• 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!

GOP makes $2.2 Trillion Counteroffer to Obama - includes revenue increases

Catawba said:
Only some states voted in Republicans. And if the Republicans don't go along with extending the middle class tax cuts, I bet they will lose the House as well in 2014.
Click to expand...

the dems want to continually isolate the upper level tax payers so each time the dems want to pander to the masses, they demand more and more taxes on that two percent

if the deficit really is that bad EVERYONE should pay more taxes
 
the House should pass a bill extending the tax rates for EVERYONE. the dishonest dems claimed that these tax rates only benefitted the rich when they were enacted 10 years ago. Now the same dishonest parasites are claiming that these rates are good for most people (but not those who actually are paying most of the FIT).
 
Catawba said:
Only some states voted in Republicans. And if the Republicans don't go along with extending the middle class tax cuts, I bet they will lose the House as well in 2014.
Click to expand...

Well when that happens, then you'll have a point. But until then, the people voted in Republicans to control taxes.

Section. 7.

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
Click to expand...

And congress, not Obama, to control spending and the making of laws, in the form of split ideologies.

Section. 1.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States
Click to expand...

Sec 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States
Click to expand...
 
RLWSNOOK said:
Umm I said clearly that these things you attribute to bush add up to $2 trillion and the national debt went up from 10.5 trillion to 16.3 trillion... I thought you could do the math and figure out that 16.3-10.5 = 5.8T.. and Guess what 5.8T is bigger than 2 Trillion... meaning bush can only be blamed at most for 35% of the debt added under obama.
Click to expand...

And I'll say very clearly you are wrong that the tarp, the Iraq war, and the Recession only cost us $2 trillion dollars.

As for the democrats not voting for the budget, do you know what a filibuster is? Republicans put this up and tried to get democrats to vote on it, because Obama's budget as he sent to congress was absurd... And they wanted to prove that democrats wouldn't even vote for the crap obama was sending them... And they didn't...

This is a 0 sum game... If you give tax cuts to one side you have to pay for it with something else. The problem is the democrat's plan, the math doesn't add up, and they say well we will figure it out some day down the road... Yeah right, and I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.. We can give everyone and their mother a tax cut, but it has to be paid for... The democrats have not described ever how they plan on paying for the middle class tax cut, they just say lets get it done and we will figure it out later..> And then blame republicans for not wanting to help middle class...

Edit: I missed the talking point about 98% of small businesses, yes I too can use talking points and tell you that of that 2% over 40% of Americans are employed by those companies... But these are just talking points, using statistics to better explain your point...
Click to expand...

What you leave out, and I'll credit you with just being unaware than trying to be deceptive, is that what received 0 votes by the Democrats in the Senate was the president's budget after amendment by the House GOP.

Its a very simple choice the GOP has now. They can join the Democrats in extending the tax cuts for the middle class and argue about the tax cuts for the wealthy later. Or they can once again hold the middle class tax cuts hostage to the tax cuts for the wealthy.
 
why should most of the country not face higher taxes if the deficit is as bad as the congress claims it is

or do you believe that the rich have a duty to pay more and more taxes everytime the rest of the country wants more handouts from the government

you obviously believe that the majority of americans have no duty to do anything to help end the deficit
 
TurtleDude said:
the dems want to continually isolate the upper level tax payers so each time the dems want to pander to the masses, they demand more and more taxes on that two percent

if the deficit really is that bad EVERYONE should pay more taxes
Click to expand...


That is the plan that Romney/Ryan put forward. Apparently, the majority of middle class feels like they have been getting the short end of stick by giving bigger tax cuts to the rich in hopes it would trickle down. Recession and unemployment, when we were promised more jobs for tax cuts for the rich, kind of leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
 
TurtleDude said:
which would matter if revenue increases actually motivated the parasites known as democratic politicians Since class warfare and pandering to envy is what actually motivates Obama and his toadies in the Congress, this plan will never be supported since it doesn't slake the hatred of the industrious by the failures
Click to expand...

Industrious? surely you jest......
what did the uber rich MAKE in the last 5 years?
tell me the IDLE RICH aren't just as much parasites as the IDLE POOR....

as for revenue, we can do it the way Mexico does it....every time they want more tax income, they jack up the price of gasoline...
 
Catawba said:
That is the plan that Romney/Ryan put forward. Apparently, the majority of middle class feels like they have been getting the short end of stick by giving bigger tax cuts to the rich in hopes it would trickle down. Recession and unemployment, when we were promised more jobs for tax cuts for the rich, kind of leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
Click to expand...

there is no plan to give the rich or anyone else a tax break. why cannot you actually respond to the points I made

why should only 2% get a tax increase if the deficit is everyone's problem?
 
UtahBill said:
Industrious? surely you jest......
what did the uber rich MAKE in the last 5 years?
tell me the IDLE RICH aren't just as much parasites as the IDLE POOR....

as for revenue, we can do it the way Mexico does it....every time they want more tax income, they jack up the price of gasoline...
Click to expand...

stop the nonsense-we are talking about the top 2% not the Idle rich. I don't know what that means-all the rich people I know work hard.
 
TurtleDude said:
why should most of the country not face higher taxes if the deficit is as bad as the congress claims it is

or do you believe that the rich have a duty to pay more and more taxes everytime the rest of the country wants more handouts from the government

you obviously believe that the majority of americans have no duty to do anything to help end the deficit
Click to expand...


Since the large majority of the nations wealth is now owned by the rich, it is hard to comprehend how the middle class could be squeezed any further to address the deficit. Since the wealthy have seen their fortunes grown at the expense of the middle class in this country it is only right that they should give up their 4% tax cut they have enjoyed longer than the temporary cut was intended to last.

Or, they can commit political suicide by insisting that the middle class suffer further if the rich do not continue to get their 4% tax cut.
 
RLWSNOOK said:
So we are still under going deflation? Why did QE3 which was put into place around September of 2012 go forward then...

Federal Reserve launches QE3 - Sep. 13, 2012

Ps CNN isn't a right wing website...

And note there were more QE's than just the first one, QE1, QE2, Operation Twist, QE3... They keep on coming out with more and more..
Click to expand...

Well we are the fastest growing economy in the free world so Obama's and the Feds policies are working but I think you are premature about a full recovery. That will take a few more years.
I like your optimism though. There is far to much doom talk on the right.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
there is no plan to give the rich or anyone else a tax break. why cannot you actually respond to the points I made

why should only 2% get a tax increase if the deficit is everyone's problem?
Click to expand...

LOL Romneys proposal cut the top tax rates from 35% to 25%. No amount of deduction killing would offset that 20% cut. He lost because of it too.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Then why is it that if those tax cuts benefited the wealthy so much more than the middle class when they were enacted they will now HURT the middle class so much more than the wealthy if they expire? You can't have it both ways.


You've listed the top 1%, the top 20%(of which the top 1% is included), the "middle" 20% and the "lower" 20%. That's a total of 60%. You're analysis is missing 40% somewhere. Oversight, or are you cherry picking data?


The real comparison is pretty simple when talking about the middle class. Prior to the Bush tax cuts rates on people filing single were: 27K/yr to 65K/yr were taxed at 27.5%. 65K/yr to 135K/yr were taxed at 30.5% Today those making 35K/yr to 85K/yr are taxed at 25% and those making 85K/yr to 178K/yr are taxed at 28%. So basically, the "middle class" is looking at a 2.5% increase should the rates expire. Look, I'm not advocating letting the "rich" slide by here. All's I want is a fair discussion about this stuff without all of the spin.

The real motive behind this is how it effects the "effective rate" a person pays. Lets use someone who is classified as "rich" who makes 500K/yr. Under the current system, the top rate of 35% is applied to any amount of income over $388,350. In this case the person would have $111,650 exposed to the top rate. If the Democrats get what they want, the tax rates on all money earned above 250K/yr would be subject to rates of 35.5% from 250K to 388K(if the tables are left intact) and 39.1% for everything over 388K. Under the new scenario this same person would have $138,000 of his income exposed to a rate .5% higher than it is currently and $112,000 exposed to a rate 4.1% higher than it is currently. Fully one half, or $250,000 will now be exposed to a tax rate higher than it is currently whereas, today, only $112,000 has exposure to rates this high. So there is definitely a "slight of hand" going on here and I'm sick and tired of these very legitimate concerns being downed out by a bunch of rhetorical nonsense.(not directed at you personally:))
Click to expand...

If you can't understand a simple concept like raising taxes on those that spend all or nearly all they earn will cut their spending and slow the economy then there is no reason to debate anything more. Just ask the CBO, they calulated that ending the tax cuts for the top bracket would have minimal effect on the economy while ending the middle class tax cuts will likely put us into another recession. Why do YOU think they determined that?
 
iguanaman said:
Well we are the fastest growing economy in the free world so Obama's and the Feds policies are working
Click to expand...

Wanting something to be true doesn't make it true.

List of countries by real GDP growth rate (latest year) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rank Country
1 Qatar 18.7
2 Ghana 13.5
3 Turkmenistan 9.9
4 Iraq 9.6
5 China 9.5
6 Papua New Guinea 9
7 Argentina 8.8
8 Mongolia 8.5
9 Turkey 8.5
10 Sri Lanka 8.3
11 Laos 8.3
11 Eritrea 8.2
12 Bhutan 8.1
13 India 7.8
14 Ethiopia 7.5
15 Panama 7.4
16 Timor-Leste 7.3
17 Mozambique 7.2
18 Afghanistan 7.1
19 Equatorial Guinea 7.1
20 Uzbekistan 7.1
21 Kyrgyzstan 7
22 Moldova 7
23 Rwanda 7
24 Liberia 6.9
25 Nigeria 6.9
26 Cambodia 6.7
27 Zambia 6.7
29 Chile 6.5
30 Democratic Republic of the Congo 6.5
31 Estonia 6.5
32 Kazakhstan 6.5
33 Maldives 6.5
34 Saudi Arabia 6.5
35 Indonesia 6.4
36 Paraguay 6.4
37 Uganda 6.4
38 Bangladesh 6.3
39 Botswana 6.2
40 Peru 6.2
41 Haiti 6.1
42 Tanzania 6.1
43 Hong Kong, China 6
44 Lithuania 6
45 Tajikistan 6
46 Uruguay 6
47 Zimbabwe 6
48 Ecuador 5.8
49 Vietnam 5.8
50 Kuwait 5.7
51 Solomon Islands 5.7
52 Cape Verde 5.6
53 Gabon 5.6
54 Burma 5.5
55 The Gambia 5.5
56 Georgia 5.5
57 Niger 5.5
58 Guyana 5.3
59 Kenya 5.3
60 Kosovo 5.3
61 Mali 5.3
62 Singapore 5.3
63 Lesotho 5.2
64 Malaysia 5.2
65 Taiwan 5.2
66 Mauritania 5.1
67 Sierra Leone 5.1
68 Belarus 5
69 Bolivia 5
70 Republic of the Congo 5
71 Sao Tome and Principe 5
72 Seychelles 5
73 Suriname 5
74 Burkina Faso 4.9
75 Colombia 4.9
76 Djibouti 4.8
77 Guinea-Bissau 4.8
78 Israel 4.8
79 Philippines 4.7
80 Ukraine 4.7
81 Armenia 4.6
82 Malawi 4.6
83 Morocco 4.6
84 Dominican Republic 4.5
85 Oman 4.4
86 Sweden 4.4
87 Russia 4.3
88 Burundi 4.2
89 Mauritius 4.2
90 Central African Republic 4.1
91 Costa Rica 4
92 Guinea 4
93 Latvia 4
94 Nicaragua 4
95 Senegal 4
96 Mexico 3.9
97 South Korea 3.9
98 Benin 3.8
99 Cameroon 3.8
100 Poland 3.8
101 Togo 3.8
102 Vanuatu 3.8
103 Angola 3.7
— World average 3.7
104 Luxembourg 3.6
105 Namibia 3.6
106 Honduras 3.5
107 Nepal 3.5
108 South Africa 3.4
109 Austria 3.3
110 Slovakia 3.3
111 United Arab Emirates 3.3
112 Kiribati 3
113 Macedonia 3
114 Algeria 2.9
115 Brazil 2.8
116 Brunei 2.8
117 Guatemala 2.8
118 Venezuela 2.8
119 Finland 2.7
120 Germany 2.7
121 Albania 2.5
122 Belize 2.5
123 Chad 2.5
124 Iran 2.5
125 Jordan 2.5
126 Malta 2.5
127 Iceland 2.4
128 Pakistan 2.4
129 Serbia 2.3
130 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2.2
131 Bulgaria 2.2
132 Canada 2.2
133 Comoros 2.2
134 Switzerland 2.1
135 Antigua and Barbuda 2
136 The Bahamas 2
137 Belgium 2
138 El Salvador 2
139 New Zealand 2
140 Saint Lucia 2
141 Samoa 2
142 Australia 1.8
143 Barbados 1.8
144 Czech Republic 1.8
145 Hungary 1.8
146 Montenegro 1.8
147 France 1.7
148 Norway 1.7
149 United States 1.7
150 European Union 1.6
151 Netherlands 1.6
152 Bahrain 1.5
153 Denmark 1.5
154 Fiji 1.5
155 Jamaica 1.5
156 Lebanon 1.5
157 Romania 1.5
158 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.5
159 Thailand 1.5
160 Tonga 1.4
161 Egypt 1.2
162 Ireland 1.1
163 Slovenia 1.1
164 Trinidad and Tobago 1.1
165 United Kingdom 1.1
166 Madagascar 1
167 Tuvalu 1
166 Dominica 0.9
169 Croatia 0.8
170 San Marino 0.8
171 Spain 0.7
172 Italy 0.6
173 Azerbaijan 0.2
174 Cyprus 0
175 Tunisia 0
176 Sudan -0.2
177 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines -0.4
178 Japan -0.5
179 Andorra -1.8
180 Syria -2
181 Swaziland -2.1
182 Portugal -2.2
183 Yemen -2.5
184 Cote d'Ivoire -5.8
185 Greece -6
 
Last edited:
Harshaw said:
Wanting something to be true doesn't make it true.

List of countries by real GDP growth rate (latest year) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rank Country
1 Qatar 18.7
2 Ghana 13.5
3 Turkmenistan 9.9
4 Iraq 9.6
5 China 9.5
6 Papua New Guinea 9
7 Argentina 8.8
8 Mongolia 8.5
9 Turkey 8.5
10 Sri Lanka 8.3
11 Laos 8.3
11 Eritrea 8.2
12 Bhutan 8.1
13 India 7.8
14 Ethiopia 7.5
15 Panama 7.4
16 Timor-Leste 7.3
17 Mozambique 7.2
18 Afghanistan 7.1
19 Equatorial Guinea 7.1
20 Uzbekistan 7.1
21 Kyrgyzstan 7
22 Moldova 7
23 Rwanda 7
24 Liberia 6.9
25 Nigeria 6.9
26 Cambodia 6.7
27 Zambia 6.7
29 Chile 6.5
30 Democratic Republic of the Congo 6.5
31 Estonia 6.5
32 Kazakhstan 6.5
33 Maldives 6.5
34 Saudi Arabia 6.5
35 Indonesia 6.4
36 Paraguay 6.4
37 Uganda 6.4
38 Bangladesh 6.3
39 Botswana 6.2
40 Peru 6.2
41 Haiti 6.1
42 Tanzania 6.1
43 Hong Kong, China 6
44 Lithuania 6
45 Tajikistan 6
46 Uruguay 6
47 Zimbabwe 6
48 Ecuador 5.8
49 Vietnam 5.8
50 Kuwait 5.7
51 Solomon Islands 5.7
52 Cape Verde 5.6
53 Gabon 5.6
54 Burma 5.5
55 The Gambia 5.5
56 Georgia 5.5
57 Niger 5.5
58 Guyana 5.3
59 Kenya 5.3
60 Kosovo 5.3
61 Mali 5.3
62 Singapore 5.3
63 Lesotho 5.2
64 Malaysia 5.2
65 Taiwan 5.2
66 Mauritania 5.1
67 Sierra Leone 5.1
68 Belarus 5
69 Bolivia 5
70 Republic of the Congo 5
71 Sao Tome and Principe 5
72 Seychelles 5
73 Suriname 5
74 Burkina Faso 4.9
75 Colombia 4.9
76 Djibouti 4.8
77 Guinea-Bissau 4.8
78 Israel 4.8
79 Philippines 4.7
80 Ukraine 4.7
81 Armenia 4.6
82 Malawi 4.6
83 Morocco 4.6
84 Dominican Republic 4.5
85 Oman 4.4
86 Sweden 4.4
87 Russia 4.3
88 Burundi 4.2
89 Mauritius 4.2
90 Central African Republic 4.1
91 Costa Rica 4
92 Guinea 4
93 Latvia 4
94 Nicaragua 4
95 Senegal 4
96 Mexico 3.9
97 South Korea 3.9
98 Benin 3.8
99 Cameroon 3.8
100 Poland 3.8
101 Togo 3.8
102 Vanuatu 3.8
103 Angola 3.7
— World average 3.7
104 Luxembourg 3.6
105 Namibia 3.6
106 Honduras 3.5
107 Nepal 3.5
108 South Africa 3.4
109 Austria 3.3
110 Slovakia 3.3
111 United Arab Emirates 3.3
112 Kiribati 3
113 Macedonia 3
114 Algeria 2.9
115 Brazil 2.8
116 Brunei 2.8
117 Guatemala 2.8
118 Venezuela 2.8
119 Finland 2.7
120 Germany 2.7
121 Albania 2.5
122 Belize 2.5
123 Chad 2.5
124 Iran 2.5
125 Jordan 2.5
126 Malta 2.5
127 Iceland 2.4
128 Pakistan 2.4
129 Serbia 2.3
130 Bosnia and Herzegovina 2.2
131 Bulgaria 2.2
132 Canada 2.2
133 Comoros 2.2
134 Switzerland 2.1
135 Antigua and Barbuda 2
136 The Bahamas 2
137 Belgium 2
138 El Salvador 2
139 New Zealand 2
140 Saint Lucia 2
141 Samoa 2
142 Australia 1.8
143 Barbados 1.8
144 Czech Republic 1.8
145 Hungary 1.8
146 Montenegro 1.8
147 France 1.7
148 Norway 1.7
149 United States 1.7
150 European Union 1.6
151 Netherlands 1.6
152 Bahrain 1.5
153 Denmark 1.5
154 Fiji 1.5
155 Jamaica 1.5
156 Lebanon 1.5
157 Romania 1.5
158 Saint Kitts and Nevis 1.5
159 Thailand 1.5
160 Tonga 1.4
161 Egypt 1.2
162 Ireland 1.1
163 Slovenia 1.1
164 Trinidad and Tobago 1.1
165 United Kingdom 1.1
166 Madagascar 1
167 Tuvalu 1
166 Dominica 0.9
169 Croatia 0.8
170 San Marino 0.8
171 Spain 0.7
172 Italy 0.6
173 Azerbaijan 0.2
174 Cyprus 0
175 Tunisia 0
176 Sudan -0.2
177 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines -0.4
178 Japan -0.5
179 Andorra -1.8
180 Syria -2
181 Swaziland -2.1
182 Portugal -2.2
183 Yemen -2.5
184 Cote d'Ivoire -5.8
185 Greece -6
Click to expand...

The latest numbers show a 2.7% growth rate for the U.S. . Now compare that to our trading partners in Europe or Japan. And please leave out 3rd world nations and communist dictatorships. What do you have left?
 
iguanaman said:
The latest numbers show a 2.7% growth rate for the U.S. . Now compare that to our trading partners in Europe or Japan. And please leave out 3rd world nations and communist dictatorships. What do you have left?
Click to expand...

Point to these "latest numbers," and also those for all of the "free world." Show the data.
 
Catawba said:
That is the plan that Romney/Ryan put forward. Apparently, the majority of middle class feels like they have been getting the short end of stick by giving bigger tax cuts to the rich in hopes it would trickle down. Recession and unemployment, when we were promised more jobs for tax cuts for the rich, kind of leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
Click to expand...

to borrow the liberal meme for the Obama economy, unemployment would have been worse without the tax cuts. raising them creates zero new jobs--it just changes deficit projections.
 
Fisher said:
to borrow the liberal meme for the Obama economy, unemployment would have been worse without the tax cuts. raising them creates zero new jobs--it just changes deficit projections.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the case in the 1990's nor through most the most prosperous periods in our history when effective tax rates for the rich (after deductions and loopholes) were much higher than the 39% being proposed. The CBO has said eliminating the 4% tax cuts for the wealthy would have almost no affect on the economy, though eliminating the tax cuts for the middle class could throw us into another recession. Seems like an easy choice for those concerned about our economy!
 
Catawba said:
That wasn't the case in the 1990's nor through most the most prosperous periods in our history when effective tax rates for the rich (after deductions and loopholes) were much higher than the 39% being proposed. The CBO has said eliminating the 4% tax cuts for the wealthy would have almost no affect on the economy, though eliminating the tax cuts for the middle class could throw us into another recession. Seems like an easy choice for those concerned about our economy!
Click to expand...

It is a false choice. Obama will not negotiate because he cannot negotiate--he does not control the democrats in the senate. He had to take what they would give him on healthcare, not what he wanted. If he truly controlled the Senate, he could easily pick off enough votes to raise the taxes just by being creative in what he was offering to rural district GOP members in the House. As is, there is no way for him to guarantee them anything he could promise to them. Taxes should be raised, but there needs to be cuts that House members can use for cover. For instance, carve out some family farm exceptions to the cap gains and estate tax stuff and a member of a rural district can say I protected farmers not billionaires. Right now this thing is nothing more than an ego-driven pissing match on both sides and there is no reason for it, but both sides have to put down their gun to end the Mexican standoff. Neither will, which is why we will be hitting the fiscal pothole IMHO.
 
Catawba said:
And I'll say very clearly you are wrong that the tarp, the Iraq war, and the Recession only cost us $2 trillion dollars.



What you leave out, and I'll credit you with just being unaware than trying to be deceptive, is that what received 0 votes by the Democrats in the Senate was the president's budget after amendment by the House GOP.

Its a very simple choice the GOP has now. They can join the Democrats in extending the tax cuts for the middle class and argue about the tax cuts for the wealthy later. Or they can once again hold the middle class tax cuts hostage to the tax cuts for the wealthy.
Click to expand...

For the first part. Tarp we made a profit on... $24 billion TARP
For the Wars, I'm using a cost of $3 trillion divided over the period of 2003-2012... or $300 Billion a year that's $1.2 Trillion for 4 years..
For stimulus I'm using:
February 2009: Obama stimulus $787 billion in broad stimulus package
February 2009: Obama stimulus $75 billion for distressed homeowners
February 2009: Obama stimulus $200 billion for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
March 2009: Obama stimulus $30 billion for AIG
March 2009: Obama Stimulus $15 billion for small business lending
March 2009: Obama Stimulus $22 billion for Big 3 Automakers Chrysler and GM

Which adds up to $1.099T...
1.099T+ 1.2T- 24B = $2.275 Trillion... My point is still valid...

Now as for your "Its a very simple choice the GOP has now. They can join the Democrats in extending the tax cuts for the middle class and argue about the tax cuts for the wealthy later. Or they can once again hold the middle class tax cuts hostage to the tax cuts for the wealthy."

So let's assume we cut the taxes just for the middle class, what do we cut from the budget to make up for that tax cut we gave to the middle class?
 
Harshaw said:
Point to these "latest numbers," and also those for all of the "free world." Show the data.
Click to expand...

Since you think it is so easy, why don't you point out a free nation of comparable size with better than 2.7% growth in the 3rd quarter of 2012.

Here are some examples that don't have near our growth. They are our major trading partners and the Eurozone alone is responsible for 60% of out exports of finished goods.

0817-biz-EUROweb.jpg
 
Fisher said:
to borrow the liberal meme for the Obama economy, unemployment would have been worse without the tax cuts. raising them creates zero new jobs--it just changes deficit projections.
Click to expand...

Actually there is no correlation between tax cuts for the wealthy and employment. Bush had dismal job creation despite both cuts he made during his terms. Clinton created more jobs than both Bush's AND Reagan put together and he RAISED taxes on the wealthy.
 
iguanaman said:
Since you think it is so easy, why don't you point out a free nation of comparable size with better than 2.7% growth in the 3rd quarter of 2012.

Here are some examples that don't have near our growth. They are our major trading partners and the Eurozone alone is responsible for 60% of out exports of finished goods.

0817-biz-EUROweb.jpg
Click to expand...

Might want to read what your chart says... It says "change in GDP" not GDP... And there are more countries that we can include that are part of the free world than Europe which is currently in a recession...
 
iguanaman said:
Actually there is no correlation between tax cuts for the wealthy and employment. Bush had dismal job creation despite both cuts he made during his terms. Clinton created more jobs than both Bush's AND Reagan put together and he RAISED taxes on the wealthy.
Click to expand...

Didn't say there were. Tax increases won't create jobs either. I am approaching this from a long-term view and the growing debt is going to be a huge problem about the time a lot of our social programs reach critical mass, but we also have the short-term problem of jobs and discretionary spending. Neither side has even scratched the surface IMHO. If I were POTUS, I would take a 6 month extension deal, and flood the Congress with specific meaningful reforms that are more substantive than the bar graph shell game to prove who has the bigger wiener.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom