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 better question is why are they known as the "Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich", whey 60%+ of the reductions went to lower income tax payers? Usual story though, tell the same lie long enough and the ignorant will start to believe it.
Why would Bush do that? And why do republicans advertise eliminating tax cuts for the top 1-5% as "burden on job creators" when you claim that they didn't see noticeable difference? And are you also accounting for capital gains tax?
The Liberal Media.....and liberals.....can't do anything without there being a label on their target. In this case, leftists are holding on to the last vestiges of the Bush legacy in their attempt to prop up Barack Obama. Unfortunately for libs, America sees right through this lousy attempt to shield the President. The pendulum is swinging towards conservatism and Republicans in 2012. Bet on it.
Besides, after a decade, aren't they "tax rates"? Go ahead Obama, raise taxes. Do it today, since you and your minions keep saying that it's what the American people want. You do not have the courage. As usual.
Your little economics thread showed that you don't know a lot about economics. I'm guessing you don't know much about taxes either. They are called the Bush tax cuts as that's the overall common monicker given to them. It would probably be nice for Obama if they were called the Obama tax cuts, but nobody would have a sweet damn clue of what you were talking about.
Obama agreed to extend them in return for extending the unemployment benefits. Basically, he agreed to let the Republicans give another gift to the rich while he did what the President has to do and keep the country running.
In terms of your courage comment, the call to go after OBL took a lot of courage. Had they been wrong, it would have been the biggest foreign policy mistake since Carter's time and his Presidency would have been done.
Other than he's a Democrat and you're overly emotional, is there anything you're really whining about here?
The better question is why are they known as the "Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich", whey 60%+ of the reductions went to lower income tax payers? Usual story though, tell the same lie long enough and the ignorant will start to believe it.
That's debatable. While the Bush tax-cuts lowered taxes on many by very little, it lowered the taxes of the few greatly. In sheer dollar terms it looks like more went to the lower brackets because there are so many lower bracket people. (And now, conservatives are complaining that 49% pay no income taxes at all.)
Over a ten-year period, $1.7 trillion went to the bottom 99% while $700 billion went just to the top 1%. Thus, a larger share proportionally went to the wealthy.
Actually, even the 1% got the same tax cut that the rest did. So any accounting of tax dollars for lower incomes also include incomes of the highest wage earners.
Obama agreed to extend them in return for extending the unemployment benefits. Basically, he agreed to let the Republicans give another gift to the rich while he did what the President has to do and keep the country running.
At the signing ceremony, Obama said passage of the law was propelled "by the fact that tax rates for every American were poised to automatically increase on January 1st." If that had happened, "the average middle-class family would have had to pay an extra $3,000 in taxes next year," he said. "That wouldn't have just been a blow to them; it would have been a blow to our economy, just as we're climbing out of a devastating recession."
It's one of the few positive things he's done as President. Don't dilute it by saying he didn't want to do it.
Do you want to hate the tax cuts now? But to answer your question, they are called Bush Tax Cuts because Bush proposed and signed off on them. Obama opposes most of it, but agreed to extend it temporarily as a compromise with republicans. Do you not know EVEN THAT?
I know EVERYTHING!
Obama was too weak to end them. He KNEW that by doing so, it would be disasterous to the economy.
Obama IS too weak to end them come January.....lame duck or not.
I like ANY tax cut, as long as there are no leftie policies attached to the bill.
Why would Bush do that? And why do republicans advertise eliminating tax cuts for the top 1-5% as "burden on job creators" when you claim that they didn't see noticeable difference? And are you also accounting for capital gains tax?
Did you know that even the poorest among us can pay 15% for capital gains?
It's NOT a "rich person tax break".
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.
