• 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!

WH warns tax defeat could trigger new recession

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,497
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I rarely start threads, but something struck me about the article that I am referring. I understand that we have several threads on this issue, but there was two lines from this article that I wanted to focus on:

Obama says the compromise was necessary because Republicans were prepared to let everyone's taxes rise and to block the extension of unemployment benefits for jobless Americans if they didn't get much of what they wanted.

<snip>

For a second straight day Wednesday, Vice President Joe Biden traveled to the Capitol to meet privately with Democrats — this time in the House, after visiting senators on Tuesday. Aides distributed a color-coded chart labeled "what we got," and "what they got," indicating that Democrats won more concessions in the tax deal than did Republicans.

WH warns tax defeat could trigger new recession - Yahoo! News

I placed in bold the comments that annoyed me. This is the problem with this entire issue. Seems to me that neither side really cares what is best for the country. They just care about winning. Republicans refusing to accept ANYTHING unless they get what they want. Democrats charting wins and losses. This is the kind of stupid partisanship that has been ruining this country for a while. It would be nice if people could just get together and say, "ok, screw winning. Let's assess what works." I understand that there are differences in opinion in what works, but threatening to "take your toys and go home" or looking at it as a win/loss idea. misses the point of what is needing to be accomplished. IMO, both parties have acted atrociously, for the most part, putting the interests of their party above the interests of the country.

So. my question to you is NOT what you think of the tax cut compromise, but what do you think of the behavior of the two parties surrounding this entire thing.
 
Last edited:
I rarely start threads, but something struck me about the article that I am referring. I understand that we have several threads on this issue, but there was two lines from this article that I wanted to focus on:



I placed in bold the comments that annoyed me. This is the problem with this entire issue. Seems to me that neither side really cares what is best for the country. They just care about winning. Republicans refusing to accept ANYTHING unless they get what they want. Democrats charting wins and losses. This is the kind of stupid partisanship that has been ruining this country for a while. It would be nice if people could just get together and say, "ok, screw winning. Let's assess what works." I understand that there are differences in opinion in what works, but threatening to "take your toys and go home" or looking at it as a win/loss idea. misses the point of what is needing to be accomplished. IMO, both parties have acted atrociously, for the most part, putting the interests of their party above the interests of the country.

So. my question to you is NOT what you think of the tax cut compromise, but what do you think of the behavior of the two parties surrounding this entire thing.

the worst thing the GOP could do is allow the dems to keep taxes the same on the people who most need to learn that government spending costs everyone money while letting taxes on those who already understand that and pay most of the taxes go up.
 
Both sides are playing the same old politics. Nothing was learned by either party from the last election. Obama tried to sell the idea of hey I can work with the Republicans, yet then bashes them in basically saying they were terrorists. Dems are becoming the party of "No". IMO, not enough new blood was brought into Washington to force a change on how business is done. Maybe in two years voters can force a change.
 
America voted against bipartisanship during the midterms. As you may recall, they decided to send the Blue Dogs packing and they were the ones most likely to bring the two parties together. This is nothing like the partisanship we are going to see the next 2 years.
 
I'm glad the Republicans held Obama's nuts to the fire, because ultimately, not raising taxes will be beneficial to the American economy.
 
I'm glad the Republicans held Obama's nuts to the fire, because ultimately, not raising taxes will be beneficial to the American economy.

So **** the deficit is what you're saying?

I don't care either way, I'm just sayin...
 
America voted against bipartisanship during the midterms. As you may recall, they decided to send the Blue Dogs packing and they were the ones most likely to bring the two parties together. This is nothing like the partisanship we are going to see the next 2 years.

What bipartisanship are you referring to? Do you call it bipartisanship, when Obama said: "The-the-the Republicans can come along for the ride, but they gotta sit in back"? How about: "We won"? That kind of bipartisanship?
 
I'm curious as to whether some of you more "fervent" supporters of one side or the other see any problem with the tactics that both sides used. Especially the side that you support.
 
What bipartisanship are you referring to? Do you call it bipartisanship, when Obama said: "The-the-the Republicans can come along for the ride, but they gotta sit in back"? How about: "We won"? That kind of bipartisanship?

Or how about the bipartisanship of the Republicans who said they would not support anything Democrats prposed unless they got what they wanted.
 
I'm curious as to whether some of you more "fervent" supporters of one side or the other see any problem with the tactics that both sides used. Especially the side that you support.

I'm just surprised that so many conservatives are happy the tax breaks will stay in place, when they're a huge deficit causing mechanism, surely if you're for fiscal conservatism, you might support the tax breaks expiring AND the federal government cutting their budget, therefore putting the feds on the road to a balanced budget, but instead, continue to support tax breaks whilst at the same time, gutting Obama for deficits.
 
I'm just surprised that so many conservatives are happy the tax breaks will stay in place, when they're a huge deficit causing mechanism, surely if you're for fiscal conservatism, you might support the tax breaks expiring AND the federal government cutting their budget, therefore putting the feds on the road to a balanced budget, but instead, continue to support tax breaks whilst at the same time, gutting Obama for deficits.

starving the beast is good

letting all the tax cuts expire was the second best option

because then the middle class would realize it is not just the rich who have to pay for all the idiotic government spending that mostly was created to appeal to the middle class
 
I'm curious as to whether some of you more "fervent" supporters of one side or the other see any problem with the tactics that both sides used. Especially the side that you support.

I am pissed that the GOP caved on the handouts but that was political reality. I am glad that they didn't let the dems get what they wanted-shifting even more of the tax burden to the rich and thus allowing most people to continue to believe that the majority of taxpayers and tax consumers have no duty to do anything about the deficit
 
So **** the deficit is what you're saying?

I don't care either way, I'm just sayin...

Oh, so now it's all about shrinking the deficit? Extending unemplyment bennies for nearly two more years probably isn't going to be very good for the deficit. Eh?

Do you have enough experience in the real world, to understand that the more taxes you place on people, the harder they're going to work at avoiding them? What if--and this isn't at all far-fetched--raising taxes caused people to work twice as hard at avoiding taxes and it resulted in less revenue? Were that the case, what would have actually been accomplished at the end of the day?

I'll say it for the umpteenth time, if it were really about shrinking the deficit and not about ****ing over people whom are considered to be too wealthy; Obama wouldn't have killed so many jobs with his kook fringe Leftist agenda.

The DREAM Act passed this evening. How much is that **** going to cost us?
 
Or how about the bipartisanship of the Republicans who said they would not support anything Democrats prposed unless they got what they wanted.

How long since the Republicans have been in control?
 
I'm just surprised that so many conservatives are happy the tax breaks will stay in place, when they're a huge deficit causing mechanism, surely if you're for fiscal conservatism, you might support the tax breaks expiring AND the federal government cutting their budget, therefore putting the feds on the road to a balanced budget, but instead, continue to support tax breaks whilst at the same time, gutting Obama for deficits.

What about Obamacare? That doesn't raise taxes enough on businesses? How much is it going to add to the deficit?
 
I'm curious as to whether some of you more "fervent" supporters of one side or the other see any problem with the tactics that both sides used. Especially the side that you support.

Are the tactics now any different than they were, say, 230 years ago?
 
So **** the deficit is what you're saying?

I don't care either way, I'm just sayin...

The debt will not be paid by Obama. there is still stimulus and tarp money. You do not see Obama or democrats talking about paying any of the debt.
 
How long since the Republicans have been in control?

Irrelevant. Oh, wait... that's right... I keep forgetting. You are of the mindset that if one side demonstrates bad behavior, it gives the other side the right to act out, too. Sorry, apdst... all that does is demonstrate that you are part of the issue that I presented. You don't care about the country. You care about winning verses the Democrats.
 
Are the tactics now any different than they were, say, 230 years ago?

I would say probably not. I've read a lot about the history of partisanship and this has been going on forever. Doesn't mean it's OK.
 
The debt will not be paid by Obama. there is still stimulus and tarp money. You do not see Obama or democrats talking about paying any of the debt.

Letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire would decrease the deficit.
 
Irrelevant. Oh, wait... that's right... I keep forgetting. You are of the mindset that if one side demonstrates bad behavior, it gives the other side the right to act out, too. Sorry, apdst... all that does is demonstrate that you are part of the issue that I presented. You don't care about the country. You care about winning verses the Democrats.

Yet, I'm the only one that you single out for criticism? Hypocrisy comes to mind all of a sudden.
 
I rarely start threads, but something struck me about the article that I am referring. I understand that we have several threads on this issue, but there was two lines from this article that I wanted to focus on:



I placed in bold the comments that annoyed me. This is the problem with this entire issue. Seems to me that neither side really cares what is best for the country. They just care about winning. Republicans refusing to accept ANYTHING unless they get what they want. Democrats charting wins and losses. This is the kind of stupid partisanship that has been ruining this country for a while. It would be nice if people could just get together and say, "ok, screw winning. Let's assess what works." I understand that there are differences in opinion in what works, but threatening to "take your toys and go home" or looking at it as a win/loss idea. misses the point of what is needing to be accomplished. IMO, both parties have acted atrociously, for the most part, putting the interests of their party above the interests of the country.

So. my question to you is NOT what you think of the tax cut compromise, but what do you think of the behavior of the two parties surrounding this entire thing.

My sense is that the way the compromise was put together was close to what we would hope the two parties would do. Let's remember that both sides have truely different views on the topics they dealt with. So to say we "got" something we otherwise would not is true. For example the President was able to get the 2% reduction on payroll taxes which will he most helpful to lower earners. By got he meant that there is no way this would have passed as stand alone legislation. Same with the Republicans on the tax break for upper incomes.

The point you miss is that there is no absolute "Best Answer". Both sides think they have the best answer and thus the need to compromise to get to an answer that satisfies both sides and hopefully somewhere in there it also works for the American people.
 
Letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire would decrease the deficit.

Not if they worked harder to avoid paying more taxes. If they played their cards right, it would cause there to be less tax revenue, which wouldn't decrease the deficit.

The only way to decrease the deficit, is to stop spending money they don't have.
 
Yet, I'm the only one that you single out for criticism? Hypocrisy comes to mind all of a sudden.

No, you're just the most outrageously partisan person right now. Don't worry, I'm sure Turtledude will really get into the conversation soon.
 
Letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire would decrease the deficit.

speculation on your part because the other 98% would see no reason to stop the idiotic spending increases
 
Back
Top Bottom