The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: The Tax Bill

  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Dec 15, 2010 6:49 PM GMT
    Well, it seems the tax bill has cleared the Senate. Now it is up to the House.

    And it is also my turn to decide what to do in this Good Ole' U.S.A. for the next two years -- money-wise that is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 6:59 PM GMT
    More deficit spending by the GOP. Give to the rich. Take from the Chinese. Print more money. Blame the Dems. Speak out of both sides of mouth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 7:05 PM GMT
    The Bill is a monstrous example of fiscal irresponsibility. It contains not only profligate social spending but continued tax cuts for the monumentally rich, who need no such thing. It only contributes to the deficit, saving up terrible fiscal problems for the future. The most depressing thing is that it's from the party that claims to be fiscally responsible. I wish that they had bothered to learn to add up.

    However, that being said, if it heralds an era of co-operation that prevents the previous log-jams in the federal government, I think having a bad plan will prove better than having no plan at all.

    The best plan now is to follow the advice of the bipartisan commission on the deficit and reform the tax code.

    Time to follow the advice of the IMF, I think: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2010/new070810b.htm
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 7:11 PM GMT
    I concur, the bill is more bad management. The math just does not work out, even to a peasant like me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 7:19 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    conservativejock saidWell, it seems the tax bill has cleared the Senate. Now it is up to the House.

    And it is also my turn to decide what to do in this Good Ole' U.S.A. for the next two years -- money-wise that is.


    And it's another bill that nobody who voted on it has read!

    Let's hope it gets stopped in the House. I would welcome a government shutdown between now and the beginning of January.

    BTW... nobody is mentioning that this bill - which is supposed to fund the government for the current fiscal year which began on October 1 - was supposed to have been taken care of prior to October 1.

    Good work again, Democrats! icon_neutral.gif


    You're talking about the wrong bill. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 7:21 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidThe Bill is a monstrous example of fiscal irresponsibility. It contains not only profligate social spending but continued tax cuts for the monumentally rich, who need no such thing. It only contributes to the deficit, saving up terrible fiscal problems for the future. The most depressing thing is that it's from the party that claims to be fiscally responsible. I wish that they had bothered to learn to add up.

    However, that being said, if it heralds an era of co-operation that prevents the previous log-jams in the federal government, I think having a bad plan will prove better than having no plan at all.

    The best plan now is to follow the advice of the bipartisan commission on the deficit and reform the tax code.

    Time to follow the advice of the IMF, I think: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2010/new070810b.htm


    Not sure about the IMF, which is nearly always in favor of austerity and helping corporations rape third world countries.

    The social spending, by and large, is necessary to assists American families suffering from the financial collapse. What is irresponsible - and we agree - is that no one (not even Obama) seems capable of saying "no" to the very rich, despite how damaging it is to the country.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Dec 15, 2010 7:35 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    conservativejock saidWell, it seems the tax bill has cleared the Senate. Now it is up to the House.

    And it is also my turn to decide what to do in this Good Ole' U.S.A. for the next two years -- money-wise that is.


    And it's another bill that nobody who voted on it has read!

    Let's hope it gets stopped in the House. I would welcome a government shutdown between now and the beginning of January.

    BTW... nobody is mentioning that this bill - which is supposed to fund the government for the current fiscal year which began on October 1 - was supposed to have been taken care of prior to October 1.

    Good work again, Democrats! icon_neutral.gif


    It actually would not bother me if it failed in the House. If government is shut down, so be it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 8:11 PM GMT
    What the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 8:19 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    By removing a revenue source (taxes) without eliminating a similar amount in spending, this bill worsens the deficit.

    The Bush tax cuts were passed through reconciliation (which all conservative freaked out about when it came to HCR), with the rationale that they would boost the economy and create jobs (which they did not) and were so expensive they were scheduled to sunset (which they will not), all of which is stunningly fiscally irresponsible and proves that no one on this board or in the Republican party are fiscal conservatives but rather corporatists
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 8:21 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    By removing a revenue source (taxes) without eliminating a similar amount in spending, this bill worsens the deficit.


    Yep, so that's why you eliminate a similar amount in spending and then there won't be anything to worry about.

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

    Dec 15, 2010 8:26 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    By removing a revenue source (taxes) without eliminating a similar amount in spending, this bill worsens the deficit.


    Yep, so that's why you eliminate a similar amount in spending and then there won't be anything to worry about.



    But they're not doing that. Rather, the "deal" pushed by Republicans was we will give you $190 billion in spending (to help the poor, unemployed and stimulate the economy) if you give us $700 billion in tax cuts for the affluent and wealthy.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Dec 15, 2010 8:56 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    Many seem to think that federal spending is an entitlement. They think we must have a budget of the dollar amount proposed by the Obama Administration. They believe the budget takes priority over anything else in life, including individual freedoms to own ones property no matter what the form of that property. That belief is a bold face lie.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 10:15 PM GMT
    conservativejock said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    Many seem to think that federal spending is an entitlement. They think we must have a budget of the dollar amount proposed by the Obama Administration. They believe the budget takes priority over anything else in life, including individual freedoms to own ones property no matter what the form of that property. That belief is a bold face lie.


    The Iraq war, entirely unfunded, has been the most effective way possible to diminish American power and hand it straight to the Chinese. And it was done by the Republican party.

    You have, incidentally, utterly failed to address the question of fiscal responsibility. Perhaps it is because you too are unable to add up?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 10:17 PM GMT
    conservativejock said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    Many seem to think that federal spending is an entitlement. They think we must have a budget of the dollar amount proposed by the Obama Administration. They believe the budget takes priority over anything else in life, including individual freedoms to own ones property no matter what the form of that property. That belief is a bold face lie.


    I don't think anyone thinks of it as an "entitlement" so much as paying for our collective needs (roads, other infrastructure, healthcare research, seniors, the disabled, education, military, etc.).

    Contrary, American and multinational companies think it's our responsibility to to pay for their protection as they rape and pillage smaller countries, protect their pipelines, shipment routes, overthrow governments trying to tax them, etc. And then American tax payers, get to pay for it. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 10:27 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidNot sure about the IMF, which is nearly always in favor of austerity and helping corporations rape third world countries.

    The social spending, by and large, is necessary to assists American families suffering from the financial collapse. What is irresponsible - and we agree - is that no one (not even Obama) seems capable of saying "no" to the very rich, despite how damaging it is to the country.


    People much malign the IMF, but the reality is that when they talk about the developed world, they're typically right. Countries that call for the IMF do so as a last resort -- so it had better be painful -- and if they do not typically have to endure far more sever austerity because they have to pay market rates on their debt.

    I agree their record is less than flattering in the Third World. But their failures occur for many reasons: the IMF's medicine is strong and TW countries are rarely equipped to take it; the economic problems of the third world are often complex and far harder to resolve. And in case you haven't noticed, it is China who is presently raping Africa.

    In any case, if the IMF gives a set of advice for a country, it is generally worth reading. It is notable that Mr Obama seems to be doing so; the Republicans are certainly not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 10:46 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    conservativejock said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    Many seem to think that federal spending is an entitlement. They think we must have a budget of the dollar amount proposed by the Obama Administration. They believe the budget takes priority over anything else in life, including individual freedoms to own ones property no matter what the form of that property. That belief is a bold face lie.


    The Iraq war, entirely unfunded, has been the most effective way possible to diminish American power and hand it straight to the Chinese. And it was done by the Republican party.

    You have, incidentally, utterly failed to address the question of fiscal responsibility. Perhaps it is because you too are unable to add up?


    conservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 11:17 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidconservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."


    If the US Government was at risk of default --- and this is the minimum that would cause these sorts of changes --- this would be the largest financial crisis in the history of civilization. Sheer idiocy!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 11:20 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    conservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."


    You're starting to sound as nutty as that "Art_Deco" guy.icon_lol.gif


    It's not nutty. Many Republicans have said as much, and you voted for some of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 11:37 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    conservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."


    You're starting to sound as nutty as that "Art_Deco" guy.icon_lol.gif


    It's not nutty. Many Republicans have said as much, and you voted for some of them.


    No Republican would has to lift a finger "bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis" --- the Democrats have already done that.


    Au contraire... The Republicans did that by cutting taxes, committing us to two wars, and giving away hundreds of billions to drug companies, all while putting it on the credit card.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 15, 2010 11:48 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    conservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."


    You're starting to sound as nutty as that "Art_Deco" guy.icon_lol.gif


    It's not nutty. Many Republicans have said as much, and you voted for some of them.


    No Republican would has to lift a finger "bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis" --- the Democrats have already done that.


    Au contraire... The Republicans did that by cutting taxes, committing us to two wars, and giving away hundreds of billions to drug companies, all while putting it on the credit card.



    Look, the Republicans running Congress from 2000-2006 were more like Democrats than Republicans (and unfortunately, some of them are about to assume leadership positions in the House again).

    However, the collossal borrowing and spending binge unleashed by the Democrat-controlled Congress since 2008 is something that this country will be feeling the unpleasant after effects of for at least the next 2 generations.


    Ridiculous. What the Dems did to offset the imminent collapse of the country's financial system (which was done in nearly every other country involved) was caused by Republicans irresponsibility.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 16, 2010 12:41 AM GMT
    Absolutely.

    Facts are facts.

    In the last 60 years, only the Democrats have EVER put forth a balanced budget. The GOP spends and spends and spends, all...while lowering taxes, and pointing the finger elsewhere. They lie, confuse, make up shit, and prey upon ignorant folks.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Dec 16, 2010 3:50 AM GMT
    Of course it will pass the House and be signed into law by my President, thanks to the United States Supreme Court, which gave corporations the power to decide elections and to decide what legislation will be enacted into law.

    If politicians want to get elected or reelected, they'll pass whatever legislation the corporations want passed (because it's advantageous to them and all of their super wealthy friends).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 16, 2010 4:10 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said

    conservativejock is on the Americans for Tax Reform (elimination) side whose goal - and frankly the goal of many so-called "small government" conservatives - is to bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis, so they can attack Social Security and Medicare in order to privatize it. There ultimate goal is to turn the US into an oligarchy and eliminate all "entitlements."


    You're starting to sound as nutty as that "Art_Deco" guy.icon_lol.gif


    It's not nutty. Many Republicans have said as much, and you voted for some of them.


    No Republican would has to lift a finger "bring the federal government to a fiscal crisis" --- the Democrats have already done that.


    Au contraire... The Republicans did that by cutting taxes, committing us to two wars, and giving away hundreds of billions to drug companies, all while putting it on the credit card.



    Look, the Republicans running Congress from 2000-2006 were more like Democrats than Republicans (and unfortunately, some of them are about to assume leadership positions in the House again).

    However, the collossal borrowing and spending binge unleashed by the Democrat-controlled Congress since 2008 is something that this country will be feeling the unpleasant after effects of for at least the next 2 generations.




    The "borrowing and spending" that's taken place since 2008 is something that was NECESSARY TO PULL THE COUNTRY OUT OF THE BUSH RECESSION.

    AGAIN - the gross fiscal irresponsibilty and incompetence of Bush is to blame for the immense size of our National Debt.
    And, it's THE HEIGHT OF HYPOCRISY for you "deficits don't matter" Republicans to be whining about the size of our National Debt.
    You guys are the ones who laid that turd.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 16, 2010 8:47 PM GMT
    There's no reaching Southbeach. He's just too far gone.

    Southbeach forgets, (or is so fucking dumb) as to not know that AIG, and GM, and countless others firms that were bailed out, have paid back what they were borrowed WITH INTEREST, all while savings jobs, and maintaining consumer confidence.

    It eludes me how SB can be so ignorant. Does he not read? Does he not listen to in-depth news? Does he never watch historical documentaries?

    The bail out WORKED, and MADE MONEY, and saved jobs.

    Trickle down is / was a miserable failure. Wall Street deregulation was a catastrophe that nearly caused a financial melt down in the country.

    Has SB never listened to Alan Greenspan talk about what he did wrongly?

    I am forever amazed at how ill informed SB is on these things. It baffles me how a grown man can be both so misinformed and deluded.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2010 8:05 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie said
    Christian73 said
    mocktwinkie saidWhat the heck is with people equating "deficit spending" with tax cuts? They aren't to blame for anything, the expansion and creation of programs that can't be supported by existing revenue is to blame.


    By removing a revenue source (taxes) without eliminating a similar amount in spending, this bill worsens the deficit.


    Yep, so that's why you eliminate a similar amount in spending and then there won't be anything to worry about.



    But they're not doing that. Rather, the "deal" pushed by Republicans was we will give you $190 billion in spending (to help the poor, unemployed and stimulate the economy) if you give us $700 billion in tax cuts for the affluent and wealthy.


    Because every compromise with the democrats means spending more. The only way they can get a tax cut bill through is with compromising. So please, don't pretend that increased spending is on the republican agenda.