View Poll Results: Should the 2001/2003 GWB tax cuts be extended for people that make under $250k?

Voters
63. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, because...

    35 55.56%
  • No, because...

    24 38.10%
  • um... wait...

    4 6.35%
Page 2 of 33 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 321

Thread: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

  1. #11
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm OK with extending them for people making under $250K. I'm completely against extending them for wealthy people though. The government needs to balance its budget.
    Why should they be extended for those making under $250K?

  2. #12
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    It just shows how little you know about the Bush tax cuts. They weren't for everybody...
    I got a tax cut. So did everyone I know. So did you. We all make under $250k.
    Heck -- SOME people had their taxes cut to 0%
    How can you be right?
    Last edited by Goobieman; 02-03-10 at 01:00 PM.

  3. #13
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,513

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    It just shows how little you know about the Bush tax cuts. They weren't for everybody...they overwhelmingly rewarded those making in excess of 200k a year.
    Also...it is small businesses that are the economic backbone of this country that generally are investing in our economy. These are not the people making 200,000 a year.
    When did making over 200k a year become a crime?

    I have no problem with people paying their fair share. Now since the top brackets pay the lions share to begin with, why should they not get the same across the board cuts?
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  4. #14
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    I believe they should remain permanent. But then I also believe we should have a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage not to exceed 15%. The goventment should be forced to work within those limits and no more.

  5. #15
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Baralis View Post
    I believe they should remain permanent. But then I also believe we should have a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage not to exceed 15%. The goventment should be forced to work within those limits and no more.
    In the long term, we really can't afford to make them permanent.

    Regardless of your idea spending of the US government, that isn't going to come true, so they need this revenue. Anyway, even if there was large spending cuts, reducing the debt is helpful for a country, at least when the economy is going well.



    anyway, I don't think that taxes should be increased during this economy, so I think its better to be safe then sorry. the tax cuts should be extended for everyone untill maybe 2011 at the earliest, but afterward, we need for tax revenue.

    Cutting spending is another issue, and even if that should be pursued, tax revenues must be strong. Getting a modest budget surplus would be better then having a balanced budget if spending is the same in both cases.

  6. #16
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    How can you be right?
    I was about to call your signature fascist, but I won't. I will just infer that.


    You make it seem like that if someone doesn't work then they have no value. They are human, I don't understand the whole "weakening humanity" in that context.

    Getting a "stronger humanity" compared with a weaker one only has value in how it helps people. We aren't trying to create a race of super productive citizens for the sake of doing that.

    You can say that wealth distribution reduces the standard of living of people in the future, but thats really it.

    but i regress
    Last edited by nerv14; 02-03-10 at 09:17 PM.

  7. #17
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    If someone has evidence that the Bush tax cuts decreased tax revenue, please show it to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    For the middle class, yes. For the upper class, no.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm OK with extending them for people making under $250K. I'm completely against extending them for wealthy people though. The government needs to balance its budget.
    Class warfare FTW

  8. #18
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    They should be extended. Obama is a moron for not doing so... You shouldn't spend your way out of a recession. It's almost like this president wants to rape, then murder, then beat, and then desecrate the grave of prosperity.
    It's one thing to oppose a policy because you think there is a better way. It's another to act as though there's no logic in it even when there is.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    I would agree to the extension if those Wallstreet scumbags had their bonuses taxed at a rate of 55%.

  10. #20
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

    We're in a terrible economic time, in tremendous debt, and money has to come from somewhere. You cut as much as you can and you raise as much as you can. The only way government can pay its bills is through fees and taxes.

    It makes sense to me to take it from people who will not be hurt in a serious way. An extra 5% from someone making $250,000 may mean that they can't buy that extra boat they wanted. An extra 5% from the average family means they might not be able to pay their mortgage.

Page 2 of 33 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •