Most likely dem legislation to pass in 2009

What a load of crap. Bottom line... as a result of their actions, would taxes increase, stay the same or decrease? They would allow taxes to increase by their inaction.... and yes, inaction is still a decision. It is inaction that allowed Rwanda (clinton) and the Sudan (Bush) genocides to occur.

Yes, I do agree that the tax cuts are not fiscally responsible without corresponding cuts in spending. I have stated that numerous times. Top asked for what I thought the dems would do first.... I gave my answer. Adding to the burden with yet another poorly run social program is doomed to the same fate that the current fiascos like Medicare etc... hold.

Bottom line.... I do think that raising the taxes is a mistake. It would be far better for them to cut spending. (my opinion)

However, if they do not cut spending (which we all know they won't) then I agree they do need to raise the taxes to compensate.

Well we are going to cut spending...by allowing the bush tax gifts for the rich to expire.

There is public support for that you know.
 
Well we are going to cut spending...by allowing the bush tax gifts for the rich to expire.

There is public support for that you know.
Increasing taxes is decreasing spending? You are making no sense. Although any actual money given to them would be decreasing spending so long as the same money wasn't just shifted to their pals...

Hmmm...

Seriously, exactly how would you be decreasing spending by allowing the taxes to hike?
 
Short straw is what you get and you'll be thankfull for it.
Boomers have been, and will be in control for a long time.
So I'll laugh all the way to the bank with my $2,500 mo from SS, my medicade perscripitons yada yada. Just like Bush spending invisible money on Iraq, Dems will nationalize HC and pass on the bill to gen x,y,z.
Deal with it.
 
Increasing taxes is decreasing spending? You are making no sense. Although any actual money given to them would be decreasing spending so long as the same money wasn't just shifted to their pals...

Hmmm...

Seriously, exactly how would you be decreasing spending by allowing the taxes to hike?


If you have 200 dollars to last you for two weeks, and you only spend 50 of it in the store, and then give 150 of it to friends of yours, how much do you have left at the end of two weeks?

you can call it what you want, I call it spending.
 
Short straw is what you get and you'll be thankfull for it.
Boomers have been, and will be in control for a long time.
So I'll laugh all the way to the bank with my $2,500 mo from SS, my medicade perscripitons yada yada. Just like Bush spending invisible money on Iraq, Dems will nationalize HC and pass on the bill to gen x,y,z.
Deal with it.

I plan to do just that. When gen x takes control we are going to pay back you boomers for all of your waste. You forget that there is another generation the size of the boomers and they will begin voting in about 10-15 years. You think they are going to play nice with your generation after what you have left them AND as your generation is dying off?

:burn:
 
If you have 200 dollars to last you for two weeks, and you only spend 50 of it in the store, and then give 150 of it to friends of yours, how much do you have left at the end of two weeks?

you can call it what you want, I call it spending.
As I said, raising taxes is not the same as this.

What happens is that you take money to continue spending. Instead of taking $200 you take only $195 leaving the money in the pocket that earned it. If you start taking $200 you are not decreasing spending.
 
SF I'll have sponged off gem x y z plenty long enough by the end of the boomers power. They will take it out on you and chap.
 
What a load of crap. Bottom line... as a result of their actions, would taxes increase, stay the same or decrease? They would allow taxes to increase by their inaction.... and yes, inaction is still a decision. It is inaction that allowed Rwanda (clinton) and the Sudan (Bush) genocides to occur.

Yes, I do agree that the tax cuts are not fiscally responsible without corresponding cuts in spending. I have stated that numerous times. Top asked for what I thought the dems would do first.... I gave my answer. Adding to the burden with yet another poorly run social program is doomed to the same fate that the current fiascos like Medicare etc... hold.

Bottom line.... I do think that raising the taxes is a mistake. It would be far better for them to cut spending. (my opinion)

However, if they do not cut spending (which we all know they won't) then I agree they do need to raise the taxes to compensate.



No. The bottom line is that the Republicans passed legislation that cut taxes for a specific period of time, not forever. Allowing Republican legislation to run its normal course is exactly that. SUre taxes may increase but its the Republicans you need to blame.
 
I plan to do just that. When gen x takes control we are going to pay back you boomers for all of your waste. You forget that there is another generation the size of the boomers and they will begin voting in about 10-15 years. You think they are going to play nice with your generation after what you have left them AND as your generation is dying off?

:burn:

People have been talking about SS going broke since its inception. They always make minor adjustments, and fix it. I heard this same gloom and doom talk 20 years ago.
 
No. The bottom line is that the Republicans passed legislation that cut taxes for a specific period of time, not forever. Allowing Republican legislation to run its normal course is exactly that. SUre taxes may increase but its the Republicans you need to blame.

How do you figure? Whoever is in charge when the tax cuts either expire or are extended or renewed will be the one's with the 'credit' or 'blame'.
 
Assuming a Dem win and larger control of House and senate as all the credible polls show will happen.
What's your prediction for the largest impact 3 bills.:clink:

tax increase for the wealthy.
Criminal charges against Bush and cronies.
A raise for themselves.
 
AMT fix will be in no doubt,
I was hoping for some exciting stuff to the dems but obviously it does not look probable.
 
Yeah, don't point the finger at the morons that passed the legislation in the first place.

The point Dung is that should the dems have complete control, any changes will be theirs. They have the power to extend the tax cuts or to let them expire. Either way, they are taking a side.... either current tax rates or higher tax rates. The decision is theirs (again assuming they have complete control).
 
no shit, seniors are a huge voting block. They love SS and Medicare. The 30 something's like chap and freak's heads explode every time they stare at the huge amount coming out of their paychecks and the actuary in them gets thier butwhole's spazzing.

no shit considering they tell us.. um well you may not get SS when u retire.. may not be there.. ohh we are moving the age to 70 nor ahhh 72 since you will probably live longer... and um well if u collect more then 100k a year you are not elligable.. ah em you have to be under 500K in assets to collect... ohh well lifting the tax limit so now all income included.. um ahh moving the rate to 10%...

fucking biggest scam going run by our government.

could u imagine what super and I at our ages. super being 10years younger then me could retire with like 50M if he got to keep the 14% for Medicare and SSI. instead he will get 70% of some poverty level monthly check when hes 70years old.
 
Damm chap your 35ish right, freak is 10 yrs younger.
NO wonder he's always so pissed. As a high wage earner in is late 20's he will be paying through the ass till he's 60 and get about 1% return if that.
My bad, to keep your sanity both of you should never again compute what that 7.5% that your putting in could get you in 30 yrs at 10%:clink:
 
Back
Top