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.
The purpose of this post is to inject a few facts:
1) If 54% don't feel the effect of the payroll tax holiday, that means that 46% do, and that's a large number.
2) The OP asks "didn't the Dems learn anything from the stimulus?" The answer is , 'yes.' The stimulus, such as it was, has been analyzed by the CBO and private economists with the conclusion that it raised GDP from where it was. The problem with the stimulus was scale. It was $788 billion, 40% tax-cuts of minimal effectiveness, spread out over two-years and trying to negate a 6% drop in GDP on a $14 trillion economy.
Thus, to the chagrin of people who want Obama to fail, the stimulus worked. It just was too underpowered to undo the massive drop.
3) While the anti-Obama group snicker at the effect of a payroll tax holiday, "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) shows that a payroll tax cut is one of the most effective tax cuts in stimulating demand for goods and services in a recessionary economy — not as effective as direct spending on unemployment benefits but still far more effective than high-end income tax rate reductions." link So, if we filter out the partisan foolishness and only address facts, we see that the payroll tax holiday is indeed stimulative.
Of course, the anti-Obama crowd doesn't want the economy to improve because their only objective is to leave Obama with the worst economy so their electoral chances are better -- never mind that Americans will suffer.
Did you read the article ?
From the OP link:
Fifty-four percent said the tax holiday has not helped them financially, while only 25 percent said it had been a help to them.
Is a corporate jet different than a corporate locomotive?
Did you know that all durable business equipment is eligible for depreciation deductions?
Were you under the impression that rolling back the depreciation deduction for corporate jets from five years to seven years was somehow pertinent in the debate about the debt and deficit? Did you know that the additional tax money collected, if you got that amount each year since the Dead Sea was only sick, wouldn't really make much difference?
Or did President Hyberbole's focus on corporate jets make you think this was a legitimate issue?
Is a corporate jet different than a corporate locomotive?
Did you know that all durable business equipment is eligible for depreciation deductions?
Were you under the impression that rolling back the depreciation deduction for corporate jets from five years to seven years was somehow pertinent in the debate about the debt and deficit? Did you know that the additional tax money collected, if you got that amount each year since the Dead Sea was only sick, wouldn't really make much difference?
Or did President Hyberbole's focus on corporate jets make you think this was a legitimate issue?
Obama told them so. I asked the poster myself what were the special breaks that corporate jets got besides depreciation. I'm still waiting for the answer.
Don't ya love how some just listen and believe with no questioning whatsoever.
Is a corporate jet different than a corporate locomotive?
Did you know that all durable business equipment is eligible for depreciation deductions?
Were you under the impression that rolling back the depreciation deduction for corporate jets from five years to seven years was somehow pertinent in the debate about the debt and deficit? Did you know that the additional tax money collected, if you got that amount each year since the Dead Sea was only sick, wouldn't really make much difference?
Or did President Hyberbole's focus on corporate jets make you think this was a legitimate issue?
I did miss that but in the end, it doesn't matter. Few 'feel' the macro economic effect.
Simple theory: People notice the slight increase the first couple of paychecks. And then they adjust their lifestyle around those few extra dollars and then it just becomes absorbed as if it were always there. If Obama wanted to score political points (only), he'd let it expire and the citizenry would notice the extra dollars gone from their paychecks, thereby presumably reflecting negatively on the GOP.
Barack Obama is not that kind of risk-taker, though. That kind of calculus wouldn't make it through the political filter between his ears.
But you keep bringing it up so it does seem to matter to you. You got led down a false path and believed what was said.
What I'm saying is that people's perception of economic areas are fuzzy and inaccurate. But I stand by the smart economists, not polls, and the economists say the macro economic effect is +1/2% of GDP.
Then beg your Republican representation to take him up on the offer
What about OBAMA putting down his proposals ON PAPER? OR the Senate dems doing the same? You know, something that can be SCORED, looked at in detail? But that is the rub, they don't want anything on paper, do they? You have NOTHING from them on this issue.
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.
