt=T2
From the article:
"In a strong bipartisan showing, 11 of 18 members voted yes. Five Democrats, five Republicans and one independent voted in favor of the panel's debt-reduction plan. Those who voted against it included four Democrats and three Republicans.
...
The group's final report -- called "The Moment of Truth" -- includes a wide range of suggested spending cuts and tax changes that would slash $4 trillion from projected deficits between now and 2020.
...
Their recommendations include a radical overhaul of the tax code, changes to Social Security and substantial cuts in defense and discretionary spending
Overall the panel's plan would reduce the country's accumulated debt to 40% of the overall economy by 2035, down from the 185% currently projected."
Maybe they'll get something done someday.
EVIL!!!!!!! Holding the unemployed hostage! at Christmas! I wish I could get a list so as to help sign them up to vote in 2012! he he!
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Well, Caw, I doubt you can get 40 votes in the senate for a full extension of the Bush tax cuts, and Reid isn't going to agree reconciliation for the Republicans. It's more likely that you'll get a Democratic bill through, with reconciliation, extending the middle class portions. I don't think either side is going to come to a compromise that can get 60 votes.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
It's really not in Obama's hands at this point. It's all to do with the senate.
I doubt one issue is going to kill them. Even if most Americans think the full extent of the tax breaks are dumb, there's a dedicated 40% that won't make a peep about it no matter what if their Republican overlords tell them it's fine.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Raising taxes on the top 2% really wouldn't be bad for the economy.
This is for more than the 2 years or so we'd need for recovery anyway, and there's better uses the money could be put towards than the savings of some trust fund brat. You guys are truly only using the recovery as a facade; it's not the primary reason you support permanently extending the tax cuts for the top 2%.
Last edited:
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Will 60 votes on any side bend any? Doubt it.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
That was a movie.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I really should stop giving my opponents ideas.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
You know, when I hear talks to compromise on this, I am reminded of a story I heard once. Back in the 70's at St. Anne's college in England, they were talking about liberalizing things by allowing them to have guys over for the night. There were snooty people who were against this, but were to embarrassed to just state their true intentions for their opposition, which was just that they were fuddy duddies who despise the idea of sex. So they complained about how doing this would raise costs instead. Eventually, the two sides came to a compromise, and a 25 pence fee was to be charged to any male visitor to help pay for the extra maintenance. The next day, the headline in the paper's was "St. Anne's Girl! 25 pence a night".
Republicans are the snooty old guard who truly just want to protect the rich but put up the recovery as a logical facade (when in reality there are things we could be doing with the money to further hasten the recovery anyway). And LR and Chapdog come in, take them seriously at their face, and offer please-nobody compromises. This is why I hate compromise. Because it so often avoid the meat of the issue, the elephants in the room everyone is afraid to talk about. Simple fact is, we can't afford these tax cuts and we never could.
Republicans are the snooty old guard who truly just want to protect the rich but put up the recovery as a logical facade (when in reality there are things we could be doing with the money to further hasten the recovery anyway). And LR and Chapdog come in, take them seriously at their face, and offer please-nobody compromises. This is why I hate compromise. Because it so often avoid the meat of the issue, the elephants in the room everyone is afraid to talk about. Simple fact is, we can't afford these tax cuts and we never could.
Last edited:
I am a big fan of let them expire! USA first! We need the money, we are broke!
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Our debt situation isn't gloom and doom yet, but it's a fact that we can't afford this level of taxation and this level of spending permanently into the future. The Republicans don't want a 2 year extension, they want a permanent one, because the recovery, again, is not their primary goal. And they aren't going to compromise that away.
Thanks, you have lifted me up and I needed that!