If the Bush tax cuts were going to help the economy and create jobs...wouldn't they have done so in the past 9 years?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 5:14 PM GMT
    No really, thoughts? Ideas?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 5:17 PM GMT
    True enough. Even worse that was never Bush's reasoning behind the cuts anyway, he did them because he thought if the country had a surplus taxes somehow were too high.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 5:30 PM GMT
    wran saidTrue enough. Even worse that was never Bush's reasoning behind the cuts anyway, he did them because he thought if the country had a surplus taxes somehow were too high.

    I really don't believe Bush did much "reasoning." He was a tool of the neo-cons around him, who were completely pro-big business and pro-wealthy. Cheney was the masterful insider of the Federal government, after decades at it. He pulled all the strings behind the scenes, worked all the levers of power, while the naive, incompetent & inexperienced Bush blithely thought he was in charge and setting the direction.

    The real villain of that Greek tragedy was Cheney, and his band of loyalists, like Donald Rumsfeld. Bush deserves his share of the blame, but the true evil genius was Cheney.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 5:39 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidThey did.

    The whole thing crashed when the Congress turned Democrat in 2007.



    That's not true at all.

    In fact our deficit started gaining momentum in 2006....had it not been for the Bush tax cuts, we would have actually had a surplus that year.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 5:43 PM GMT
    Ralphie251 saidBusinesspeople should be barred from serving in any branch of government. They dont know what there doing.

    I might argue that they know EXACTLY what they're doing: advancing big business. On the theory that money flows from the rich to all others. Therefore, make the rich even richer, and the poor will see some of the crumbs off the table, too.

    Let the rich control wages, let the rich control health care. let the rich decide how much money others can or cannot have. In political theory, this is called an oligarchy. It is what Republicans want politically & economically, and is at the heart of their philosophy. True Democracy is the last thing on Earth they want, though they talk a good game to deceive the weaker-minded voters, like the Teabaggers. The ordinary people control things? God forbid!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 6:15 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    Ralphie251 saidBusinesspeople should be barred from serving in any branch of government. They dont know what there doing.

    I might argue that they know EXACTLY what they're doing: advancing big business. On the theory that money flows from the rich to all others. Therefore, make the rich even richer, and the poor will see some of the crumbs off the table, too.

    Let the rich control wages, let the rich control health care. let the rich decide how much money others can or cannot have. In political theory, this is called an oligarchy. It is what Republicans want politically & economically, and is at the heart of their philosophy. True Democracy is the last thing on Earth they want, though they talk a good game to deceive the weaker-minded voters, like the Teabaggers. The ordinary people control things? God forbid!


    EXACTLY, we not only have our winner, but it was done within one page!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 6:24 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    (Careful how you answer.... most in Congress are career politicians who haven't had a job in the private sector in decades.)



    You're kidding right? Unless lobbying for the private sector doesn't count as a job for the private sector.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_StatesIn July 2005, Public Citizen published a report entitled "The Journey from Congress to K Street": the report analyzed hundreds of lobbyist registration documents filed in compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act and the Foreign Agents Registration Act among other sources. It found that since 1998, 43 percent of the 198 members of Congress who left government to join private life have registered to lobby. The Washington Post described these results as reflecting the "sea change that has occurred in lawmakers' attitudes toward lobbying in recent years." The report included a case study of one particularly successful lobbyist, Bob Livingston [R], who stepped down as Speaker-elect and resigned his seat in 1999. In the six years since his resignation, his lobbying group grew into the 12th largest non-law lobbying firm, earning nearly $40 million by the end of 2004. During roughly the same time period, Livingston, his wife, and his two political action committees (PACs) contributed over $500,000 to the PACs or campaign funds of various candidates.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Sep 10, 2010 7:19 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    wran saidTrue enough. Even worse that was never Bush's reasoning behind the cuts anyway, he did them because he thought if the country had a surplus taxes somehow were too high.

    I really don't believe Bush did much "reasoning." He was a tool of the neo-cons around him, who were completely pro-big business and pro-wealthy. Cheney was the masterful insider of the Federal government, after decades at it. He pulled all the strings behind the scenes, worked all the levers of power, while the naive, incompetent & inexperienced Bush blithely thought he was in charge and setting the direction.

    The real villain of that Greek tragedy was Cheney, and his band of loyalists, like Donald Rumsfeld. Bush deserves his share of the blame, but the true evil genius was Cheney.


    i always wondered how cheney got his hand so far up bush's ass to make his mouth move so realisticlly.. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 7:35 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Ralphie251 said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNo really, thoughts? Ideas?



    thats true wear are all the jobs. its time the rich started paying there fare share of taxes so we can create more jobs. Obama has many plans but we need to the money to make it happen. thats why the rich need to start paying more in taxes so the governement can create more jobs to put people to work.


    Ummm... 48% of households pay no Federal income tax. Is that "their fair share?"



    Hahaha. Pwnage


    P.S. I wonder how many posting in this thread fall into that category
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 7:43 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    southbeach1500 said
    Ralphie251 said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNo really, thoughts? Ideas?



    thats true wear are all the jobs. its time the rich started paying there fare share of taxes so we can create more jobs. Obama has many plans but we need to the money to make it happen. thats why the rich need to start paying more in taxes so the governement can create more jobs to put people to work.


    Ummm... 48% of households pay no Federal income tax. Is that "their fair share?"



    Hahaha. Pwnage


    P.S. I wonder how many posting in this thread fall into that category


    Between the two of you lets see if you can use that same fact checking to see how many corporations pay proper taxes!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 7:47 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    mocktwinkie said
    southbeach1500 said
    Ralphie251 said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNo really, thoughts? Ideas?



    thats true wear are all the jobs. its time the rich started paying there fare share of taxes so we can create more jobs. Obama has many plans but we need to the money to make it happen. thats why the rich need to start paying more in taxes so the governement can create more jobs to put people to work.


    Ummm... 48% of households pay no Federal income tax. Is that "their fair share?"



    Hahaha. Pwnage


    P.S. I wonder how many posting in this thread fall into that category


    Between the two of you lets see if you can use that same fact checking to see how many corporations pay proper taxes!


    I live in Massachusetts and am up to my neck in liberals, but the more I see on this board the more I'm shocked. CORPORATIONS HIRE PEOPLE, THEY PUT PEOPLE TO WORK!!!! and they are over taxed. If you want the government to continue with failed programs then why dont you volunteer to give up more of your paycheck, since you dont care about money anyway.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 7:59 PM GMT
    CHRISMA said
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    mocktwinkie said
    southbeach1500 said
    Ralphie251 said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNo really, thoughts? Ideas?



    thats true wear are all the jobs. its time the rich started paying there fare share of taxes so we can create more jobs. Obama has many plans but we need to the money to make it happen. thats why the rich need to start paying more in taxes so the governement can create more jobs to put people to work.


    Ummm... 48% of households pay no Federal income tax. Is that "their fair share?"



    Hahaha. Pwnage


    P.S. I wonder how many posting in this thread fall into that category


    Between the two of you lets see if you can use that same fact checking to see how many corporations pay proper taxes!


    I live in Massachusetts and am up to my neck in liberals, but the more I see on this board the more I'm shocked. CORPORATIONS HIRE PEOPLE, THEY PUT PEOPLE TO WORK!!!! and they are over taxed. If you want the government to continue with failed programs then why dont you volunteer to give up more of your paycheck, since you dont care about money anyway.




    You flatter me with your ignorance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 8:35 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidThey did.

    The whole thing crashed when the Congress turned Democrat in 2007.



    Please, SB, you must given up this meme. Macroeconomics of the kind that caused the crash in 2008 do not occur in 12 months. We can disagree on the exact causes but this is just silly rhetoric.

    It's akin to my saying "9/11 is Bush's fault because he was elected and 10 months later we were attacked by Al Qaeda."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 8:36 PM GMT
    CHRISMA said
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    mocktwinkie said
    southbeach1500 said
    Ralphie251 said
    DoomsDayAlpaca saidNo really, thoughts? Ideas?



    thats true wear are all the jobs. its time the rich started paying there fare share of taxes so we can create more jobs. Obama has many plans but we need to the money to make it happen. thats why the rich need to start paying more in taxes so the governement can create more jobs to put people to work.


    Ummm... 48% of households pay no Federal income tax. Is that "their fair share?"



    Hahaha. Pwnage


    P.S. I wonder how many posting in this thread fall into that category


    Between the two of you lets see if you can use that same fact checking to see how many corporations pay proper taxes!


    I live in Massachusetts and am up to my neck in liberals, but the more I see on this board the more I'm shocked. CORPORATIONS HIRE PEOPLE, THEY PUT PEOPLE TO WORK!!!! and they are over taxed. If you want the government to continue with failed programs then why dont you volunteer to give up more of your paycheck, since you dont care about money anyway.




    Where do the corporations get the money to hire people and put them to work? Don't scramble, we'll wait.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 9:13 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 saidThey did.

    The whole thing crashed when the Congress turned Democrat in 2007.



    Please, SB, you must given up this meme. Macroeconomics of the kind that caused the crash in 2008 do not occur in 12 months. We can disagree on the exact causes but this is just silly rhetoric.


    Oh, I don't know, "straw that broke the camel's back" comes to mind.....

    Also, remember, psychology plays an important role in markets. I'm sure the fact that the Democrats took control of Congress in January of 2007 didn't exactly inspire confidence in the business community. icon_wink.gif


    In other words, the rich and powerful realized they wouldn't be able to openly fuck the rest of us over due to impending regulation.

    Corporations have money to hire people currently, they are simply sitting on it until republicans hold power again. How is it that a hand full of people can hold that much power?
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Sep 10, 2010 9:21 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said....In other words, the rich and powerful realized they wouldn't be able to openly fuck the rest of us over due to impending regulation.

    Corporations have money to hire people currently, they are simply sitting on it until republicans hold power again. How is it that a hand full of people can hold that much power?


    QFT icon_exclaim.gificon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 9:25 PM GMT
    DoomsDayAlpaca said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 saidThey did.

    The whole thing crashed when the Congress turned Democrat in 2007.



    Please, SB, you must given up this meme. Macroeconomics of the kind that caused the crash in 2008 do not occur in 12 months. We can disagree on the exact causes but this is just silly rhetoric.


    Oh, I don't know, "straw that broke the camel's back" comes to mind.....

    Also, remember, psychology plays an important role in markets. I'm sure the fact that the Democrats took control of Congress in January of 2007 didn't exactly inspire confidence in the business community. icon_wink.gif


    In other words, the rich and powerful realized they wouldn't be able to openly fuck the rest of us over due to impending regulation.

    Corporations have money to hire people currently, they are simply sitting on it until republicans hold power again. How is it that a hand full of people can hold that much power?


    Thats true, Corporations are sitting on cash right now and are in a position to hire more people. The reason their not is they need the funds to pay for the tax increases instead. Also their afraid of more regulations so yes they are sitting on the cash until the Republicans take over.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 9:27 PM GMT
    rnch saidi always wondered how cheney got his hand so far up bush's ass to make his mouth move so realisticlly.. icon_rolleyes.gif


    l_Crisco+Alk-Vegetable+Shortening+453g+C
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 10:19 PM GMT
    CHRISMA said

    Thats true, Corporations are sitting on cash right now and are in a position to hire more people. The reason their not is they need the funds to pay for the tax increases instead. Also their afraid of more regulations so yes they are sitting on the cash until the Republicans take over.




    I don't think things have changed much since 2008:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1249465620080812The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Sep 10, 2010 11:06 PM GMT
    Hmmmm .......... Let's see


    SB brought up the word "FAIR" earlier in the thread

    The Bush Tax cuts
    Let's take a look and see how fair they were
    We all had a cut in taxes with his tax cut plan yes
    Most people in the middle class who make less than 150,000/ year kept around 300 to 600 dollars

    WOOOO-WHOOO VEGAS BABY YEAH!

    But the top ten percent did a WEE bit better ... just a Tad
    They got to keep from the Hundreds of Thousands to the MILLIONS of Dollars

    The George W Bush administration saw the largest redistribution of wealth in the History of this country

    They opened the Mint and said have at it Boys! To the tune of one third of our Trillions of dollars in deficit

    So the next time you see a Billionaire ...... say .... You're Welcome icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 10, 2010 11:23 PM GMT
    Just wanted to say thanks to several posters, or maybe that was posers in this thread. I assume some of the accounts are not real. Some of the messages are really hilarious. OP please don't delete it; this helps lighten things up. Humor here is long overdue. Thanks again.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Sep 10, 2010 11:38 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock saidHmmmm .......... Let's see


    SB brought up the word "FAIR" earlier in the thread

    The Bush Tax cuts
    Let's take a look and see how fair they were
    We all had a cut in taxes with his tax cut plan yes
    Most people in the middle class who make less than 150,000/ year kept around 300 to 600 dollars

    WOOOO-WHOOO VEGAS BABY YEAH!

    But the top ten percent did a WEE bit better ... just a Tad
    They got to keep from the Hundreds of Thousands to the MILLIONS of Dollars

    The George W Bush administration saw the largest redistribution of wealth in the History of this country

    They opened the Mint and said have at it Boys! To the tune of one third of our Trillions of dollars in deficit

    So the next time you see a Billionaire ...... say .... You're Welcome icon_cool.gif


    Yep, people who make more $$$ got to keep more of their $$$. Perhaps some of them work 2 jobs or work more hours or took greater risks than you and the rest of the "lower income" citizens.

    It's not as if everyone does the exact same amount of work, has the exact same skills, has taken the exact same risks or worked the exact same hours.

    If that was true, then you would have at least a semblence of an argument, but you don't.


    What kind of "Ridiculousness" is THAT
    like there aren't MOST families working in America requiring two jobs just to stay afloat now???
    and YOU think that many of the people making over 250K per year work MORE than those making less???
    Or did you happen to forget the whole thing that went on about "The Death Tax"
    That abolished the whole Inheritance tax system we had here in this country
    Work for it?
    We're supposed to have a progressive tax rate here in this country ... not Regressive
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 11, 2010 12:38 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock saidHmmmm .......... Let's see


    SB brought up the word "FAIR" earlier in the thread

    The Bush Tax cuts
    Let's take a look and see how fair they were
    We all had a cut in taxes with his tax cut plan yes
    Most people in the middle class who make less than 150,000/ year kept around 300 to 600 dollars

    WOOOO-WHOOO VEGAS BABY YEAH!

    But the top ten percent did a WEE bit better ... just a Tad
    They got to keep from the Hundreds of Thousands to the MILLIONS of Dollars

    The George W Bush administration saw the largest redistribution of wealth in the History of this country

    They opened the Mint and said have at it Boys! To the tune of one third of our Trillions of dollars in deficit

    So the next time you see a Billionaire ...... say .... You're Welcome icon_cool.gif


    Yep, people who make more $$$ got to keep more of their $$$. Perhaps some of them work 2 jobs or work more hours or took greater risks than you and the rest of the "lower income" citizens.

    It's not as if everyone does the exact same amount of work, has the exact same skills, has taken the exact same risks or worked the exact same hours.

    If that was true, then you would have at least a semblence of an argument, but you don't.



    That's a ridiculous argument. I would argue that the vast majority of people who earn $200k per year are NOT working two jobs. Quite the opposite, in that there are countless families where both parents work two jobs and they are still in the poverty zone.

    What risks didn't they take?

    Do they work less hours than a doctor or a lawyer?

    They probably work more hours than I do, but I would freely admit that while I'm a hard worker and of above average intelligence, I am also incredibly lucky to have found a career that I excel at, that pays me well and that I enjoy. I probably average 55-60 hours per week, but I know lots of families where one or both parents work just as hard and just as long if not longer and are not doing as well as I am.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 11, 2010 1:18 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    That's a ridiculous argument. I would argue that the vast majority of people who earn $200k per year are NOT working two jobs. Quite the opposite, in that there are countless families where both parents work two jobs and they are still in the poverty zone.

    What risks didn't they take?

    Do they work less hours than a doctor or a lawyer?


    So you want everyone to make approximately the same amount of money?

    That way the "countless families where both parents work two jobs and they are still in the poverty zone" will earn approximately the same as everyone else.

    That seems to be your goal, no?



    Oh joy. more Republican hyperbole. Yes, I want everyone to make exactly $200,001 per year and pay exactly 50% in taxes. No exceptions.

    Stop being a tool and answer my question.

    What, in your mind, separates the doctor or lawyer from the husband who works full-time at Wal Mart and walks dogs every morning and night to make ends meet?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 11, 2010 1:42 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    Oh joy. more Republican hyperbole. Yes, I want everyone to make exactly $200,001 per year and pay exactly 50% in taxes. No exceptions.

    Stop being a tool and answer my question.

    What, in your mind, separates the doctor or lawyer from the husband who works full-time at Wal Mart and walks dogs every morning and night to make ends meet?


    I can't answer your question because you haven't provided enough information.

    For example, we know that a doctor or lawyer has to spend many years (and a lot of money) in order to attain their professional status.

    But the "husband who works full-time at Wal Mart and walks dogs every morning and night to make ends meet".... that's a bit more nebulous. Did he also go through medical school / law school and he just can't get employed as a doctor or lawyer?

    Or is he a high school dropout?

    You see.... you haven't given enough information for me to answer your question.


    Yup, to give you a little more information: this said husband did go through med school (big mistake) but was unable to go back to practicing medicine because he got sued out of his license for an unfortunate death that he had done nothing wrong to cause (we won't go into details). So he has to work as a nurse now and to supplement his expensive lifestyle, he has to walk dogs every morning and night when he's off 12 hour shifts. A little daft, but its his choice.

    Or this version: the said husband is a high school dropout because he had to take care of his mom dying of cancer, and subsequently got stuck into a low-paying job that isn't enough for his kids. (no, he's unlucky enough to be straight and got married to have kids).

    The REAL question is: what's the morality to have wealth be so disparate in the US when it should be more equitable, regardless of circumstances:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_StatesIncome_gains.jpg
    Inflation adjusted percentage increase in after-tax household income for the top 1% and the four quintiles, between 1979 and 2005 (gains by top 1% are reflected by bottom bar; bottom quintile by top bar).[22]