Fact is, the President did his job. It was then incumbant upon Congress to take both plans, as well as any proposed by the Senate, and come up with a consensus budget plan that would work. Instead, they all played party politics and offered short-term plans. Hence, the reason the President said he was unwilling to sign any 2, 3 or 6 month short-gap spending plans. I'd say he has shown leadership here. He has gone above the dollar amount of spending cuts initially requested by the GOP, but at every turn they've balked and the only reason they did so was because the President's plan called for closing tax loopholes and didn't include entitlement reform. Yet, Sen. McConnoll has said such reforms (in the tax code) could not be done in such a short time between the time he got involved in debt limit negotiations and the deadline for raising same. What a crock!! Can you say, "cop-out?"
Last edited by Objective Voice; 07-19-11 at 02:00 PM.
Now on to your new argument:
"The U.S. tax system is based on that idea that taxes system should encourge economic growth."
According to who? Sounds like your opinion, you can't really raise that as a debate topic. But you can try by providing some evidence that this is why we're taxed. Because everything I'm reading simply points to the fact that it's a congressional power.
According to just about everyone who is posting in this thread, judging by their arguments. Do you really think posters are arguing that their proposals for taxes have nothing to do with promoting eco growth?