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.
Didn't Boner say that they wouldn't let the taxes expire for the middle class even if they had to give up the $200,000 and higher tax cuts. Seems he forgot?
It is good he came to his sense....maybe I will get an answer, doubt it...why should I (who is the 2%) bracket have to pay more?
Lets see - 600 Billion less in revenue for the Gov from the middle class and 140 Billion in less revenue from the high earners....if the high earners don't get an extension how is it fair for the others to get a break?
Is it not fair to treat everyone the same? Are we not all citizens? If the high earners already pay over 70% of income tax, why should they be forced to pay more?
Didn't Boner say that they wouldn't let the taxes expire for the middle class even if they had to give up the $200,000 and higher tax cuts. Seems he forgot?
Like a typical republican, the spray tan man is a liar and a hypocrite. Sure did agree to vote on the 250K
Think you got it wrong as the repubs are not interested the in "average" american but in protecting the rich. They won't give a tax cut to the middle class unless the rich get the cuts with the other sweet deal. The republicans are a party of HELL NO!!!!
No, I am not rich, but in the % you talk about...the Repub better stick to their guns and say, treat all citizens the same, stop with the discrimination...
In regards to the tax cut extensions, the government doesn't have to borrow any money to let people keep the same percentage of their own earnings. They simply collect the designated tax revenue.
The problem actually lies in the fact that the Dems are spending money the government doesn't have.
If there are no spending cuts they do have to borrow money. When the bill was originally passed by Republicans there were no spending cuts attached to it. As a result tax revenue was decreased while the budget was not. As a result of that combination there was more borrowing. Again here there is no spending cut to go along with the extension and that will result in more borrowing.
The Democrats are being more fiscally responsible in this situation. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats want to make cuts, or they would have proposed adding them to the bill. Emphasis on neither. Democrats want to end the tax cuts which would raise rates and bring in Revenue. Republicans want to keep the status quo. Until the Republicans actually propose some cuts to pay for their insistence on this measure, calls for reduced spending from that party cannot be taken seriously.
the liberals are CONTINUING to be the party of DISCRIMINATION, wanting to discriminate agaist one group (in this case the 'so called rich'( btw 250k is not rich))
its the liberals who are not backing thier own president
but the liberals dont care
Where did the "no more spending" go. You do know that this will add to the deficit, right?
What is economically illiterate is borrowing $900 Billion dollars without knowing how you will pay it off. What ever happened to the fiscal conservatism of the Tea Party?
Did you know that permanently extending the Bush tax cuts on the lower 98% of us was going to cost $1.8 Trillion over the next decade? But due to some budget trickery, Congress could pretend that it cost nothing? And no one can predict the lost growth due to diminished incentives.
GregW says the tax rate should be 80%. So if I have a chance at putting capital work, I get 100% of the loss and 20% of the gain??!!?? That is a recipe for stagnation and ultimately, national bankruptcy. The Dem's plan is a point on the path between the status quo and ruination.
I'm not the Tea Party. I am pro-growth. A growing economy raises tax revenues, reduces welfare outlays, and makes the debt smaller as a percentage of the economy. The growth ramifications of our policies are more important at this juncture than the debt--Obama for the first time has come down on the side of growth. So I support his compromise.
In regards to the tax cut extensions, the government doesn't have to borrow any money to let people keep the same percentage of their own earnings. They simply collect the designated tax revenue.
The problem actually lies in the fact that the Dems are spending money the government doesn't have.
Ding Ding Ding
Democrats dont want to do that. One has to ask why not? Why do democrat think increasing spending and making us all a slave to the gov to pay off the debt is a good thing for middle class.
The Bill is not satisfactory to either party, but is a compromise...meaning both sides of the argument get part of what they want. You would rather have it one sided, ...ot going to happen, and it means the Dems are not willing to compromise. Sour grapes... about to loose the House because they did not listen to the people....
and what was the compromise with the repubs? If you don't do what we say tax cuts are going away along with unemployment extension. Is that really a compromise?
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.
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.
Didn't Boner say that they wouldn't let the taxes expire for the middle class even if they had to give up the $200,000 and higher tax cuts. Seems he forgot?
What ever happened to the fiscal conservatism of the Tea Party?
