Democrats threaten to go over ‘fiscal cliff’ if GOP fails to raise taxes

[RoadVirus]

The Dumbos would rather jack up taxes rather then give up their entitlements.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Democrats are economic Jihadists. They wired themselves up with Failed Keynesian economics, walked out onto Main Street USA and are threatening to hit the detonator

Sure, we need to give even more handouts and giveaways to the rich, that will fix the economy!

They've never worked in the past, have done nothing but tanked the economy, but that's the way to go!

Massive deficits = goooooooooooood That's the brainwashed radical right's view.

What you fail to understand is that you could take 100% of EVERY 'millionaires' money, you could tax the Fortune 500 at 100%, you could even liquidate them.

Just take it ALL.

You'd squeeze just enough out of them to...
1.) Eliminate the deficit

2.) Pay down 1/4 of the debt

3.) Pay the interest on what we've borrowed from China

4.) Operate government for 9 months


I assure you one of these answers is right.

Pick one.

What, none of you lefties want to tackle this??

 

[JWBooth]

Whatever it takes to shatter the faith in the myth of the supremacy of the state.

 

[tjvh]

Scares you all to death that the Dems could hold the rest of us hostage like the repugs do.
Personally I hope they do it (let all Bush cuts expire) Between my Sch C income and Sch E income, I won't feel a thing. But the rest of you rethugs, evidentally a tax increase of any sort will send you into financial ruin and bankruptcy. Good for you.

Is that about right?

"Hope and Change" to "Forward" to "Bankrupt"... You idiots must be so proud.

 

[WillowTree]

Democrats threaten to go over ‘fiscal cliff’ if GOP fails to raise taxes
Washington Post ^

Democrats threaten to go over ‘fiscal cliff’ if GOP fails to raise taxes - The Washington Post

Democrats are making increasingly explicit threats about their willingness to let nearly $600 billion worth of tax hikes and spending cuts take effect in January unless Republicans drop their opposition to higher taxes for the nation’s wealthiest households.

Emboldened by signs that GOP resistance to new taxes may be weakening, senior Democrats say they are prepared to weather a fiscal event that could plunge the nation back into recession if the new year arrives without an acceptable compromise.

In a speech Monday, Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), the Senate’s No. 4 Democrat and the leader of the caucus’s campaign arm, plans to make the clearest case yet for going over what some have called the “fiscal cliff.”

“If we can’t get a good deal, a balanced deal that calls on the wealthy to pay their fair share, then I will absolutely continue this debate into 2013,” Murray plans to say, according to excerpts of the speech provided to The Washington Post.

If the tax cuts from the George W. Bush era expire and taxes go up for everyone, the debate will be reset, Murray is expected to say. “Every proposal will be a tax-cut proposal,” according to the excerpts, and Republicans would no longer be “boxed in” by their pledge not to raise taxes.

“If middle-class families start seeing more money coming out of their paychecks next year, are Republicans really going to stand up and fight for new tax cuts for the rich? Are they going to continue opposing the Democrats’ middle-class tax cut once the slate has been wiped clean? I think they know this would be an untenable political position.”

Murray’s address, set to be delivered at the Brookings Institution, is meant to influence both the Nov. 6 election and the lame-duck legislative session in November and December

Let them. It will seal their fate for 100 years.

 

[tjvh]

The Dumbos would rather jack up taxes rather then give up their entitlements.

Yeah they would, especially when other people are paying those Taxes.

 

[WillowTree]

Sure, we need to give even more handouts and giveaways to the rich, that will fix the economy!

They've never worked in the past, have done nothing but tanked the economy, but that's the way to go!

Massive deficits = goooooooooooood That's the brainwashed radical right's view.

Massive deficits are the work of Democrats. The Republicans certain haven't been the ones asking for all the current spending.

It's truly astounding to behold all the myriad ways DemoRATs find to blame their debacles on others.

Show me the last time the GOP trash balanced the budget and ran a surplus,...

Newt Gingrich did it during the Clinton Presidency. Thanks for asking.

 

[Seawytch]

Sure, we need to give even more handouts and giveaways to the rich, that will fix the economy!

They've never worked in the past, have done nothing but tanked the economy, but that's the way to go!

Massive deficits = goooooooooooood That's the brainwashed radical right's view.

What you fail to understand is that you could take 100% of EVERY 'millionaires' money, you could tax the Fortune 500 at 100%, you could even liquidate them.

Just take it ALL.

You'd squeeze just enough out of them to...
1.) Eliminate the deficit

2.) Pay down 1/4 of the debt

3.) Pay the interest on what we've borrowed from China

4.) Operate government for 9 months


I assure you one of these answers is right.

Pick one.

What, none of you lefties want to tackle this??

If we let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, it will increase tax revenues by about $678 billion over 10 years. If we let all of the Bush tax cuts expire, we’ll generate a total of about $3.7 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

http://www.doughroller.net/taxes/should-the-bush-tax-cuts-be-extended/

 

[TakeAStepBack]

$678 billion over 10 years

Awesome! Considering the rising deficit, currently at 1.3 trillion annually, that 67.8 billion should really tackle our woes!

You fucking LOLberals really need to learn history, math and economics. it is sad to watch you do this over and over.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Democrats are economic Jihadists. They wired themselves up with Failed Keynesian economics, walked out onto Main Street USA and are threatening to hit the detonator

Sure, we need to give even more handouts and giveaways to the rich, that will fix the economy!

They've never worked in the past, have done nothing but tanked the economy, but that's the way to go!

Massive deficits = goooooooooooood That's the brainwashed radical right's view.

Spread the wealth komrade

Soread the wealth until its all gone

 

[JWBooth]

What you fail to understand is that you could take 100% of EVERY 'millionaires' money, you could tax the Fortune 500 at 100%, you could even liquidate them.

Just take it ALL.

You'd squeeze just enough out of them to...
1.) Eliminate the deficit

2.) Pay down 1/4 of the debt

3.) Pay the interest on what we've borrowed from China

4.) Operate government for 9 months


I assure you one of these answers is right.

Pick one.

What, none of you lefties want to tackle this??

If we let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, it will increase tax revenues by about $678 billion over 10 years. If we let all of the Bush tax cuts expire, we’ll generate a total of about $3.7 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Should the Bush Tax Cuts Be Extended?

Perhaps so, if all assumptions are based on static analysis. However, as was shown in Human Action, rich or poor, people do not behave statically, as circumstances change they react to them. Any time money is coerced from productive use and turned to the unproductive uses of the state, the society is harmed and made less productive.

 

[GuyPinestra]

What you fail to understand is that you could take 100% of EVERY 'millionaires' money, you could tax the Fortune 500 at 100%, you could even liquidate them.

Just take it ALL.

You'd squeeze just enough out of them to...
1.) Eliminate the deficit

2.) Pay down 1/4 of the debt

3.) Pay the interest on what we've borrowed from China

4.) Operate government for 9 months


I assure you one of these answers is right.

Pick one.

What, none of you lefties want to tackle this??

If we let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, it will increase tax revenues by about $678 billion over 10 years. If we let all of the Bush tax cuts expire, we’ll generate a total of about $3.7 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Should the Bush Tax Cuts Be Extended?

$678 billion over 10 years... Our deficit THIS year is over $1 TRILLION.

$3.7 trillion over 10 years covers our current deficit spending for 3 years.

It seems that the hole is getting deeper.

Care to take a shot at the question now?

Which of those 4 answers is correct?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

What, none of you lefties want to tackle this??

If we let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, it will increase tax revenues by about $678 billion over 10 years. If we let all of the Bush tax cuts expire, we’ll generate a total of about $3.7 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Should the Bush Tax Cuts Be Extended?

$678 billion over 10 years... Our deficit THIS year is over $1 TRILLION.

$3.7 trillion over 10 years covers our current deficit spending for 3 years.

It seems that the hole is getting deeper.

Care to take a shot at the question now?

Which of those 4 answers is correct?

You're doing it wriong, sir. The 3.7 trillion in additional revenue over 10 years breaks down to 370 billion per year. That covers one forth of the deficit per year. Putting us at around 1 trillion in deficits for 2013 IF, and it is a huge IF, no additional programs are created and not adjusted for inflation.

 

[GuyPinestra]

If we let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, it will increase tax revenues by about $678 billion over 10 years. If we let all of the Bush tax cuts expire, we’ll generate a total of about $3.7 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Should the Bush Tax Cuts Be Extended?

$678 billion over 10 years... Our deficit THIS year is over $1 TRILLION.

$3.7 trillion over 10 years covers our current deficit spending for 3 years.

It seems that the hole is getting deeper.

Care to take a shot at the question now?

Which of those 4 answers is correct?

You're doing it wriong, sir. The 3.7 trillion in additional revenue over 10 years breaks down to 370 billion per year. That covers one forth of the deficit per year. Putting us at around 1 trillion in deficits for 2013 IF, and it is a huge IF, no additional programs are created and not adjusted for inflation.

You are correct, I just worded it differently. The $3.7 trillion over 10 years would only cover 3 years worth of deficits. I believe we're on the same page, though...

And I'm still waiting for the first daring lefty to provide an answer to my question.

Do you think any of them will have the intestinal fortitude it takes to pony up to the table and venture a guess?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I fully support any and every effort that significantly reduces spending, whatever the cost -- for that cost, long-term, will be -less- than endless trillion-dollar deficits.

Liberals will never understand that you cannot possibly tax the rich enough to cover our spending.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I fully support any and every effort that significantly reduces spending, whatever the cost -- for that cost, long-term, will be -less- than endless trillion-dollar deficits.

Liberals will never understand that you cannot possibly tax the rich enough to cover our spending.

It's a feel good thing. They can falsely blame the rich for the governments mismanagement of our money and laws, by demanding that the government take more of our money to mismanage. The government has really run a great propaganda campaign. Turning citizens against themselves in favor of the state.

It's incredible how many people are falling for this blatant lie.

 

[auditor0007]

^

Dems rooting for the downfall of America.

Wow

Republican policy got the ball rolling. Since Republicans are completely opposed to raising any taxes and actually want to cut taxes further, somebody has to make a stand. It's easy to sell voters tax cuts; I mean who doesn't want a tax cut? But when you see at least 50% of voters supporting a tax increase, something that is not easy to sell, then you really have to ask yourself if you are on the right side of the equation.

 

[GuyPinestra]

^

Dems rooting for the downfall of America.

Wow

Republican policy got the ball rolling. Since Republicans are completely opposed to raising any taxes and actually want to cut taxes further, somebody has to make a stand. It's easy to sell voters tax cuts; I mean who doesn't want a tax cut? But when you see at least 50% of voters supporting a tax increase, something that is not easy to sell, then you really have to ask yourself if you are on the right side of the equation.

The 50% of voters supporting this tax increase are the same 50% of voters that the tax increase will not affect.

 

[M14 Shooter]

^
Dems rooting for the downfall of America.
Wow

Republican policy got the ball rolling.

This is a lie.

Since Republicans are completely opposed to raising any taxes and actually want to cut taxes further, somebody has to make a stand.

Yep. The GOP. Cut Spending.

It's easy to sell voters tax cuts; I mean who doesn't want a tax cut?

It's -easier- to sell voters on federal handouts at the expense of the rich; the Dems refuse to cut that spending because doing so will not allow them to supplicate their voter base with entitlements.

But when you see at least 50% of voters supporting a tax increase, something that is not easy to sell, then you really have to ask yourself if you are on the right side of the equation.

Yes. I am. You cannot possibly raise taxes enough to make good on the deficts born of excessive spending.

 

[Jackson]

And the headlines will read:

Democrats Push US Over the Fiscal Cliff, Renewed Recession to Follow