? For liberals: If taxes go up on rich, how will you feel about consequences?

[Mr. Shaman]

I'm really sick of the term "Bush tax cuts". From this point forward I will refer to it as "Obama tax increases". It's his economy now.

except you'd be lying.

Flippin' & Floppin'.....it's what embarrassed BUSHCO-supporters do.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Oh I understand that the "world is complex" and unlike the elitists on this board, I do not pretend to be an expert on every subject.

.....For obvious reasons. The elitists rely, primarily, on The Facts.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"not re-implementing those tax cuts is NOT a tax increase...it's just a refusal to continue your guy's idiocy."
As posted by Jillian....

When you go from paying one amount in taxes then the next day you pay more........Well that's a tax hike,a tax increase,call it what you will.Anyone who disputes whether this tax cut created jobs or not is a fair argument...but do you really think that increasing taxes will create jobs.

C'mon Libs you can't be that stupid...or can you?

Gee.....maybe that's the question the 'Baggers should have asked Lil' Dumbya.....when he added the expiration-date.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Libs love to spend other peoples money....

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight........

​

 

[asterism]

The Bush tax cuts. If they expire, massive tax hikes on rich people and rich companies will ensue.

Liberals: If you are at work in January, for a wealthy company or wealthy boss, and you the Bush cuts to expire as Obama wants, how will you feel if you get called into the office and told:


"Since Washington let the tax cuts expire, we can't afford the staff your division as is. 40% of you will be laid off. It will be a randomly selected group. You'll know within 2 weeks."

If you lose your job due to Obama allowing the companies and rich people to get their taxes hiked, how will you feel? Or, what if you come to work after watching MSNBC applaud Obama no longer allowing tax breaks for the rich, and find out your best friend at work got laid off, because it turns out the Bush tax cuts allowed enough capital for that company to expand your division 6 years ago and hire both of you, but now they cant afford you both and one has to go?????

Never forget, as much as you lefties hate the rich and hate corporations, they provide the jobs in this country. If you want a good paying, stable job, most likely it's gonna be working for a rich person or company. Thats reality, and I'm thankful for the rich who have employed me and don't want their taxes to go up, because the more money they send to Washington DC, the less money they send to their employees.

Linked below is an interesting article in the Washington Post, describing 5 myths about the Bush tax cuts. The article addresses many points made on this thread, and is pertinent to the OPs claim regarding the importance of keeping taxes low on "rich" people. I think this link is worth reading.

"According to the Congressional Budget Office and other authorities, extending all of the Bush tax cuts would have a small bang for the buck, the equivalent of a 10- to 40-cent increase in GDP for every dollar spent.

Why? As the CBO notes, most Bush tax cut dollars go to higher-income households, and these top earners don't spend as much of their income as lower earners. In fact, of 11 potential stimulus policies the CBO recently examined, an extension of all of the Bush tax cuts ties for lowest bang for the buck. (The CBO did not examine the high-income tax cuts separately, but the logic it used suggests that extending those cuts alone would have even less value.) The government could more effectively stimulate the economy by letting the high-income tax cuts expire and using the money for aid to the states, extensions of unemployment insurance benefits and tax credits favoring job creation. Dollar for dollar, each of these measures would have about three times the impact on GDP as continuing the Bush tax cuts."

washingtonpost.com

An interesting point. Why does the CBO ignore the benefit of the money that isn't spent but is invested? Also, since the CBO is quoted as an authority on economic projections can you please provide some information on any time the CBO's projections were correct?

 

[daveman]

How much bang for the buck are we getting from Obama's spending?

We're getting banged, all right.

 

[daveman]

Liberals have never seen a tax increase that they didn't like. The concept of "tax the crap out of the rich" seems to be their battle cry. Ok. Let's say we do that. When there are no more rich to tax, what then Tonto?

Simple. Revise downward the income at which people are considered "rich" and tax them, too.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What percentage of those "filthy rich" are small businesses? What percentage of the country works for them?

You surely do ask a lot o' questions?

Wouldn't you prefer doing a little research and (actually) KNOW something....rather-than playin' the Bimbo-routine????

​

"Supporters of various tax benefits for high-income households often claim that failure to maintain them would have an undue effect on many small businesses. But even assuming a broad definition of “small business,” such claims are often exaggerated or false.* This paper examines three such claims."

* LIES!

 

[rdean]

The Bush tax cuts. If they expire, massive tax hikes on rich people and rich companies will ensue.

Liberals: If you are at work in January, for a wealthy company or wealthy boss, and you the Bush cuts to expire as Obama wants, how will you feel if you get called into the office and told:


"Since Washington let the tax cuts expire, we can't afford the staff your division as is. 40% of you will be laid off. It will be a randomly selected group. You'll know within 2 weeks."

If you lose your job due to Obama allowing the companies and rich people to get their taxes hiked, how will you feel? Or, what if you come to work after watching MSNBC applaud Obama no longer allowing tax breaks for the rich, and find out your best friend at work got laid off, because it turns out the Bush tax cuts allowed enough capital for that company to expand your division 6 years ago and hire both of you, but now they cant afford you both and one has to go?????

Never forget, as much as you lefties hate the rich and hate corporations, they provide the jobs in this country. If you want a good paying, stable job, most likely it's gonna be working for a rich person or company. Thats reality, and I'm thankful for the rich who have employed me and don't want their taxes to go up, because the more money they send to Washington DC, the less money they send to their employees.

Fuck the rich. What are they going to do? Move more jobs to China. Unless they get more Republican tax breaks like last time, they won't have the money.

And what's going on in China? Strikes.

And they have better negotiator's. They just had their salary doubled to 73 dollars a week at a factory employing 300,000 where there's been suicides every other week.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

For liberals: If taxes go up on rich, how will you feel about consequences?

One can never feel sorry enough for those poor put upon billionaires.

After all, they've been so good to us.

....And, don't forget about their Patriotism & willingness to SACRIFICE!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4xEK9IP2z0]YouTube - Mitt Romney's answer when asked why his sons never served.[/ame]​

 

[asterism]

Fuck the rich.

That seems to sum up the current economic policy. At least nobody is pretending otherwise anymore.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What a genius this Obama guy is...the stimulus did nothing and they spent a fortune on it.

....Yet, Republicans are MORE-than-happy to take every penny they can get their hooks-INTO....and, take-credit-FOR!!!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgvkLYCqpKo]YouTube - Republicans Busted On Stimulus Hypocrisy By Rachel Maddow[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TFNmzAtWyU]YouTube - Piyush Jindal Touts Louisiana's Economic Successes While Refusing to Credit Stimulus Package[/ame]
*

"Jindal was one of the GOP governors who opposed the Recovery Acthttp://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/21/jindal-stimulus-check/ and he succeeded in blocking money for unemployment compensation."

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Dollar for dollar, each of these measures would have about three times the impact on GDP as continuing the Bush tax cuts."

washingtonpost.com

WHOOPS!!!!!

Toooooooooooooo much REALITY for the average-'Bagger!!!!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Businesses won't invest if we raise marginal rates a few percentage points on the wealthiest Americans?

Clinton did that in 1993. What happened then?

It's often referred-to as A Nation Transformed!!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If the Bush tax cuts worked so well, why are we just coming out of a 2 year recession?

.....AND, if Bill Clinton's tax-increases had such a devastating-impact on our economy.....'cause those are the rates we'd be returning-TO....how is it that we came-outta the '90s experiencing THE GREATEST ECONOMY THIS COUNTRY HAD EVER EXPERIENCED????!!

​

The Republicans have no intention of reducing spending and every intention of keeping taxes irresponsibly low and even lower if they could. The modern day massive deficits began with the fiscal insanity of Reagan,

and conservatives/Republicans can't stop talking about ressurrecting the Reagan policies.

Yeah.....whatta magical-time THAT was.....

(....Especially with all o' the record-breaking!!)​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Liberals have never seen a tax increase that they didn't like.

wow....how original....let me write-that-one-down....

​

 

[rdean]

Fuck the rich.

That seems to sum up the current economic policy. At least nobody is pretending otherwise anymore.

You're not rich. What do you care?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The Bush tax cuts. If they expire, massive tax hikes on rich people and rich companies will ensue.

Liberals: If you are at work in January, for a wealthy company or wealthy boss, and you the Bush cuts to expire as Obama wants, how will you feel if you get called into the office and told:


"Since Washington let the tax cuts expire, we can't afford the staff your division as is. 40% of you will be laid off. It will be a randomly selected group. You'll know within 2 weeks."

If you lose your job due to Obama allowing the companies and rich people to get their taxes hiked, how will you feel? Or, what if you come to work after watching MSNBC applaud Obama no longer allowing tax breaks for the rich, and find out your best friend at work got laid off, because it turns out the Bush tax cuts allowed enough capital for that company to expand your division 6 years ago and hire both of you, but now they cant afford you both and one has to go?????

Never forget, as much as you lefties hate the rich and hate corporations, they provide the jobs in this country. If you want a good paying, stable job, most likely it's gonna be working for a rich person or company. Thats reality, and I'm thankful for the rich who have employed me and don't want their taxes to go up, because the more money they send to Washington DC, the less money they send to their employees.

Linked below is an interesting article in the Washington Post, describing 5 myths about the Bush tax cuts. The article addresses many points made on this thread, and is pertinent to the OPs claim regarding the importance of keeping taxes low on "rich" people. I think this link is worth reading.

"According to the Congressional Budget Office and other authorities, extending all of the Bush tax cuts would have a small bang for the buck, the equivalent of a 10- to 40-cent increase in GDP for every dollar spent.

Why? As the CBO notes, most Bush tax cut dollars go to higher-income households, and these top earners don't spend as much of their income as lower earners. In fact, of 11 potential stimulus policies the CBO recently examined, an extension of all of the Bush tax cuts ties for lowest bang for the buck. (The CBO did not examine the high-income tax cuts separately, but the logic it used suggests that extending those cuts alone would have even less value.) The government could more effectively stimulate the economy by letting the high-income tax cuts expire and using the money for aid to the states, extensions of unemployment insurance benefits and tax credits favoring job creation. Dollar for dollar, each of these measures would have about three times the impact on GDP as continuing the Bush tax cuts."

washingtonpost.com

An interesting point. Why does the CBO ignore the benefit of the money that isn't spent but is invested? Also, since the CBO is quoted as an authority on economic projections can you please provide some information on any time the CBO's projections were correct?

You mean because you (already) have all o' the conflicting-info; showing how-often they were wrong? ​

 

[chanel]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

 

[rdean]

Small businesses will a) reduce staff b) reduce salaries and benefits c) raise prices

Middle class will suffer the most. As usual.

Trickle down misery.

Why does the right equate small business with the "rich". How many "small businesses" have a billion dollars?

How come you guys NEVER defend the Middle Class? Are they no good? Not worth the time or effort?

Besides, I suspect you aren't rich. If you were, you would be off somewhere in your private yacht.