• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Announces 'Framework' for Deal With Congress to Extend Bush-Era Tax Cuts

I am left wondering a couple of things here. First, we all know that Obama is a duplicitous liar, so why this apparently broad reaching package now? What's the real end game for this guy whom didn't even tell his own leadership in the Congress that he was doing this?

Something stinks here. Obama, and the liberals have engaged in a bitter two year class war, beating the drum endlessly about how business was bad, and that all corporations were greedy, and that they harmed the middle class, (although all the while leaving out that they are a part of the economy that creates jobs, along with small businesses).

It just isn't kosher, Obama railed against all common sense that he wanted a tax hike on those making over $250K per year, ignoring the fact that that would hit something like 80% of small business that files their taxes at the personal rates.

He calls not our enemies, but rather the American people "enemies, and hostage takers" all the while talking out of his ass about how he gets that the American people want more bipartisanship. He is a liar plain and simple, and to date has done a great job of outing the liars within the demo party as well.

But as far as this goes? I don't trust Obama, or demo's as far as I can throw them....

j-mac
 
NOT getting money doesn't ADD to anything. If you owe $100 dollars and I don't give you $10 that I said I would give you I don't magically make you owe $100 dollars...you still owe $100. Its not ADDING to anything. Its subtracting from theoretical revenue that may've potentially came in the future, but that is far different from ADDING to something.

Spending government money on health care adds to the deficit. Spending government money on Aids relief in Africa adds to the deficit. And yes, fighting the war in Afghanistan adds to the deficit. Charging people the same amount of money tomorrow as they were charged today doesn't ADD to the deficit.

This can't even be fully compared to the Bush Tax Cuts because the CURRENT tax code is the only thing guaranteed. The higher tax codes that COULD'VE come were not, they were nothing but theoretical. Unlike the Bush Tax cuts this isn't changing it from the Government taking in X money to Y money, where X > Y. This is a case where the government is taking in Y money, and will continue to take in Y money, as opposed to theoretically having had the potential to take in X but that never being guaranteed.

For it to be "adding" to the deficit people would have to be getting something new they weren't previously getting....that's not the case.

Notice Disneydude's silence? Disneydude doesn't respond to challenges to his/her posts because he cannot refute the information provided that tax cuts are not an expense to the govt.
 
I am left wondering a couple of things here. First, we all know that Obama is a duplicitous liar, so why this apparently broad reaching package now? What's the real end game for this guy whom didn't even tell his own leadership in the Congress that he was doing this?

Something stinks here. Obama, and the liberals have engaged in a bitter two year class war, beating the drum endlessly about how business was bad, and that all corporations were greedy, and that they harmed the middle class, (although all the while leaving out that they are a part of the economy that creates jobs, along with small businesses).

It just isn't kosher, Obama railed against all common sense that he wanted a tax hike on those making over $250K per year, ignoring the fact that that would hit something like 80% of small business that files their taxes at the personal rates.

He calls not our enemies, but rather the American people "enemies, and hostage takers" all the while talking out of his ass about how he gets that the American people want more bipartisanship. He is a liar plain and simple, and to date has done a great job of outing the liars within the demo party as well.

But as far as this goes? I don't trust Obama, or demo's as far as I can throw them....

j-mac

Good post, Obama is back in campaign mode although this time he is going after the independent votes that helped elect him in 2008 by implementing more supply side economic policy knowning it will generate positive results thus giving him something positive to run on in 2012.
 
This is unbelievable. The voters were angry about the way things were going in D.C. so they voted for change and the very first major thing they do is agree to "stay the course" and offer up the very same policies that have gotten us into the situation we are in.

If I know I can't pay my bills next month how much sense does it make for me to refuse an opportunity to increase my revenue?

You can't increase them more than what the market can bear. If you price your custimers out of business, you'll permanently decrease your revenue. In that case, you're going to have to trim some fat off your operation, in order to be within your monthly budget.
 
I am left wondering a couple of things here. First, we all know that Obama is a duplicitous liar, so why this apparently broad reaching package now? What's the real end game for this guy whom didn't even tell his own leadership in the Congress that he was doing this?

Something stinks here. Obama, and the liberals have engaged in a bitter two year class war, beating the drum endlessly about how business was bad, and that all corporations were greedy, and that they harmed the middle class, (although all the while leaving out that they are a part of the economy that creates jobs, along with small businesses).

It just isn't kosher, Obama railed against all common sense that he wanted a tax hike on those making over $250K per year, ignoring the fact that that would hit something like 80% of small business that files their taxes at the personal rates.

He calls not our enemies, but rather the American people "enemies, and hostage takers" all the while talking out of his ass about how he gets that the American people want more bipartisanship. He is a liar plain and simple, and to date has done a great job of outing the liars within the demo party as well.

But as far as this goes? I don't trust Obama, or demo's as far as I can throw them....

j-mac

Although I disagree with a lot of the finer points, I do agree that Obama is more than likely a liar, although for different reasons, and most modern presidents do also(I don't have an example of every president from the 20th Century, so I'll refrain from saying all), and the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of politicians in general, but I agree with you nonetheless.

I disagree with the 3rd paragraph, but agree on bipartisanship. People don't want bipartisanship. They want what's right.

Conservative said:
Notice Disneydude's silence? Disneydude doesn't respond to challenges to his/her posts because he cannot refute the information provided that tax cuts are not an expense to the govt.

Although from a budget standpoint tax cuts are not in themselves expenses, by definition... it's incorrect to state that they don't add to the deficit. Budget = Revenue - Expenses. I think this is the point the "left" is trying to make, although they're not doing a very good job of it.

Conservative said:
Good post, Obama is back in campaign mode although this time he is going after the independent votes that helped elect him in 2008 by implementing more supply side economic policy knowning it will generate positive results thus giving him something positive to run on in 2012.

Obama has lost a significant portion of his base... let alone independents. You can't offer change, give more or less the status quo, then expect people to reelect you.

Thanks!
 
Good post, Obama is back in campaign mode although this time he is going after the independent votes that helped elect him in 2008 by implementing more supply side economic policy knowning it will generate positive results thus giving him something positive to run on in 2012.


That is the take on the surface, I'll give you that. However, I think it is too 'what he wants you to think' in a sense. It is the shiny distraction if you will.

Think about it, this entire past two years events as distractions to ram through legislation that was nearly unanimously unpopular, that he didn't write, and no one actually read. Obama is the quintessential passive, aggressive Socialist crap manager. ****ting all over business one day, and having them to lunch to pat them on the back the next, all the while driving a knife in their backs.

There is another shoe to drop, watch the left hand.


j-mac
 
Although I disagree with a lot of the finer points, I do agree that Obama is more than likely a liar, although for different reasons, and most modern presidents do also(I don't have an example of every president from the 20th Century, so I'll refrain from saying all), and the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of politicians in general, but I agree with you nonetheless.

I disagree with the 3rd paragraph, but agree on bipartisanship. People don't want bipartisanship. They want what's right.



Although from a budget standpoint tax cuts are not in themselves expenses, by definition... it's incorrect to state that they don't add to the deficit. Budget = Revenue - Expenses. I think this is the point the "left" is trying to make, although they're not doing a very good job of it.



Obama has lost a significant portion of his base... let alone independents. You can't offer change, give more or less the status quo, then expect people to reelect you.

Thanks!

Yet tax cuts have grown revenue everytime rates were cut so higher revenue doesn't increase deficits, but higher revenues do increase spending. Bush withholding tax reduction July 2003

Yr Tot Rev Income Tax
2000 3,132 2202.8
2001 3,118 2163.7
2002 2,987 2002.1
2003 3,043 2047.9
2004 3,265 2213.2
2005 3,659 2546.8
2006 3,996 2807.4
2007 4,197 2951.2
2008 4,072 2790.3
 
I am left wondering a couple of things here. First, we all know that Obama is a duplicitous liar, so why this apparently broad reaching package now? What's the real end game for this guy whom didn't even tell his own leadership in the Congress that he was doing this?

Something stinks here. Obama, and the liberals have engaged in a bitter two year class war, beating the drum endlessly about how business was bad, and that all corporations were greedy, and that they harmed the middle class, (although all the while leaving out that they are a part of the economy that creates jobs, along with small businesses).

It just isn't kosher, Obama railed against all common sense that he wanted a tax hike on those making over $250K per year, ignoring the fact that that would hit something like 80% of small business that files their taxes at the personal rates.

He calls not our enemies, but rather the American people "enemies, and hostage takers" all the while talking out of his ass about how he gets that the American people want more bipartisanship. He is a liar plain and simple, and to date has done a great job of outing the liars within the demo party as well.

But as far as this goes? I don't trust Obama, or demo's as far as I can throw them....

j-mac
too funny........repubs get what they want, at least short term, and now they are trying to figure out how obama screwed them by letting them have what they wanted!!:shock::mrgreen::lamo
 
Well you got your wish, now you can stop bitching about the deficit... right? Because these tax cuts are gonna add a ****load more to it.

No, they won't. If businesses can and do expand, and you cut unemployment in half, you can add a HUGE number of people to the taxable base AND take them off the unemployment benefits payroll.

Of course, with 13 more months of unemployment coming, many will just choose to continue to sleep 14 hours a day and play.

If you want to cut the deficit, the ONLY way is to drastically cut spending, primarily on wasteful and useless welfare programs. But those are the Dems pet projects they use to ensure votes.
 
Although I disagree with a lot of the finer points, I do agree that Obama is more than likely a liar, although for different reasons, and most modern presidents do also(I don't have an example of every president from the 20th Century, so I'll refrain from saying all), and the vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of politicians in general, but I agree with you nonetheless.


Saying that ALL politicians lie is in many respects not refutable, it is however troubling the reasons for those lies. Obama in my humble opinion is lying for a purpose far more destructive to this nation than those in the past.

I disagree with the 3rd paragraph, but agree on bipartisanship. People don't want bipartisanship. They want what's right.


What is being discussed is raising the tax rate on those making over $200 k. For those poor at math, including Ryan, $200 k is much less than $1 million, let alone millions and millions of dollars.

The Small Business Administration defines a small business as one having less than 500 to 1,500 employees (depending on industry).

Focusing solely on the smaller number of <500 employees, there were 12.6 million small businesses employing 0 to 500 employees in the US, using US Census Bureau statistics from 2007 (newest available).

This represents 91% of all US businesses, small or large.

In Ohio, there were 422,318 small businesses employing 0 to 500 employees, which equals 89% of all Ohio businesses.

The average gross receipts of these small businesses were $905 k (US) and $925 k (Ohio).

Tim Ryan still pushing for tax hike on small business owners - Youngstown Trumbull County Conservative | Examiner.com

However, there is a perception among politicians and pundits that letting the top-tier tax rates expire and revert to the higher, pre-2001 levels will simply increase taxes on the wealthy. That is not true. Seventy-three percent of manufacturers file their business taxes at the individual rate - including Power Curbers Inc. Let there be no doubt, these burdensome tax increases will hit small manufacturers like us, and they will hit hard.

As a result, instead of reinvesting, hiring and expanding, employers are going to make more cuts. This concern is not unique to us but something I hear from other manufacturers as well - forcing difficult choices regarding wages, benefits and other actions that could have negative consequences for employees. As hard as the tax increases will be on employers, they will hurt employees just as much.

MESSINGER: Tax hikes aimed at the rich hit everyone - Washington Times

What exactly do you disagree with? These are the facts.


j-mac
 
too funny........repubs get what they want, at least short term, and now they are trying to figure out how obama screwed them by letting them have what they wanted!!:shock::mrgreen::lamo

Repubs ain't got jack ****! Obama isn't a king althoughI know good union members like yourself would like it to be so. These proposals have to pass House and Senate, and because of your demo reps it doesn't look likely.

j-mac
 
Repubs ain't got jack ****! Obama isn't a king althoughI know good union members like yourself would like it to be so. These proposals have to pass House and Senate, and because of your demo reps it doesn't look likely.

j-mac

Actually, judging by how Democrats are ripping each other to pieces right now, I think Obama has the votes to get it through. This will drive Harry, Nancy, Durbin, Wiener, Grayston, etc, insane.
 
This country doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. So what you are saying is that every dime spent by the Federal Govt. is necessary and cannot be cut? If I have less revenue I cut spending and that happens when taxes are raised>

But you aren't a politician spending other people's money....I think we can all agree that govt wastes the money they get, and will waste all that they get, plus more, building deficits and debt. National referendum on those issues would help, but the existing politicians will never propose it...
 
But you aren't a politician spending other people's money....I think we can all agree that govt wastes the money they get, and will waste all that they get, plus more, building deficits and debt. National referendum on those issues would help, but the existing politicians will never propose it...

Then why are you wanting to give them MORE money when they've shown absolutely zero ability to actually reduce spending, stop being wasteful, and actually worry about the deficit with real actions?
 
But you aren't a politician spending other people's money....I think we can all agree that govt wastes the money they get, and will waste all that they get, plus more, building deficits and debt. National referendum on those issues would help, but the existing politicians will never propose it...

Hence, the tea party. I don't care what "party" or group does it, we must stop electing the kind of people we have, or at least start championing those who stand for integrity in regards to our money.

But it's just too easy to buy people's votes with promises of welfare programs. Therein lies the problem. It's those type of character flawed politicians that are so carelessly wasteful with tax revenue.
 
No, they won't. If businesses can and do expand, and you cut unemployment in half, you can add a HUGE number of people to the taxable base AND take them off the unemployment benefits payroll.

Of course, with 13 more months of unemployment coming, many will just choose to continue to sleep 14 hours a day and play.

If you want to cut the deficit, the ONLY way is to drastically cut spending, primarily on wasteful and useless welfare programs. But those are the Dems pet projects they use to ensure votes.

Watch the EU, and their austerity programs. We are next....
 
How are Republicans proposing that we pay for the two trillion in cuts that Republicans want to give to the wealthiest Americans? That's the thing about you Republicans, you want all kinds of tax breaks for the wealthy, but you have no ideas about how to fund them.

The problem with Liberals, you want all this tax revenue, but have absolutely no idea how to get it, other than soaking rich folks.

if it were really about generating tax revenue and not just about screwing people that you think have made too much money, you would propose that the folks who qualify for the earned income credit cough up a few hundred dollars a year. Anyone, in the middle class can afford to cough up $500 in taxes a year. How many billions would that come to?
 
The problem with Liberals, you want all this tax revenue, but have absolutely no idea how to get it, other than soaking rich folks.

if it were really about generating tax revenue and not just about screwing people that you think have made too much money, you would propose that the folks who qualify for the earned income credit cough up a few hundred dollars a year. Anyone, in the middle class can afford to cough up $500 in taxes a year. How many billions would that come to?

LOL, they want the deficit reduced as long as they don't have to do one damn thing to help.
 
Watch the EU, and their austerity programs. We are next....

Perhaps. Cutting government spending is the only way though. The only way.

I'm not even sure those Europeans know what they're protesting.
 
This country doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. So what you are saying is that every dime spent by the Federal Govt. is necessary and cannot be cut? If I have less revenue I cut spending and that happens when taxes are raised>

Sure, this is true. The reality is that they won't even come close to cutting that much spending though. Keeping this reality in mind, we have a revenue problem. ;)
 
Sure, this is true. The reality is that they won't even come close to cutting that much spending though. Keeping this reality in mind, we have a revenue problem. ;)

or both....
During my Navy years I observed some funds being wasted, and the excuse was, if we don't spend all of this year's budget, they will reduce next years budget....sounds really stupid to me.....
 
You can't increase them more than what the market can bear. If you price your custimers out of business, you'll permanently decrease your revenue. In that case, you're going to have to trim some fat off your operation, in order to be within your monthly budget.

If the businesses are filing personally and are making a profit of $250,000+, I don't think there is a threat of them going out of business.
 
Then why are you wanting to give them MORE money when they've shown absolutely zero ability to actually reduce spending, stop being wasteful, and actually worry about the deficit with real actions?

It's a lesser of two evils. A government shutdown would be worse.
 
If the businesses are filing personally and are making a profit of $250,000+, I don't think there is a threat of them going out of business.

You know that there's a difference between taxable income and profit. Right?

Not every business expense is deductable. So, just because a company is reporting $250,000, doesn't mean that they have $250,000 just sitting in the bank.

I wish it were that simple.
 
Back
Top Bottom