Bush tax cuts up in the air by Niki2

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Bush tax cuts up in the air

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Friday, July 9, 2010 06:52
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1754
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 9:41 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

At least they're not talking (at THIS point) about extending them for the rich! Thank gawd for small favors.

Quote:
Odds are good that the middle-class will get to keep their tax cuts. The question now is for how long.

The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire in six months. President Obama had promised to make them permanent for the majority of Americans. But the reality of the federal budget's impending shortfalls is making that a hard promise to keep.

Indeed, some influential players in Washington have signaled that it's no longer a given that the tax cuts will be made permanent, at least not right away.

The most prominent Democrat to suggest as much is House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. In a speech last month, Hoyer said point-blank that lawmakers can't ignore the budget consequences of extending the cuts.

"We need to have a serious discussion about their implications for our fiscal outlook, including whether we can afford to permanently extend them before we have a real plan for long-term deficit reduction," Hoyer said.

In May, conservative economist Martin Feldstein, who was President Reagan's top economic adviser and now sits on Obama's recovery advisory board, wrote in a Wall Street Journal commentary that while he favors temporarily extending the cuts for everyone, the country can't afford to make them permanent.

The cost of doing so for everyone would top $3 trillion over 10 years. Making them permanent for families making less than $250,000 -- which tracks with Obama's promise -- would cost less but not much less: an estimated $2.2 trillion.

Two prominent Senate Democrats recently told The Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress, that the $250,000 threshold is not necessarily a done deal with Congress.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who chairs the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, said he didn't think there was "any magic" in $250,000. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., noted "you could go lower ... why not $200,000? With the debt and deficit we have, you can't make promises to people."

Meanwhile, the House Ways and Means Committee is considering a one-year extension of the tax cuts for families making less than $250,000, according to a report in Congress Daily. The extension would be accompanied by a two-year "patch" to protect the middle class from getting hit by the Alternative Minimum Tax. The estimated cost of those measures combined is $270 billion over 10 years.

More at http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/07/news/economy/bush_tax_cuts/index.htm?s
ource=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin

I know some of you still buy into "trickle-down" and think tax cuts for the rich are a good thing; facts and history have proven otherwise. The rest of us are hurting so bad, we need a chance to catch up, even if just a little bit!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 10:29 AM

KAREL

Flying on duct tape and a damaged registry.

How about the "Trickle Up" theory? Let's see... $800B divided by 307M is about $2600 per person in the USA (illegals not included). I know I could use $2600! And I would not spend it unwisely, because no matter how I would spend it, it would be good for the economy!

But what if I were to use that money to pay down a 20% credit card? Why, that would be un-American! Or, put that money into savings? That too would be un-American! Neither would help the economy in the short term.

I guess the "Trickle Up" theory might not work, either. Kinda like peeing up a rope? *snort*

P.S.: This outta be good. *waits for fireworks*

"Whatever is wrong with you is so right for me." -- Marillion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 10:40 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Actually, I agree. Neither trickle down nor trickle up works to achieve the ends desired.

Part of that is the old "give a man a fish..." thing. You can't just hand out money and expect it to work, you're right.

By the way, nice to meet you if I haven't before, don't recognize your handle. Every additional voice is a GOOD thing!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 3:32 PM

DREAMTROVE

The War is Making You Poor.

There is only one kind of deficit: War Debt. The Debt, as we know it, was created by FDR for world war two. He spend what is today $2 Trillion, and it was never paid down. The war bonds are still owing. The debt remained basically stable until Clinton, when we embarked on more wars. These were on the cheap, many bombs, few soldiers, so it sank us $1 Trillion. Then Bush went more seriously into it, and sank us another $4 Trillion. Now Obama has doubled down and greatly expanded the war, funding not only our own wars, but proxy wars in africa and Pakistan. The total is now $13 Trillion, and will be $14 Trillion by the end of the year.

Every penny of the debt is war debt. If you want to reduce the deficit, there is one painfully obvious thing that you must do. All other policies are relatively meaningless. Here's why:

War is the taking of American labor and resources to create something with parts foreign and domestic which we have made and purchased, and minerals and labor we have paid for and sending it overseas where instead of being paid for it, like an export, it is blown up, and yields nothing. Except death. Death is a liability.

To create something which yields nothing is a net loss. Spending money on anything inside the USA would keep money in the USA. Blowing it up causes it to vanish.

Death is our product, and it has this liability: In an international market it is hard to kill people without killing our own employees. Today, we're doing it in spades.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 3:51 PM

KAREL

Flying on duct tape and a damaged registry.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
The War is Making You Poor.

Ah, yes. Those quagmires. Every penny? I don't think so; however, I'd go with a majority.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 4:14 PM

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)

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
The War is Making You Poor.

There is only one kind of deficit: War Debt. The Debt, as we know it, was created by FDR for world war two. He spend what is today $2 Trillion, and it was never paid down. The war bonds are still owing. The debt remained basically stable until Clinton, when we embarked on more wars. These were on the cheap, many bombs, few soldiers, so it sank us $1 Trillion. Then Bush went more seriously into it, and sank us another $4 Trillion. Now Obama has doubled down and greatly expanded the war, funding not only our own wars, but proxy wars in africa and Pakistan. The total is now $13 Trillion, and will be $14 Trillion by the end of the year.

Every penny of the debt is war debt. If you want to reduce the deficit, there is one painfully obvious thing that you must do. All other policies are relatively meaningless. Here's why:

War is the taking of American labor and resources to create something with parts foreign and domestic which we have made and purchased, and minerals and labor we have paid for and sending it overseas where instead of being paid for it, like an export, it is blown up, and yields nothing. Except death. Death is a liability.

To create something which yields nothing is a net loss. Spending money on anything inside the USA would keep money in the USA. Blowing it up causes it to vanish.

Death is our product, and it has this liability: In an international market it is hard to kill people without killing our own employees. Today, we're doing it in spades.

You've got a few of the details wrong, though. Things were pretty stable until REAGAN, at which point things took a sharp upturn, debt-wise. This continued until around '96, when things took a sharp turn DOWNWARD under Clinton, shaving somewhere around a trillion or more off the debt. Then, immediately following Bush's installation in 2001, things ratcheted up at a rate never before seen. Obama is accelerating that rate now.

What's funny is that conservatives tend to view Republican-era presidencies as The Good Olde Days, and in recent history, it's during those times that the spending tends to increase the most, directly contravening the stated policies of those same alleged "conservatives".

Ironically, the public debt reached its lowest post-war point during the late-Ford/early-Carter era, at which it also hit its lowest percentage of GDP; it remained fairly low until the Reagan years began. The debt's HIGHEST percentage of GDP occurred during WWII, when the debt was 121% of GDP.

And somehow, we survived that, the postwar economy boomed, and people remember the times with the LOWEST debt and debt-to-GDP ratio as the really, really bad times of the Nixon/Ford/Carter era. And some view the second Clinton term, when the debt was being paid down instead of ratcheted up, as a bad time, too.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 4:38 PM

KAREL

Flying on duct tape and a damaged registry.

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
By the way, nice to meet you if I haven't before, don't recognize your handle.

Oh, the irony!

I've been frequenting this site since September of 2005, and had been lurking since January of 2003. I normally do not visit RWED. Nice to meet you! By the way, I grew up in San Ramon.

"Whatever is wrong with you is so right for me." -- Marillion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 4:44 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I am fairly upset about much of our spending. I don't like investing in the wars, and I didn't like the bank bailouts. If the government is going to spend my money, I want to be able to point to something and say, "That's what I bought."

Infrastructure, Parks, Power, Technology. Things that will benefit me and my fellow man in tangible ways, creating jobs meanwhile. Unfortunately, I don't have much precise say in how my taxes are spent.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, July 7, 2010 4:53 PM

DREAMTROVE

Without the wars, nothing would have been borrowed.

Mike, That's a different debt than I had. I don't have the chart now, I posted it a while ago, I see your debt has added debt, it has the debt at $7 Trillion at the end of Clinton. But look at your own chart, Debt is not going down under Clinton. I wonder what the extra debt is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 7:51 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Funny, what I found pretty much backs up what Mike linked:

Source: Department of the Treasury

Source: Whitehouse FY 2011 Budget

Source: PerotCharts

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 7:54 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Yes, yes Nix.

Blame Bush, Blame Bush, wash, repeat.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 7:59 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Just posted what I found on three separate websites, little one; I didn't make them up or look for things that backed anything up, I just took the first three charts I found by googling "National Debt Charts".

Dream on, little one.

for your blind partisan jihad

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:06 AM

MALACHITE

Sadly, it looks like the only president who consistently did something to lower the debt was Clinton, right? Most of the time, it appears that the democrats just overspend less than the republicans (if this graph is true and if I'm interpreting it correctly).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:12 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yup, Mala, they ALL spend, it's a prerequisite for being Prez, I think.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:17 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Amazing if you look at it, isn't it?

It wasn't until the 60's/70's that spending got out of control.

Thanks AGAIN, hippies.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:21 AM

MALACHITE

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Yup, Mala, they ALL spend, it's a prerequisite for being Prez, I think.

I guess my emphasis should have been on OVERspend... And also, cudos to Clinton on this issue...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:28 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Oh, jeez, Wulfwin, contribute SOMETHING to the discussion that doesn't just slather of your hatred of hippies and leftists...or are you even capable of that? Maybe then, something INTELLIGENT reflecting that hatred?

All that seems to run through your brain is "it's Obama's fault", "it's the hippies'
fault"...something about a stuck record...

for your single-minded hatreds.

Well, Mala, that's kind of what I meant; I just didn't put it right.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 6:23 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Yes, yes Nix.

Blame Bush, Blame Bush, wash, repeat.

What I find curious, little Wulfchild, is that, while you CLAIM to be "independant" [sic], and not beholden to any party, you will never, EVER hold Bush accountable even for the things he's accountable for.

You'll hold OBAMA accountable for the Patriot Act, despite the fact that he wasn't even in the Senate when it was enacted at Bush's insistence, but you'll never utter a disparaging word against Bush.

So I have to wonder - what kind of photos does Bush have of you, anyway?

Is it wrong to blame Bush for the things that Bush really is responsible for? Nobody forced him to spend trillions of dollars on needless, illegal, wasteful wars. He chose to do that. You chose to cheerlead him. The Iraq War alone has ALREADY cost this country over a trillion dollars. That's what we've paid out so far; that doesn't include one penny of the ongoing obligations we have to the tens of thousands of soldiers coming home with horrific injuries, traumatic brain injuries, missing limbs, and more - those are costs that are going to pile up in the upcoming years, MORE trillions of dollars.

It's a hell of a lot harder to get out of a war than it is to get into one. Ask Nixon. Or Truman.

I hold Obama accountable for upping the ante in Afghanistan, for doubling down on a losing bet placed by his predecessor. He needs to get us out, now, but he sure as hell wasn't the one who put us there, and he wasn't the one who put the economy into a nosedive. That was the inevitable result of Bush's policies, which were just warmed-over Reagan policies. Reagan's "trickle-down" economics put us into some deep voodoo. Bush's recommitment to those same policies just amplified the effect.

Hell, his tax cuts to the richest 2% of the country cost the country over a trillion all by themselves - and the rich asked him NOT to enact those cuts!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 6:26 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Amazing if you look at it, isn't it?

It wasn't until the 60's/70's that spending got out of control.

Thanks AGAIN, hippies.

Yes, yes, Wulfie...

Blame Hippies, Blame Hippies, Wash, Repeat...

Weird that you consider Nixon and Reagan to be "hippies". I know Reagan had some radical ideas about illegals and amnesty (he was all for it), but I wouldn't think of him as a "hippie" by any stretch of the imagination.

Where the spending really skyrockets is under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II. Why are all you neocons courting the Hippie vote, Wulfie?

And looking closer at those charts, and comparing them to what you claim, I just have to ask: What ARE you smoking, Wulfie? Crack? PCP? Meth? The spending doesn't get well and truly out of control until the 80s. You know, Saint Ronnie, the patron saint of idiot conservatives?

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 8, 2010 6:31 PM

KANEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Just posted what I found on three separate websites, little one; I didn't make them up or look for things that backed anything up, I just took the first three charts I found by googling "National Debt Charts".

Dream on, little one.
for your blind partisan jihad

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

Great chart whore. Now add Obama's debt to that chart to be credible you fucking fat twinkie eating, money stealing whore....Well, it's true.......try again

--------------------------------------------------

RIVERLOVE.."I forgot that gem Kman. Good to see you here battling the crazies. I was away for a spell, and I'm playing ketchup"

KANEMAN.."RIVERLOVE I think you meant catsup:

Kwicko.."By the way, you both got "catch up" wrong. So among the other things you're exactly the same at is your stupidity".

TELL ME THIS BOY IS NOT DUMB....My work here will be short lived....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, July 9, 2010 12:42 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I think we should have the FAIR tax, but until then, tax cuts for those who pay more than their fair share ( aka - THE RICH ) is what is in order.

Extending the Bush tax cuts would help ALL Americans.

But the socialists in office are too focused on redistributing the wealth, in all areas of life, to understand basic economics.

Pity.

( Funny, but the debt graph listed above only shows until the Bush years. What of the debt AFTER, hmmm ? If Bush was bad then Obama is apocalyptic! )

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, July 9, 2010 2:44 AM

KWICKO

I *DO* wish they'd add Obama's spending to the charts, but they always seem to run at least a couple of years behind, it seems. Obama seems to be on a quest to out-Reagan Reagan's socialism and out-Bush Bush's.

I'd be happy with a "fair" tax if it were applied to ALL income above a set amount, including capital gains, "bonuses", and the like.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, July 9, 2010 3:53 AM

DREAMTROVE

Wulf,

you forgot rinse

Mike

You also forgot rinse

Niki

I dare you to add Obama or FDR to your debt chart. Also, I got some very different clintons, he was a clever voodoo economist, shuffling things around, he knew where to hide it, so to speak.

Rap,

Good to see you're down with socialism. Seriously, the only people who want anyone out there saying socialism is about spreading wealth around is the socialists, where to you think mccain got the idea from? He was trying to sell Obama to the people, succeeded too.

But take a look at any of the socialists govts. (yes, those who actually called themselves socialist) Of which we have like 150 to choose from, do you think there is one out there honestly that has engaged in redistribution of wealth other than to themselves?

take a look at any socialist economy, and you'll find some trend like the one you see in N. and S. Korea. Seriously. The state controlled wages in a socialists system are the lowest wages that you will ever see on any above board labor arrangement on the face of the earth. Under socialism, if one thing is abundantly clear, it's that the poor are far far poorer.

I recently heard this comment on the news: The US-Mexican border represents the greatest disparity of wages between any two bordering nations on the earth.

Oh really?

The average mexican makes about 1/3 what the average mexican makes. The worst scenario specifically is Tiajuana/San Diego, where it's about 1/7.

The average income in South Korean is around $20k, very similar to western nations. In North Korea, it's less than $1,000.

Croatia:Serbia is larger than US:Mexico, actually, you find this all over the globe.

But if you want to see a real disparity, check out Africa:

Cameroon: $1200
Equitorial Guinea: $50,200

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, July 9, 2010 4:37 AM

KANEMAN

DT, nice post. I love seeing real world examples over ideological BS.....well done

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, July 9, 2010 6:52 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Goodness, RiverKane, I don't have to try again. I got it right the first time.

But thanx for the addition. Newcomers will easily know who's the crazed hateriot here

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off

”Niki--condescending arrogant fat old bi-polar hag .... You are an asshole ... one does not need a sockpuppet to tell you to fuck off".... eat shit you big government whore .... I do hate you ... You are an arrogant douche” ... “you fucking fat twinkie eating, money stealing whore” ...sayeth Kane

...Remember, remember, the ugliest members...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE