For years the Dems have complained that the Republicans would not compromise. Both sides have given on the extension of the tax cuts and unemployment benefits. Yet the Dems are whining that everyone will get to keep more of what they have earned. A perfect example of what compromise means to the Dems, that everyone is to drop everything they believe in and move over to their way of thinking.

I'm still waiting for one of the libs here to explain to me how the Bush tax cuts that didn't give anything to the middle class when they were enacted will now be devestating to the middle class if all of them are allowed to expire.

I'm still waiting for one of the libs here to explain to me how the Bush tax cuts that didn't give anything to the middle class when they were enacted will now be devestating to the middle class if all of them are allowed to expire.

 

I'll guess you'll be waiting as long as I have been to find out where the jobs are that the upper class have been creating while enjoying the lower taxes of the tax cuts...the ones that will disappear if they expire.

I'll guess you'll be waiting as long as I have been to find out where the jobs are that the upper class have been creating while enjoying the lower taxes of the tax cuts...the ones that will disappear if they expire.

 

Jobs were created when the cuts went into effect and continued to be created until the decline started.

Jobs were created when the cuts went into effect and continued to be created until the decline started.

 

http://www.ourfuture.org/fast-fact/2008104427/2000-2008-job-growth-slowest-depression

 

http://thenumbersguru.blogspot.com/2008/08/unemployment-rates-2000-2008.html

 

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/zero-10-year-us-job-creation/

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2536507/posts

 

 

I'm fine if they extend the cuts to all. But if anyone thinks I'm falling for the rhetoric that this will spur job creation, well...that ain't happen'. The Republicans got what they wanted, and the upper class will continue to do what they do.

Not necessarily, some liberal Democrat Reps are moving block Speaker Pelosi from being able to bring the tax cuts to a vote on the floor and blocking the Democrat President's bill.

 

Obama is in for some real trouble brewing as him working with the Republicans has done nothing but anger the Democrat Congressmen.

The only people that should be crying are those making under $40k as I read this morning will be actually paying more taxes under this plan.

No matter the time or situation, taxes should be lower for all. Spending needs to be cut. The money belongs to the person who earned it. There is a need for taxation, but at a lower level than we have now. Our country went roughly 125 years without an income tax and we flourished. We could get by on lower taxes at the federal level. If taxes need to be raised they should be raised at the state or local level. It is closer to home for what the locals want. But again, for Democrats compromise is doing it their way or the highway. Their whining their backsides off on the news.

The conservatives are complaining too, but they did not want compromise to start with.

No matter the time or situation, taxes should be lower for all. Spending needs to be cut. The money belongs to the person who earned it. There is a need for taxation, but at a lower level than we have now.

 

Where the heck did you get that stupid idea? Have you no compassion? :idunno:

No matter the time or situation, taxes should be lower for all. Spending needs to be cut. The money belongs to the person who earned it. There is a need for taxation, but at a lower level than we have now. Our country went roughly 125 years without an income tax and we flourished. We could get by on lower taxes at the federal level. If taxes need to be raised they should be raised at the state or local level. It is closer to home for what the locals want. But again, for Democrats compromise is doing it their way or the highway. Their whining their backsides off on the news.

The conservatives are complaining too, but they did not want compromise to start with.

 

Precisely what ole' liberal papa has been saying.

 

We tax work instead of wealth.

http://www.ourfuture.org/fast-fact/2008104427/2000-2008-job-growth-slowest-depression

 

http://thenumbersguru.blogspot.com/2008/08/unemployment-rates-2000-2008.html

 

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/zero-10-year-us-job-creation/

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2536507/posts

 

 

I'm fine if they extend the cuts to all. But if anyone thinks I'm falling for the rhetoric that this will spur job creation, well...that ain't happen'. The Republicans got what they wanted, and the upper class will continue to do what they do.

 

I have a hard time believing the info on the links you provided since it is a fact that under Bush there was a net increase in jobs. The charts on your links show no year in which there was a increase in jobs from 2000-2008. I will research it some more and get back on this one.

 

That said, you say the rich can continue to do what they do. What is that? Do they not have just as much right to keep their money as you and I? Just because they have more of it shouldn't mean we take it. I didn't earn that money and neither did you. What does everyone feel the rich need to be soaked? Will taking thier money create jobs?

The only people that should be crying are those making under $40k as I read this morning will be actually paying more taxes under this plan.

 

Do you have a link? Keep in mind that the republicans wanted the Bush tax cuts extended, the Dems said no, and so now the republicans are trying to compromise.

Do you have a link? Keep in mind that the republicans wanted the Bush tax cuts extended, the Dems said no, and so now the republicans are trying to compromise.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/us/politics/08impact.html?_r=1&ref=david_kocieniewski

The only people that should be crying are those making under $40k as I read this morning will be actually paying more taxes under this plan.

 

2 ways of looking at this. Some would argue that these groups pay a small amount and the increase would not be that much. They would say this small amount allows them to have some skin in the game. And the Social Security break, for 2011, would more than off set any payroll tax increase.

 

Then I would suggest they include in the compromise bill a measure that would set aside any potential increase in these tax brackets. Seems simple enough, but we are talking about the federal government.

 

This entire situation screams for tax reform, reducing federal spending and reducing the size of the federal government.

I have a hard time believing the info on the links you provided since it is a fact that under Bush there was a net increase in jobs. The charts on your links show no year in which there was a increase in jobs from 2000-2008. I will research it some more and get back on this one.

 

I agree. Isn't it like 52 months of job growth? It was not as many as jobs as Clinton but it was more months of job growth and its a record for more than any other president.

 

That said, you say the rich can continue to do what they do. What is that? Do they not have just as much right to keep their money as you and I? Just because they have more of it shouldn't mean we take it. I didn't earn that money and neither did you. What does everyone feel the rich need to be soaked? Will taking thier money create jobs?

 

You obtain something legally and then the government takes more and more of it away...doesn't make since. Its morally wrong as well as fiscally wrong.