U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:16 AM
 
24,843 posts, read 32,433,577 times
Reputation: 11453

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
Keeping all the tax cuts in place, would add about $4 trillion to the defict....the Repugs response...more tax cuts. They don't even believe or think they should be paid for. You can't cut taxes like Bush did, then grossly increasely the the size of the federal government.

If you think tax cuts work....you're an idiot.

One wonders if the repugs know what they're doing, or if they even care about this country.

Truth be told, the tax rate would just go back to the Clinton era, remember the 90's...we were a very happy country, we all money and jobs, and our biggest national crisis was who Clinton was screwing that week.
Oh, we know who Clinton was screwing.......us.

NAFTA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:16 AM
 
85 posts, read 71,200 times
Reputation: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
Truth be told, the tax rate would just go back to the Clinton era, remember the 90's...we were a very happy country, we all money and jobs, and our biggest national crisis was who Clinton was screwing that week.
the 90's is what screwed us

jobs leaving, because of the 90's free-trade agreements

housing BUBBLE started in the 90's...1995 to be exact
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:16 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
20,372 posts, read 13,899,136 times
Reputation: 5239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Whatever the figure is, it will be 2 trillion larger if we keep the cuts. If you are unhappy about 1 trillion increase, then why would you want to push for an additional 2 trillion?
A 3% tax cut for the top 2 percent of taxpayer equals a loss of $2 trillion dollars??? You think the top tax bracket earns over $60 trillion dollars?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:17 AM
 
783 posts, read 707,381 times
Reputation: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
Interesting that the same people who have bent over backwards the past few years to criticize the tax cuts are now so eager to maintain the lowest rates to score political points. A principled individual would be against extending all the tax cuts. To extend the Bush tax cuts for the lower rungs is to confirm that the tax cuts were a positive thing to begin with.
The lower rungs spend the money they get trough tax cuts while the upper rungs who already earns alot of money regardles of tax cuts saves most of it instead and spending is what is needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:18 AM
 
85 posts, read 71,200 times
Reputation: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
Keeping all the tax cuts in place, would add about $4 trillion to the defict
lie,


over spending, by neo-cons and neo-libs will add 10's of trillions to the debt...not tax cuts that help the poor and middleclass
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:19 AM
 
783 posts, read 707,381 times
Reputation: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
Keeping all the tax cuts in place, would add about $4 trillion to the defict....the Repugs response...more tax cuts. They don't even believe or think they should be paid for. You can't cut taxes like Bush did, then grossly increasely the the size of the federal government.

If you think tax cuts work....you're an idiot.

One wonders if the repugs know what they're doing, or if they even care about this country.

Truth be told, the tax rate would just go back to the Clinton era, remember the 90's...we were a very happy country, we all money and jobs, and our biggest national crisis was who Clinton was screwing that week.
The Republican strategy is simple and its called starve the beast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:21 AM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,348 posts, read 2,428,277 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultralight View Post
The Republican strategy is simple and its called starve the beast.
The beast the want to control---government?

Can you say conflict of interest....and therefore why would I vote for someone you fundamentally hates the very institution they wish to be elected to?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,348 posts, read 2,428,277 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by truthsayer2 View Post
lie,


over spending, by neo-cons and neo-libs will add 10's of trillions to the debt...not tax cuts that help the poor and middleclass
That's not a lie. Truth....you should do your homework. Tax cuts don't work, and this time, they will drastically increase the deficit the Repugs are sooooo concerned about. Why should anyone trust them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,348 posts, read 2,428,277 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1 View Post
Oh, we know who Clinton was screwing.......us.

NAFTA.
Nope, NAFTA was created under the Regan/Bush era. Talks started in 1986, and HW Bush, raitified parts of it before he left office in 1992-it was a total Republican idea. In fact Clinton wanted provisions to protect American workers and jobs. But due to other political forces in Canada and Mexico, the agreement was delayed to the beginning of Clinton's term, so he had to deal with it.

A simple google search would have gotten you these answers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2010, 08:35 AM
C.C
 
2,235 posts, read 2,071,780 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin View Post
But due to other political forces in Canada and Mexico, the agreement was delayed to the beginning of Clinton's term, so he had to deal with it.

A simple google search would have gotten you these answers.
By "deal with it" I assume you mean he had to either sign it or veto it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top