Aren't those two of the cornerstones of Republicans? Then why:[quote]NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- After months of debate and significant pressure from the..."/>
Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Fiscal Responsibility and Free Enterprise
Thursday, September 16, 2010 8:41 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- After months of debate and significant pressure from the White House, the Senate on Thursday passed a $42 billion bill aimed at helping small businesses. The House passed its own version of the bill about 3 months ago. The Senate's version of the Small Business Jobs Act will now have to go back to the House, where it's expected to pass, before President Obama can sign it into law. "It should not have taken this long to pass this bill. At a time when small-business owners are still struggling to make payroll and they're still holding off hiring, we put together a plan that would give them some tax relief and make it easier for them to take out loans," Obama said before Wednesday's votes. The 61 to 38 vote in favor of the small business bill largely came down along party lines, with only two Republicans Senators, George Voinovich of Ohio and George LeMieux of Florida, joining with Democrats to pass the bill.
Quote:President Obama's plan to raise taxes on wealthier people while preserving cuts for everyone else appears increasingly likely to founder before Election Day. Senate GOP leaders declared on Monday that Republicans are, to a person, opposed to legislation that would extend only middle-class tax relief - which Obama has repeatedly promised to deliver - if Democrats follow through on plans to let tax rates rise for the wealthiest Americans. The GOP senators forcefully made their case one day after House Republican leader John Boehner suggested he might vote for Obama's plan if that ends up the only option. It would take numerous Democratic defectors to pass the Republicans' version - extending all the Bush tax cuts - or the issue could be left for a postelection congressional session if Republicans block the measure with a filibuster. Wealthy Americans have the price of a BMW convertible riding on the outcome of the Congressional battle over tax cuts set to expire this year. The tax cuts for the rich plan being pushed by Republicans would add $4 TRILLION to the deficit. That's more than the stimulus AND health-care bill did.
Thursday, September 16, 2010 10:36 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Thursday, September 16, 2010 10:55 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Thursday, September 16, 2010 10:58 AM
Thursday, September 16, 2010 1:19 PM
Thursday, September 16, 2010 3:02 PM
Thursday, September 16, 2010 3:09 PM
Quote:With President Bush pushing forward with his economic policy that has helped create a massive unemployment crisis, a closer analysis of the employment data shows that this crisis has now spread to almost every corner of the nation. Specifically, using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it is possible to see how many jobs have been lost by city and state since Bush took office. Here are some highlights from those findings: TWENTY-FOUR CITIES LOST OVER 4% OF THEIR WORKFORCE SINCE BUSH TOOK OFFICE: According to BLS data, more than 24 major cities in America have lost more than 4% of their entire workforce since Bush took office. Among the worst hit are Boulder, CO which has lost 16.7% of its workforce; San Jose, CA which has lost 15.9% of its workforce; San Francisco, CA which has lost 10.2% of its workforce; Flint, MI which has lost 7.7% of its workforce; and Greenville, SC which has lost 6.8% of its workforce. 37 STATES AND 173 CITIES HAVE LOST JOBS SINCE BUSH TOOK OFFICE: Out of 300 city/metropolitan areas and 50 states surveyed, 173 cities and 37 states have seen their workforces reduced since Bush took office. MORE THAN 2 MILLION JOBS LOST SINCE BUSH TOOK OFFICE: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), total non-farm employment in January 2001 was 132,413,900. The latest data from January 2003 shows that total non-farm employment is now 130,089,400 - a loss of more than 2.3 million jobs in just two years. EMPLOYMENT WAS STILL RISING WHEN BUSH TOOK OFFICE: During the months of Oct, Nov, Dec of 2000, the three months prior to the Bush inauguration, nearly 300,000 jobs were added to the economy. Even in January of 2001, employers hired 63,000 more workers and in February 75,000 more people were hired. In other words, the recession started under Bush. UNEMPLOYMENT CRISIS STARTED AFTER BUSH TAX CUT AND BEFORE 9/11: In February, Bush introduced his first tax cut proposal, saying "today, I am sending to Congress my plan to provide relief to all income taxpayers, which I believe will help jump-start the American economy...Americans are hearing, and some feeling, the economic slowdown...A warning light is flashing on the dashboard of our economy. And we just can't drive on and hope for the best; we must act without delay" [Bush, 2/28/01]. Instead, the opposite happened. In the six months between the introduction of the tax cut and the terrorist attacks of September 11th, Labor Department data show that almost 500,000 jobs were lost. While the White House has claimed that the unemployment crisis was due to September 11th, this data proves that that clearly is not the case. BUSH LOSING MORE THAN 73,000 JOBS PER MONTH - THE WORST IN LAST TWO DECADES: Overall, the economy has shed an average of 73,400 jobs per month since Bush was inaugurated - the worst rate for any Administration in the last two decades. The President would have to create 141,000 jobs per month in order not to have the worst 4-year job record of any President in the last 60 years.
Friday, September 17, 2010 6:07 AM
KPO
Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.
Friday, September 17, 2010 7:24 AM
Friday, September 17, 2010 7:41 AM
JONGSSTRAW
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Why are the Repubs holding the tax cuts hostage unless they include the richest 2% of the country, which would increase the deficit they scream about by 4 TRILLION, more than stimulus AND health-care bill put together, if they're for fiscal responsibility and bringing down the debt?
Quote: Unless they actually DO want the country to fail, so they can get power in 2012.
Friday, September 17, 2010 11:02 AM
Friday, September 17, 2010 12:47 PM
Quote:That argument is pure b.s. Extending the tax cuts will not add one dime to the deficit on its' own.
Quote:As Obama was piling on the trillions in new debt, he was counting on saving that money when the tax cuts expired. Unfortunately for him, the Stimulus failed, and the economy is worse than ever and so is unemployment.
Quote:With 15% real unemployment 20 months into Obama's term, and record spending by Democrats leading us off the financial cliff
Friday, September 17, 2010 12:58 PM
Quote:Which responds to my refutation of the previous post, but does nothing to answer the questions posed. Please? Why are the Repubs holding the tax cuts hostage unless they include the richest 2% of the country, which would increase the deficit they scream about by 4 TRILLION, more than stimulus AND health-care bill put together, if they're for fiscal responsibility and bringing down the debt?
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL