Ending BUSH Tax Cuts

Discussion in 'Politics' started by HUNGHUGE11X7, Nov 10, 2010.

?

THE BUSH TAX CUTS SHOULD BE :

Poll closed Dec 25, 2010.
  1. ALL TAX CUTS SHOULD BE ENDED

    18 vote(s)
    22.5%
  2. TAX CUTS on 500K &UP should end !

    6 vote(s)
    7.5%
  3. TAX CUTS on 250K &UP should end !

    26 vote(s)
    32.5%
  4. TAX CUTS on 100K &UP should end !

    11 vote(s)
    13.8%
  5. ALL EXTENDED for 1 year

    3 vote(s)
    3.8%
  6. Make ALL TAX CUTS permanent, costing 4T in our deficit

    16 vote(s)
    20.0%
  1. HUNGHUGE11X7

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,080
    Albums:
    16
    Likes Received:
    1,371
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Earth/USA/GA! DEEP IN YOUR THROAT,See vid TO SEE H
    Verified:
    Photo
    Congress may soon vote to end the Bush tax cuts for the top 2% earners in the country . Personally I think they should end all cuts above 100K but they want 250K and up !
    Unlearned idiots say ending BUSH tax cuts would hurt the economy and the same idiots seem to think the tax cuts PAY FOR THEMSELVES ! WRONGGGGGGGGGGGG !
    Any economists worth his degree will tell you Tax cuts for the wealthy will NOT GROW the economy NOR will they create jobs !
    Hell, you don't really NEED Economists to tell you this, you only need to look at the yrs the Tax cuts were enforced and how it caused the economy to shrink and is still doing so and also for creating jobs, OHH yeah, it created JOBS OVER FUKIN SEAS not here.

    Call your local representative and tell them NO TAX CUTS FOR THE TOP 2% . Click the link below to see HOW to contact your local congressman

     
    #1 HUNGHUGE11X7, Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010
  2. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    $250K and up was the administration's original idea and they should stick with it. Despite the 6 figure salary, a big majority of small business owners fall under that demographic and they need a lot of help too.
     
  3. Hoss

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12,050
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern town
    Extend them 1 yr. and then go with the origninal plan $250K and above, if that seems too lenient then make it at $200K. Whatever is decided, there'll be plenty of grumbling.
     
  4. MichiganRico

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    56
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    SW Michigan
    The Administration isn't suggesting a 3% income tax increase on those Americans earning over $250K annually, only adding a 3% surcharge on all income in excess of $250K; the first $250K is exempted from the increase. A big difference. This has been widely misunderstood and mischaracterized by the opposition. Again, however, this is indicative of another Administration failure to communicate its position effectively.
     
  5. D_Myer_Dogasflees

    D_Myer_Dogasflees New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    3
    Government is not mommie, government has no right to tax some less than others(except when collecting the taxes alone would cost more than it brings in) when they are all living under the same umbrella. Mother can't love certain kids more than others.

    If it leads to a '4Tr deficit', then i think that we've got to asses really what irresponsible behaviour really caused this and address this as an issue. Allow anyone to take out a home lone for a $1mn house, and this is where it gets you. The problem should have been foreseen and prohibited this way.
     
  6. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    In other words, you don't care if the person or family who makes only $35K a year is charged the same exact tax rate as the person or family that makes $350K or even the person or family with a longstanding history of wealth and makes $35M. They all get the same "tax rate" because that's supposed to be "fair"... even though the person or family who makes the least will have to work much harder than any of the other just to make ends meet.

    If people who make more money don't think it's fair, then make it easy for yourself and make less money. However, since the issue is really about greed to begin with I don't think anyone would want to do that. Mama has spoken. :rolleyes:
     
  7. D_Myer_Dogasflees

    D_Myer_Dogasflees New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yes, absolutely, it is not the rich guys fault and if we had to tax the $350k guy, the $350k guy would simply move or seek a higher salary (both detrimental to the $35k guy). Yes, sometimes it's also a bit strong, but unfortunately, this is how the world works, this is the best way.

    The banks also need to hold their own responsibility or something of the sort should be organized to ensure that they are responsible. $7 trillion in dept? this is the pollution of the rich guy, he was irresponsible and should pay his own bills (same logic of responsibility applies everywhere).

    All we have to do is ensure that all have access to the education they please. The only way we could do this is to ensure that people are responsible when they have children.
    Mama is a whore (irresponsible)
     
    #7 D_Myer_Dogasflees, Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010
  8. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    No. The "flat tax" is a completely dishonest argument, where the ones in favor assume that a person's ability to work can only be measured by the amount of money that is in their bank accounts. In reality, there's no way to measure just how hard someone has to work in order to get what few (or many) dollars they obtain.

    Sure... just "find another job" that pays more money as if they are so easy to obtain. That's an overly simplistic premise especially when you consider that we're still in a recession and the current volatile nature of obtaining employment. These days, to obtain the right education and job skills necessary to land 6-figured high salary jobs, the average person would have to be well in their 30s (or even their 40s) to do it. And with corporations inherently looking for younger talent, isn't as simple for most people in this scenario to seek out opportunities that pay higher salaries even though they want one. And the $35K/yr person is just screwed anyhow, flat tax or none.

    Greed is never the best way. If anyone who is well off now found themselves in the same plights and struggles of the poor and working class, they would be the first ones begging and pleading for everyone (including the government) to help them. They certainly wouldn't want to hear this rhetoric about "working hard" and how unfair taxes are. Hell, even with their mass amounts of money they're still begging for help from their government to keep what they already have, and that's despite some of the unethical ways they try to save a few pennies at the expense of other hard working people.

    I agree with you on some respects on boosting the efforts with education, but that's just one part of the problem. When you have millions upon millions of people who are born in a cycle of poverty, their education outside of school become two different realities. The ones who don't have to worry about keeping a roof over their head, food to eat, etcetera, can be better prepared to live for the long haul. The rest work hard just to see another day.

    Yes I am, but I never had children. :biggrin1:
     
    #8 B_VinylBoy, Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010
  9. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Per usual.


    Per usual.


    Yes you have.
     
    #9 maxcok, Nov 11, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2010
  10. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    don't see it happening, tax cuts, this coming year but at some point the piper has to be paid or the dancing stops.
     
  11. KTF40

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,898
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC
  12. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    From the article you just sourced:
    President Barack Obama's top adviser suggested to The Huffington Post late Wednesday that the administration is ready to accept an across-the-board, temporary continuation of steep Bush-era tax cuts, including those for the wealthiest taxpayers.

    Also, it states that the White House would wait until the commission made its final recommendations on December, 1st. At that point, whatever conclusion is drawn would have to pass through the House & Senate first, with the new electorates not taking their places until 2011. And even if they wait till then, Republicans (who want to see the measure passed) have the House but not the Senate. Even if the White House would approve extending all of the Bush Tax Cuts (which would REALLY piss off Democrats and Progressives around the country), if the measure doesn't get out from the first two branches of Congress then it's already dead. And you can bet Obama isn't signing any executive orders either.

    In other words, the battle hasn't even started yet. Quite frankly, I think this is just lip service to give the illusion of compromise to some Conservatives.
     
    #12 B_VinylBoy, Nov 11, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2010
  13. KTF40

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,898
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DC
    You realize Democrats like Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad, Evan Bayh, etc, also want to extend the tax cuts, right? Even my own delegate, Gerry Connolly a Democrat, supports extending the cuts. And now with the administration openly admitting they are ready to extend the tax cuts and will not veto, how is this is a battle?
     
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    So what? It's all talk until the actual vote takes place.
    Remember, the new shift in power in the House doesn't happen till January 2011. If Republicans try to push this now, they'll have a problem with passing this through the House. If it fails there, that makes the words from senators Nelson, Conrad and the top adviser from the White House null & void. Plus there's no filibuster proof majority in the Senate. And if they wait till the shifts in power happen, the tax cuts expire.

    In reality, Republicans who really want to extend these cuts for everyone (including the wealthiest 2%) are in a tough position. That is, of course, if we pay attention to more than just the headlines and look at the actual legislative process that has to take place. I hope you didn't forget all the pandering lip service from certain politicians during HCR... the many times certain people decided to show their behinds and threaten to filibuster if they didn't get their way. Lieberman and his antics leading up to the vote, acting like he was going to side with the obstructionists for several weeks until the very last few days when he finally sided with the Democrats? This is the same thing with different faces and a different piece of legislation. Nothing but grandstanding.
     
    #14 B_VinylBoy, Nov 11, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2010
  15. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    The morons who voted for $4T in extra debt should have their voting privileges revoked until they can prove to a judge that they are sane again.
     
  16. B_RedDude

    B_RedDude New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,031
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    California
    Can you believe that in the 1970s, Richard Nixon was on record as supporting a Guaranteed Income? I could be wrong, but I think was the genesis of the Earned Income Credit.

    It's amazing how much the terms of the debate have changed since that motherfucker Ronald Reagan became president.

     
  17. B_RedDude

    B_RedDude New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,031
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    California
    So typical. Barack REALLY needs to grow a pair.

    Even if they extend all of them for only one or two years, as long as the House remains in the hands of the Republicans, there will be pressure to extend them for everybody every time they expire.

    Democrat = Pussy

    As the economy recovers or when it has recovered, the tax cuts should be phased out for everybody to help with the deficit. This could be done over a number of years. We couldn't afford the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in the first place, and especially since they have been in effect during two unpaid for wars and Mr. Bush's introduction of the prescription drug program for seniors.

    Actually maybe we should only phase them out for people who didn't vote for George W. Bush, since the idiots who did vote for him would be forced to REALLY pay for their mistake and stupidity. How's that for bipartisanship?:biggrin1:
     
    #17 B_RedDude, Nov 11, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2010
  18. B_24065

    B_24065 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    1
    What about eliminating income tax all togther and instituting a federal progressive consumption tax on all goods? The rich pay more in taxes because they buy more. And the higher, luxury items carry higher marginal rates. Essential items like food and fuel should have very low tax rates in order to make them more accessible to poor folks.
     
    #18 B_24065, Nov 11, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2010
  19. Nyseguy70

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    89
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    380
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC area
    Verified:
    Photo
    Clueless. How about this. We have class mobility in America, not a caste system. The vast majority of people who make more than $250K earned it. The potential for every American to earn lots of money creates incentives that spur innovation that create opportunity for all and the greatest economy earth has every known. Cut the class warfare bullshit, the wealth transfer shit, and cut the size of government by at least 50 percent. So sick and tired of people complaining about the deficit and acting like raising taxes is the only way. People, you can't have a deficit without SPENDING! Cut government spending. It's all an unsustainable Ponzi scheme. And while you're at it, work harder if you don't like your station in life.
     
  20. B_24065

    B_24065 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    1
    Nailed it.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted