• 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 to call for middle class tax cut extension

Assuming that H.R. 6079 is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period.
Is this your way of acknowledging that Obamacare is a one trillion dollar tax increase?
Another Repo who doesn't know the difference between 'gross' and 'net' when it comes to money. :lol:
 
Last edited:
There are 4.1 unemployed job seekers for every one available job according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Fine. The one term Marxist flexible president Barrack Hussein Obama will be gone in a few months. Once the Marxists are booted out and government's jack boot is off the economy's throat we will begin to have plenty of jobs.

Otherwise we shall not see new jobs, will we?
 
It certainly is humorous to watch those who deride Obama for supposedly destroying the labor market in it's entirety, proceed to lay the blame at the feet of the unemployed individuals themselves for their perceived lack of skill or initiative even though all statistics point to the contrary. As if the average American individual suddenly lost the will or skill to be a productive member of the work force, a phenomenon which just so happened to coincide with the collapse of the housing market.
About half of college graduates since the one term Marxist flexible president was elected have not found jobs. They got worthless degrees mostly from public schools at great expense to them and to the taxpayer.

The one term Marxist flexible president Barrack Hussein Obama's policies have despoiled the private sector. But we have a remedy at hand. In just a few months we can stop this.
 
I know people with skills and educations in areas valued. They cannot get a job in their field and many are too skilled and educated to get jobs in other fields where they are simply over qualified and employers are reluctant to hire them figuring they will not stay very long.
Some people with skills will not go to where the jobs are. Welfare has made poverty more comfortable.
 
About half of college graduates since the one term Marxist flexible president was elected have not found jobs. They got worthless degrees mostly from public schools at great expense to them and to the taxpayer.

The one term Marxist flexible president Barrack Hussein Obama's policies have despoiled the private sector. But we have a remedy at hand. In just a few months we can stop this.
Few important distinctions to make, You have absolutely no way of knowing said individuals educational background or area of expertise, secondly what "great expense to the taxpayer?" Has there been an increase in the tax burden on the average American over the past few years in response to the usage of publicly funded collegiate entities?

Vague mutterings per usual.
 
Some people with skills will not go to where the jobs are. Welfare has made poverty more comfortable.


People were willing to move across the country for a job in the 1930s.

What we really need is another depression.
 
Otherwise we shall not see new jobs, will we?

The left's messiah will not be able to bring those jobs back from China. He isn't willing to do what is really necessary to get that done.

We need leaders who are willing to make major changes to our environmental and labor laws. They must resemble the laws of the nations that we are competing against for jobs.
 
Fine. The one term Marxist flexible president Barrack Hussein Obama will be gone in a few months. Once the Marxists are booted out and government's jack boot is off the economy's throat we will begin to have plenty of jobs.

Otherwise we shall not see new jobs, will we?

Surprising how many keep falling over and over again for the same policies, as offered by Romney, tax cuts for the rich and financial deregulation, like it is somehow going to magically produce different results than it has for the last decade.
 
Last edited:
We need leaders who are willing to make major changes to our environmental and labor laws. They must resemble the laws of the nations that we are competing against for jobs.

Looks like it will be fun in your ideal world:

china-beijing-air-quality-pollution-02-tiananmen-square-chinese-face-masks.jpg


how-does-water-pollution-affect-humans-290x290.jpg


51bad6ac1343b8c9e3c1db6141cb5e3a_1M.png
 
The left's messiah will not be able to bring those jobs back from China. He isn't willing to do what is really necessary to get that done.

We need leaders who are willing to make major changes to our environmental and labor laws. They must resemble the laws of the nations that we are competing against for jobs.

I can't wait for your dream to come true, America the beautiful will look like this............

20091020luguang01.jpg


20091020luguang02.jpg


20091020luguang10.jpg
 
Surprising how many keep falling over and over again for the same policies, as offered by Romney, tax cuts for the rich and financial deregulation, like it is somehow going to magically produce different results than it has for the last decade.

You realize the regulatory burden cost on business is now the same as the tax burden right?
 
The left's messiah will not be able to bring those jobs back from China. He isn't willing to do what is really necessary to get that done.

We need leaders who are willing to make major changes to our environmental and labor laws. They must resemble the laws of the nations that we are competing against for jobs.
so you support breathing dirty air, drinking dirty water, and working for pennies an hour, and 16 to 20 hour work days, right?
 
We need leaders who are willing to make major changes to our environmental and labor laws. They must resemble the laws of the nations that we are competing against for jobs.
It's a race to the bottom! Let's WIN!!! :D
 
Last edited:
You realize the regulatory burden cost on business is now the same as the tax burden right?
American business is supposedly very good at innovation - but if we don't give them an incentive to innovate then they won't.
 
What the hell is Obama doing calling for a tax cut in the middle of a recession. :lol:
 
You realize the regulatory burden cost on business is now the same as the tax burden right?


When many companies are paying zero to very little in taxes, that is not surprising.
 
What the hell is Obama doing calling for a tax cut in the middle of a recession. :lol:

"The only people who’d have to pay substantially more taxes under Obama’s proposal are those earning far in excess of $250,000. They aren’t small businesses. Nor are they in the vast middle class, whose purchases account for most consumer spending. They’re the fattest of corpulent felines. And their spending will not be affected if their official tax rate rises from the Bush 35 percent to the Bill Clinton 39.6 percent.

In fact, most of these wealthy people’s income is unearned — capital gains and dividends that are now taxed at only 15 percent. If the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule, the capital gains rate would return to the same 20 percent it was under Bill Clinton.

But what’s so bad about the Clinton tax rates anyway? I don’t remember the economy suffering under Bill Clinton. I was in Clinton’s Cabinet, so perhaps my memory is self-serving. But as I recall, the economy generated 22 million net new jobs during those years. Unemployment fell dramatically, and almost everyone’s income grew. Poverty dropped as the economy soared.

In fact, the Clinton years generated the strongest and best economy we’ve had in anyone’s memory."

Read more: Reich: Lies about tax hikes - Framingham, MA - The MetroWest Daily News
 
"The only people who’d have to pay substantially more taxes under Obama’s proposal are those earning far in excess of $250,000. They aren’t small businesses. Nor are they in the vast middle class, whose purchases account for most consumer spending. They’re the fattest of corpulent felines. And their spending will not be affected if their official tax rate rises from the Bush 35 percent to the Bill Clinton 39.6 percent.

In fact, most of these wealthy people’s income is unearned — capital gains and dividends that are now taxed at only 15 percent. If the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule, the capital gains rate would return to the same 20 percent it was under Bill Clinton.

But what’s so bad about the Clinton tax rates anyway? I don’t remember the economy suffering under Bill Clinton. I was in Clinton’s Cabinet, so perhaps my memory is self-serving. But as I recall, the economy generated 22 million net new jobs during those years. Unemployment fell dramatically, and almost everyone’s income grew. Poverty dropped as the economy soared.

In fact, the Clinton years generated the strongest and best economy we’ve had in anyone’s memory."

Read more: Reich: Lies about tax hikes - Framingham, MA - The MetroWest Daily News

That had a lot to do with the ENTIRE Clinton "budget" keeping federal spending at 19% of GDP, while Obama is spending at least 24% of GDP, which is about 20% MORE that Bush did, using the SAME "Obama" tax rates.
 
Last edited:
That had a lot to do with the ENTIRE Clinton "budget" keeping federal spending at 19% of GDP, while Obama is spending at least 24% of GDP, which is about 20% MORE that Bush did, using the SAME "Obama" tax rates.


Most of that difference was due to our optional wars and excessive military spending began under the GOP administration.

Which candidate ended the Iraq war, and which candidate said it was too soon to withdraw our troops? Which candidate has proposed cutting military spending, and which candidate has pledged to increase military spending?
 
the main purpose of the Obama tax hikes is to create more Us against them and to buy the vote of the many with the wealth of the few
 
the main purpose of the Obama tax hikes is to create more Us against them and to buy the vote of the many with the wealth of the few

So if I vote for Obama he will send me your trust fund payments?
 
Most of that difference was due to our optional wars and excessive military spending began under the GOP administration.

Which candidate ended the Iraq war, and which candidate said it was too soon to withdraw our troops? Which candidate has proposed cutting military spending, and which candidate has pledged to increase military spending?

So where are these "savings"? What policy changes were ACTUALLY made? TALKING about stuff is not the same DOING stuff. Obama is indeed a fine talker, just not much of a doer. I am not comparing CANDIDATES and their promises, but the actual result of their GOVERNING. That is the HUGE Obama problem, he promised to cut the deficit in HALF, yet he DOUBLED it - that is what the outrage is all about. He talked of "shovel ready" JOBS and infrastructure yet that was only 6% of what he ACTUALLY spent money on. Talking about HOPE and CHANGE is the EASY part, actually getting the DC morons to do something DIFFERENT is the hard part.
 
Last edited:
So where are these "savings"? What policy changes were ACTUALLY made? TALKING about stuff is not the same DOING stuff. Obama is indeed a fine talker, just not much of a doer. I am not comparing CANDIDATES and their promises, but the actual result of their GOVERNING. That is the HUGE Obama problem, he promised to cut the deficit in HALF, yet he DOUBLED it - that is what the outrage is all about. He talked of "shovel ready" JOBS and infrastructure yet that was only 6% of what he ACTUALLY spent money on. Talking about HOPE and CHANGE is the EASY part, actually getting the DC morons to do something DIFFERENT is the hard part.

Obama announces end of Iraq war, troops to return home by year end



Romney Opposes Troop Withdrawal From Iraq


"The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday said Republican candidate Mitt Romney doesn't know what he's talking about when he criticizes President Barack Obama's proposed cuts in defense spending and is putting himself at odds with the nation's military leaders.

"He wants to attack the president as being weak on defense," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. "The problem with his position is it runs headlong into the uniformed leaders, uniformed military leaders of this country who say this is their budget."

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta provided an early look at the broad outlines of the president's budget last Thursday. It slows the growth of military spending, cuts the size of the Army and Marine Corps, trims war costs and calls for another round of domestic base closings. The budget would total $525 billion for the Pentagon in 2013, $6 billion less than the current budget and a reflection of the deficit-cutting deal that Obama reached with congressional Republicans last August."

Obama Military Spending Defended By Carl Levin

Budget Experts Stumped By Romney’s Plan To Grow Military Spending While Cutting Revenue

"Mitt Romney’s pledge to massively increase military spending — close to a $2 trillion increase over the next ten years and boosting the Pentagon’s base budget to 4 percent of GDP — combined with his promises to cuts taxes and reduce the national debt is leaving many national security and defense experts scratching their heads, particularly because the presumptive GOP presidential nominee has not said how he’d pay for it. "

Budget Experts Stumped By Romney's Plan To Grow Military Spending While Cutting Revenue | ThinkProgress
 
the main purpose of the Obama tax hikes is to create more Us against them and to buy the vote of the many with the wealth of the few
As opposed to "the wealth of the few" directly buying the votes that count - those of Congress.
 
Last edited:
Talking about HOPE and CHANGE is the EASY part, actually getting the DC morons to do something DIFFERENT is the hard part.
Negotiations with the Repos in Congress failed. The Tea Party's stance was "our way or no way" and enough Repos backed that play that that's what we all ended up with - nothing.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom