Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 01-01-2013, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,495,743 times
Reputation: 27720

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
The Bush tax cuts were also supposed to be temporary, since they had a built in ten-year sunset provision. Same with the 2-year extension of those rates in 2010. So, I guess by your logic none of those tax increases would have been "raising your taxes" either, since they were also designed to be for a specific duration.
I was for letting them expire back when. Our government has a bad habit of making "temporary" changes permanent by infinite "renewals".

I'm also for letting the Patriot Act parts expire when they were supposed to as well.

Those were all put in place at specific times in history for specific reasons.
There were expirations attached to them as well.

Raising your taxes is not only letting them expire but increasing them as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:44 AM
 
531 posts, read 501,688 times
Reputation: 488
OP, what spending increases exactly are you referring to? Can you give specific examples?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:47 AM
 
531 posts, read 501,688 times
Reputation: 488
P.S. everyone, the Senate bill includes a provision (sec. 902, page 153) that excludes members of Congress from the President's recent executive order giving raises to federal employees.

Last edited by John Dark; 01-01-2013 at 12:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:52 AM
 
15,856 posts, read 14,483,585 times
Reputation: 11948
If I were leading the House Republicans, I would allow the tax increase as passed by the senate, BUT...

I'd insist on significant cuts in entitlements as a price for agreeing to the tax increases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:56 AM
 
531 posts, read 501,688 times
Reputation: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
If I were leading the House Republicans, I would allow the tax increase as passed by the senate, BUT...

I'd insist on significant cuts in entitlements as a price for agreeing to the tax increases.
That was kind of their position many weeks ago. Entitlement reform isn't part of the cliff avoidance deal. And the sequestration has been pushed off to deal with in the future.

But take heart....a debt ceiling vote will be coming up in the next couple of months, and entitlement reform is going to be at the top of the GOP's negotiating list.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,366,904 times
Reputation: 2922
Here is a good article about that same re run we have all seen before but the Senate has forgot :

Quote:
In 1982, President Reagan was promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes,” Americans for Tax Reform says of those two incidents. “The tax hikes went through, but the spending cuts did not materialize. President Reagan later said that signing onto this deal was the biggest mistake of his presidency.
"In 1990, President George H.W. Bush agreed to $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. The tax hikes went through, and we are still paying them today. Not a single penny of the promised spending cuts actually happened.”
Fiscal Cliff Deal: $1 in Spending Cuts for Every $41 in Tax Increases
And now we are at a 41 to 1 ratio. The house should listen to Reagan and not repeat the biggest mistake that he made.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,366,904 times
Reputation: 2922
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Dark View Post
That was kind of their position many weeks ago. Entitlement reform isn't part of the cliff avoidance deal. And the sequestration has been pushed off to deal with in the future.

But take heart....a debt ceiling vote will be coming up in the next couple of months, and entitlement reform is going to be at the top of the GOP's negotiating list.
And just like now their backs will be up against the wall when the debt ceiling debate takes place, and the press and {D}s will be screaming bloody murder about a credit rating down grade. We have already seen this movie and I hate re runs. The house should nix the deal and get a fair horse trade instead of volunteering to screw themselves with no leverage later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:07 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,495,743 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swingblade View Post
And just like now their backs will be up against the wall when the debt ceiling debate takes place, and the press and {D}s will be screaming bloody murder about a credit rating down grade. We have already seen this movie and I hate re runs. The house should nix the deal and get a fair horse trade instead of volunteering to screw themselves with no leverage later.
And that credit rating downgrade is not because we refuse to raise the debt ceiling although that's what the press will report.

The more debt we take on as revenue shrinks, the higher our risk of not being able to pay back that debt.
You have the Fed pumping $80 billion of made up money into the system each month and that's not enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:33 PM
 
4,684 posts, read 4,574,213 times
Reputation: 1588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
The Democrat-led Senate, apparently with the cooperation of some RINOs
If Mitch McConnell counts as a Republican in name only, the GOP is a party in name only.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 12:34 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,394,292 times
Reputation: 3086
Hopefully the house will reject this crap.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:20 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top