• 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!

House Passes Middle-Class Tax Cut as Dems, GOP Try to Reach Compromise

RightinNYC said:
The fact that Greenspan said something (that doesn't actually support your claim) wasn't what I was asking for evidence to support. I was asking for evidence to support the much broader and much dumber arguments that:
Click to expand...

Greenspan's repudiation of deregulation is essential to my argument. Nice try though.

1) Reaganomics was obviously the cause of our current crisis, and
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html

2) Democrats "didn't fix" the economy because they were worrying about populists.
Click to expand...

Weren't you paying attention during the midterm elections?
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Right pawner. people in Texas .. well schucks alive ... they are more than mere people ... they are Texans by gawd.... check that ... they are TEXANS .... not fear'd of nutin .... taller than most trees ... stronger than a ape in the jungle and twice as smart too. they have plenty of jobs there and don't you even think about comin down to get yerself one .... y'hear?
Click to expand...

randel said:
:shock::lol: hehehehehe
Click to expand...

anyone familiar with mr halperin?

Is it hyperbolic to say the Democratic Party is in the midst of a nervous breakdown? I have been covering national politics since 1988, and I don't remember a situation quite like this. The signs of a crack-up are everywhere.
Click to expand...

time mag, thursday, december 2

The Page by Mark Halperin | Donkey Doozy
 
Eighty Deuce said:
And lastly, as for Republicans being evil .... better get some silver bullets and some wooden stakes ........ and be very afraid ... BOO !
Click to expand...

I think this joke needs a little more time in the oven.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Yeah, the Republicans didn't win control of the Senate and still don't control the presidency.
Click to expand...

of course we don't have the white house, he wasn't up, silly

most house pickups since 1938, 21 state houses, 693 state reps, most in history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...

the apologists are actually in DENIAL about the november 2 WAVE

LOL!


carry on
 
Guy Incognito said:
Greenspan's repudiation of deregulation is essential to my argument. Nice try though.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html



Weren't you paying attention during the midterm elections?
Click to expand...

Reagan had nothing to do with the housing bubble. It was gubmit that screwed that pooch, with Fannie and Freddie and Andrew Cuomo and Dimocrats. You got no argument. If you did, you would have made it instead of posting a link that has nothing to do with Reagan or the failure of Obama.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Greenspan's repudiation of deregulation is essential to my argument. Nice try though.
Click to expand...

Greenspan saying that he thought deregulation went a bit too far =/= incontrovertible proof that Reaganomics caused the current crisis.

Can't believe I have to explain this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html
Click to expand...

Ah, Krugman claimed it in an op-ed. Guess that's settled. :lol:

I could go dig up a Krauthammer op-ed or something from the WSJ that would say the exact opposite, but given that op-eds aren't evidence of anything, I think I'll pass.

Weren't you paying attention during the midterm elections?
Click to expand...

Another substantive response. You've certainly proved your point.
 
did you hear what senators webb, feingold, nelson, lieberman and manchin said?

LOL!

i wonder why they did THAT

why did orszag say it?

why did romer and summers quit?
 
randel said:
you have claimed that the tax cut created jobs...where are they? results matter!!
Click to expand...

And they did, 8.5 million from 2001-2007 on the tax cuts that went into effect in 2001 and 2003. So let me see if you can figure this out and let's make it personal. In 2003 your withholding taxes went down meaning that your paycheck was bigger and that has continued on to the present. Would you agree that is a pay raise, ok so far?

Now it is 2008-2010 and you haven't had a pay increase since 2003. The pay increase is still there but is eaten up by increased costs, i.e. healthcare, potential for higher taxes, state tax changes. How many years between your last pay increase? You really expect a tax increase in 2003 to offset the cost increases that occurred in 2008-2010 and businesses to create jobs with that pay increase from 2003? Now, your President is going to take that pay raise away from you and as a business owner would you be doing any more hiring?

How many jobs will be created by increasing the taxes on the top 2%? If you are going to take tax cuts aways since they didn't do any good, then remove them all including yours?
 
The Prof said:
of course we don't have the white house, he wasn't up, silly
Click to expand...

That's the point. The system is set up so that the party in the minority control of the government shouldn't get their way. Our founding fathers were very wise in this way.

So pipe down and stop impeding progress.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Reagan had nothing to do with the housing bubble. It was gubmit that screwed that pooch, with Fannie and Freddie and Andrew Cuomo and Dimocrats. You got no argument. If you did, you would have made it instead of posting a link that has nothing to do with Reagan or the failure of Obama.
Click to expand...

I can tell you didn't actually read the article I linked to. Read the article, which contains the argument I have adopted, and then respond.
 
randel said:
the question was directed to conservative, not you....
Click to expand...

not interested in the answer?

only in some insignificant little chatroomer?

LOL!

someone's losing it

why did obama promise unemployment would cap at 8% with passage of his stimu... err, recovery act?

why did the senators slice off?

why did orszag oust himself?
 
Guy Incognito said:
I think this joke needs a little more time in the oven.
Click to expand...

What is half-baked are the "arguments" of the liberals in this thread. Its almost exclusively whining. You want to take a progressive tax system, heavily weighted against those that earn the most, and make it worse !

Those that have said allowing the cuts to expire will raise revenue are shallow beyond belief. We will certainly double-dip if that happens, and all revenue will fall. For the Democrats to be so desperate in maintaining their class-envy game right now would be laughably pathetic if not for the harm it will do to all of us, and our kids.

Democrats are becoming inbred with largesse. Its becoming as a cancer on the Republic.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Was I talking about the present?

The tax cuts are set to expire now for all income groups for the next year correct? That will mean higher government revenues, and should the Republican congress, (who controls the purse strings according to many of your posts) does not go on a drunken sailor spending binge should result in the deficit decreasing. I think that would be a good thing dont you
Click to expand...

So you claim, higher taxes on all mean no changes in personal behavior? So you think a tax increase in all tax brackets means more revenue to the govt? Think that corporate profits and taxes will be the same when the consumer has less money? Think the state revenue will be the same when businesses offset higher taxes by moving to lower tax states? Do economics experts ever taken human behavior courses or simply multiply 2X2 and get 4?

Right now 16 million Americans aren't working and that number is low. So in your world increasing taxes takes more money out of the consumers hands and that means more revenue to the govt and higher employment? I am so thankful that I didn't go to your school for an education.
 
The Prof said:
not interested in the answer?

only in some insignificant little chatroomer?

LOL!

someone's losing it

why did obama promise unemployment would cap at 8% with passage of his stimu... err, recovery act?

why did the senators slice off?

why did orszag oust himself?
Click to expand...
losing it? have you ever had it?
 
Guy Incognito said:
I can tell you didn't actually read the article I linked to. Read the article, which contains the argument I have adopted, and then respond.
Click to expand...

You get an argument. You explain how jobs and the economy is not the priority now, but rather raising taxes on those making $200K is ? Tell us all how that gets people back to work ? Turns things around ? Makes us a better economy ?

Its an argument you, and Obama for that matter as he is such a jackass, cannot make.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Stop the personal attacks or I will be getting out my thread ban hammer and some of you will be expelled from this thread.
 
randel said:
losing it? have you ever had it?
Click to expand...

Randel, I really do feel sorry for you as you are out of your league here. Still waiting for how many jobs will be created by raising the taxes on the top 2% of income earners? Also waiting for your explanation as to what Obama has done to create jobs when the net job loss in two years is 4 million according to bls.gov.

Unfortunately you are still in that trance stage over the Obama rhetoric. Too bad you weren't one of those awakened on Nov. 2, 2010.
 
randel said:
true colors, conservative, true colors, your philosophy is 'screw everyone else, i got mine'....again conservative, stay with me this time...where have all these 'jobs' been that these people are supposed to have found....and yes conservative, i know what 'full employment' is considered to be, 95%....your still lacking of hitting that...where are the jobs, where are the jobs.....
Click to expand...

one of the great lies perpetrated by the socialist and democrat party left is that if someone opposes the government forcibly redistributing income that person must be selfish or greedy. Its the way rich dems demonize their opponents and its the way the dependent democrats justify suckling from the public teat and damning those who want to cut back on the milk coming from that teat.

In reality, most of us who oppose forced income redistribution are not only in favor of private charity, we tend to support it at much higher rates than similarly situated democrats or welfare socialists.

Nothing is more greedy and self centered than demanding others contribute at the point of a gun while you do not.
 
Conservative said:
So you claim, higher taxes on all mean no changes in personal behavior? So you think a tax increase in all tax brackets means more revenue to the govt? Think that corporate profits and taxes will be the same when the consumer has less money? Think the state revenue will be the same when businesses offset higher taxes by moving to lower tax states? Do economics experts ever taken human behavior courses or simply multiply 2X2 and get 4?
Click to expand...
Where did I say that? tax revenues can go up with tax increases, or they can go down, tax revenues can go up with tax cuts, or they can go down with tax cuts. It is entirely dependant on the what is occuring in the wider economy. Small tax increases or cuts will have minor effects either way.

Right now 16 million Americans aren't working and that number is low. So in your world increasing taxes takes more money out of the consumers hands and that means more revenue to the govt and higher employment? I am so thankful that I didn't go to your school for an education.
Click to expand...

Currently the US government has a trillion dollar deficit, tax cuts are not going to solve that. A combination of tax increases and spending cuts are going to be required to eliminate the deficit. Thankfully I have an education and not some piece of paper from Coconut College. Try to think critically about all factors that effect the economy rather some narrow set of stats and you will be far better served by your "vast" knowledge
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom