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

Conservative said:

I am still waiting for you to explain how people keeping their own money is an expense to the govt? Cooledge, JFK, Reagan, and GW Bush GAVE the American people nothing as that money was never theirs to give. Guess we need a little more of those California family values, right?

Click to expand...

Of course you don't. People like you want everything for free. Patriotism to you is waving a flag and wearing a lapel pin. You expect to live in this country and profit from its resources without having to pay back. Are those the values that you hold dear?

Now that the tax cuts have been extended, I will be looking forward to this recession ending and we have unemployment under 5%. That is all we needed, right? That question is for you conservatives who have been singing the rich man's songs about trickle down from the rich creating jobs....or will there be excuses?:2razz:

disneydude said:

Why do you guys always expect everything for free?

Its always "it MY money"...."My Money"....."mine mine mine". Part of living in this country is paying for the services provided.

I don't mind paying my taxes at all....I consider it part of being a responsible and patriotic American. I don't expect a free ride.

Click to expand...

See, there you go again, do you believe your money belongs to the govt? There is a difference between taxing someone and giving them something. So you believe Bush gave the Middle class a tax cut too? Guess Obama's support for letting those tax cuts continue is an expense to the govt. as well? How much is Obama adding to the debt with those tax cuts?

disneydude said:

Of course you don't. People like you want everything for free. Patriotism to you is waving a flag and wearing a lapel pin. You expect to live in this country and profit from its resources without having to pay back. Are those the values that you hold dear?

Click to expand...

Keep ranting and diverting from the question, do you think you keeping more of what you earn is an expense to the govt?

disneydude said:

Sorry...but if you cannot understand how continuing 2 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans without funding them will not add to the deficit....then nothing I can say here will help you. THAT is basic econ 101.

Click to expand...

You don't "fund" tax cuts, you DEfund other areas of government to prevent a deficit.

"Funding" tax cuts would imply that the government was giving money to the taxpayers, when in fact, it's a case of the government receiving less from the taxpayers in the first place.

A small distinction, perhaps, but I feel it needs to be made.

disneydude said:

Sorry...but if you cannot understand how continuing 2 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans without funding them will not add to the deficit....then nothing I can say here will help you. THAT is basic econ 101.

Click to expand...

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.

disneydude said:

Why do you guys always expect everything for free?

Its always "it MY money"...."My Money"....."mine mine mine". Part of living in this country is paying for the services provided.

Click to expand...

I don't expect things for free. What is up for debate is what should the federal govt do with the tax dollars it collects? What is up for debate is what services the govt. should provide. What is up for debate is how much federal/state/local taxes one should pay.

I pay my taxes. I also live within my means. I make decisions on what I can and cannot afford. Let me ask you, do you think the govt is living within its means? Are you willing to pay more taxes for the govt to provide more "services" without making cuts in other areas to offset costs? IMO, the whole federal budget needs to be revamped from the ground up.

UtahBill said:

Now that the tax cuts have been extended, I will be looking forward to this recession ending and we have unemployment under 5%. That is all we needed, right? That question is for you conservatives who have been singing the rich man's songs about trickle down from the rich creating jobs....or will there be excuses?:2razz:

Click to expand...

Why in the world would something STAYING THE SAME suddenly cause a massive change? The argument is that by doing this it will keep it from getting worse, not that it'll be a magical cure all. There's far, far more things wrong with the economy right now than simply the tax level, and keeping it the same as before isn't going to magically fix it.

Much like tieing a tourniquet around a wound isn't going to magically make the wound go away; its just going to keep it from getting worse.

disneydude said:

Why do you guys always expect everything for free?

Its always "it MY money"...."My Money"....."mine mine mine". Part of living in this country is paying for the services provided.

I don't mind paying my taxes at all....I consider it part of being a responsible and patriotic American. I don't expect a free ride.

Click to expand...

Yes...if only there were people who were calling for many of those frivilous services to stop being provided. Hmm, who could that be.....

UtahBill said:

Now that the tax cuts have been extended, I will be looking forward to this recession ending and we have unemployment under 5%. That is all we needed, right? That question is for you conservatives who have been singing the rich man's songs about trickle down from the rich creating jobs....or will there be excuses?:2razz:

Click to expand...

If it doesn't work, it will be the other guy's fault.

If it works, it will be everyone's fault.

More seriously, I've noticed this extremely irritating tendency among the whole economic/political crossroads/swamp.

Economic woes are NEVER tied to one cause, but 50 different people will give you 50 different specific reasons that the economic woes are the opposing parties fault.

And no one is ever WRONG about their reasons, damnit, it’s always “oh, something the other guy did 1,5,10,25,or 50 years ago” is the reason!

It’s the ultimate goalpost moving argument, it seems. :?

Zyphlin said:

Why in the world would something STAYING THE SAME suddenly cause a massive change? The argument is that by doing this it will keep it from getting worse, not that it'll be a magical cure all. There's far, far more things wrong with the economy right now than simply the tax level, and keeping it the same as before isn't going to magically fix it.

Much like tieing a tourniquet around a wound isn't going to magically make the wound go away; its just going to keep it from getting worse.

Click to expand...

Ubercons here have been saying that as soon as business can predict their tax expenses, they will be more likely to add employees....have they been lying?

UtahBill said:

Ubercons here have been saying that as soon as business can predict their tax expenses, they will be more likely to add employees....have they been lying?

Click to expand...

No.

If employment levels go up, they were right.

If employment levels go down or stay the same, something Obama/the Democrats did is the reason, because everyone knows it takes a couple years for political changes to effect the market...

/facepalm

Zyphlin said:

Why in the world would something STAYING THE SAME suddenly cause a massive change? The argument is that by doing this it will keep it from getting worse, not that it'll be a magical cure all. There's far, far more things wrong with the economy right now than simply the tax level, and keeping it the same as before isn't going to magically fix it.

Much like tieing a tourniquet around a wound isn't going to magically make the wound go away; its just going to keep it from getting worse.

Click to expand...

first excuse has been made....

mike2810 said:

I don't expect things for free. What is up for debate is what should the federal govt do with the tax dollars it collects? What is up for debate is what services the govt. should provide. What is up for debate is how much federal/state/local taxes one should pay.

I pay my taxes. I also live within my means. I make decisions on what I can and cannot afford. Let me ask you, do you think the govt is living within its means? Are you willing to pay more taxes for the govt to provide more "services" without making cuts in other areas to offset costs? IMO, the whole federal budget needs to be revamped from the ground up.

Click to expand...

Agree, now where do we find politicians with balls enough to make cuts across the board? From welfare recipeints to corporate level employees, cuts need to be made....

still can't see past your own fingertips, huh?

i'll give you a hint

this deal is so toxic to the caucus, it might just fall apart

and if it does, it will be for one reason---nancy, on behalf of the lynn woolsey's and george millers and anthony weiners of her world, MUTINIES

how's that gonna make ya feel, libs?

a nice fat DEMOCRAT CIVIL WAR

i can tell you this (it's all over msnbc tonite)---house dems are FOR SURE gonna demand sweeteners

and the house gop is (professionally) almost 100% silent

it's NOT their move, y'see, it's NANCY's

what that all means---if you sweeten this deal for ms lynn and her prog's, mr b's boys and broads will break

and like i said...

did you (no, you didn't, you were too busy clicking and submitting all your preconceived's) happen to catch ed and rachel and keith and lawrence o'd's panel tonite?

fire breathing, baby

you can't take that kinda stuff back

why did obama call his last second press conference this afternoon, and why was he so bitchy?

you want the link (you wouldn't read it)?

why did he RACE TO THE MICROPHONES last nite, cutting his caucus out (they were brainstorming with biden), to proclaim this deal "the right thing to do?"

why was biden so brutally bitched out (read politico)?

o'donnell (former chief of staff to senate finance during the hillary health care wars) was maturely moderate tonite

but his panel (excluding the nation's NUMBER ONE journo lister, wapo's ezra klein) was all for VETO

howard fineman just reported on msnbc that the house caucus this evening is "throwing chairs against walls," he was speaking figuratively

you'll see...

tomorrow

keep your head up

Disneydude, try to not double or even triple comment, you can put it all into one

As for the topic, if you're going to argue that taxes are theft then I don't see how a little bit of theft is okay. If tax is theft then there should be 0% tax, not 20 something.

UtahBill said:

Ubercons here have been saying that as soon as business can predict their tax expenses, they will be more likely to add employees....have they been lying?

Click to expand...

No, but they've also been saying that in the guise of a permanent, or long term tax extension. 2 years is essentially just kicking the can till the next presidential term...not really likely to improve greatly, but at least not letting it happen.

Saying you'll get a raise the next two years and who knows after that is a lot different than saying you'll get one for the next ten years, or theoretically forever. Due to the compromise nature of this deal, like with most compromises, the positives one side see's gets watered down to get the other side on board.

UtahBill said:

first excuse has been made....

Click to expand...

Explaining why your strawman wasn't correct isn't an excuse, its exposing your strawman.

I don't know of any republican saying if we extend the Bush Tax cuts the economy will suddenly be sunshine and lollipops like you made it out to be. I don't know of many who were talking about a 2 year extension when talking about the certainty it would bring to employers, since the republicans where talking about a permanent extension or at least a lengthy one.

Sorry, you don't get to throw strawmen out and then when people point out you're hanging out with the friend of the Cowardly Lion and the Tinman that they're just "making excuses"

UtahBill said:

first excuse has been made....

Click to expand...

Explaining why your strawman wasn't correct isn't an excuse, its exposing your strawman.

I don't know of any republican saying if we extend the Bush Tax cuts the economy will suddenly be sunshine and lollipops like you made it out to be. I don't know of many who were talking about a 2 year extension when talking about the certainty it would bring to employers, since the republicans where talking about a permanent extension or at least a lengthy one.

Sorry, you don't get to throw strawmen out and then when people point out you're hanging out with the friend of the Cowardly Lion and the Tinman that they're just "making excuses"

Zyphlin said:

Explaining why your strawman wasn't correct isn't an excuse, its exposing your strawman.

I don't know of any republican saying if we extend the Bush Tax cuts the economy will suddenly be sunshine and lollipops like you made it out to be. I don't know of many who were talking about a 2 year extension when talking about the certainty it would bring to employers, since the republicans where talking about a permanent extension or at least a lengthy one.

Sorry, you don't get to throw strawmen out and then when people point out you're hanging out with the friend of the Cowardly Lion and the Tinman that they're just "making excuses"

Click to expand...

You don't know any republicans who think that? where have you been?

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?

"Hostages".
"Enemies".
"Bitter Clingers".

Kim Jong Il?
Iranian wackos?

No, our president.

.

zimmer said:

"Hostages".
"Enemies".
"Bitter Clingers".

Kim Jong Il?
Iranian wackos?

No, our president.

.

Click to expand...

It was an analogy ffs. He's not saying the Republicans literally have Americans in a room with a gun to their heads, he's saying that in politics the other side naturally holds out to get things they want. Make one analogy and all of a sudden you're compared to mass murderers and Islamic fundamentalists. You got 10 times more than you should have gotten. A lot of house Dems are absolutely furious at him for supporting this (or at least they're acting that way, whether they're actually disappointed is another question). I won't be sad when Obama goes, that's for sure.

Personally I'll be glad to see politics go back to the Republican agenda actually being passed by Republicans.

eace

independent_thinker2002 said:

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?

Click to expand...

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>

Conservative said:

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>

Click to expand...

I agree with you entirely.