GOP to jobless: Drop dead

Flaylo

Handsome Devil
Feb 10, 2010
5,899
745
98
In some grass near you
Steven Pearlstein - GOP to jobless: Drop dead

"If you want a serious discussion about changing the structure or mandate of the fire department, the time to have it is not when the entire squad is out fighting a three-alarm blaze. That's exactly the situation with the Federal Reserve and the debate over the dual mandate. Only two weeks after the midterm election, it seems clear that the 2012 campaign has begun. For too many Republicans, the aim is to politicize policy, trash the institutions of government and intimidate anyone who might disagree with their radical ideology.

There's no better proof of that than the so-called debate over extending the Bush tax cuts on incomes above $250,000. Unable to defend more tax cuts for the rich, Republicans like to pretend that their real concern is for job creation, citing the fact that about half of all business profits now flow through partnerships and small corporations that are taxed at personal rates.

But look more closely at the argument and it turns out to be "largely bogus," according to Eric Toder, a former Treasury and IRS official who now works at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Very few of those businesses earn more than $250,000 in profit, and those that do tend to be very successful hedge funds and law firms that are flush with cash and unlikely to be dissuaded from hiring extra employees or make new investments because of a 4 percentage-point change in the marginal tax. Because most hiring and investment can be done with pre-tax dollars, Toder said, the tax rate is largely irrelevant to those decisions.


That's the micro view. The macro view, from the forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisers of St. Louis, is that not extending tax cuts for high-income households would reduce gross domestic product growth by - drumroll here - two-tenths of one percent in each of the next two years. And the difference in the unemployment rate? A whopping one tenth of one percent!

These inconvenient truths, however, are simply ignored by Republicans, who would have us all believe that extending upper-income tax cuts is the most crucial economic issue we face - not just this year but for all time
."



The Democrats shouldn't compromise shat and make the Repugs prove unequivocally that tax cuts for the richest should be extended. I'm sick and tired of righwting asshats trying to brainwash Americans into believing that trickle down shat works despite abundance of evidence to the contrary, facking bought-off SOBs.
 
Last edited:
Steven Pearlstein - GOP to jobless: Drop dead

"If you want a serious discussion about changing the structure or mandate of the fire department, the time to have it is not when the entire squad is out fighting a three-alarm blaze. That's exactly the situation with the Federal Reserve and the debate over the dual mandate. Only two weeks after the midterm election, it seems clear that the 2012 campaign has begun. For too many Republicans, the aim is to politicize policy, trash the institutions of government and intimidate anyone who might disagree with their radical ideology.

There's no better proof of that than the so-called debate over extending the Bush tax cuts on incomes above $250,000. Unable to defend more tax cuts for the rich, Republicans like to pretend that their real concern is for job creation, citing the fact that about half of all business profits now flow through partnerships and small corporations that are taxed at personal rates.

But look more closely at the argument and it turns out to be "largely bogus," according to Eric Toder, a former Treasury and IRS official who now works at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Very few of those businesses earn more than $250,000 in profit, and those that do tend to be very successful hedge funds and law firms that are flush with cash and unlikely to be dissuaded from hiring extra employees or make new investments because of a 4 percentage-point change in the marginal tax. Because most hiring and investment can be done with pre-tax dollars, Toder said, the tax rate is largely irrelevant to those decisions.


That's the micro view. The macro view, from the forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisers of St. Louis, is that not extending tax cuts for high-income households would reduce gross domestic product growth by - drumroll here - two-tenths of one percent in each of the next two years. And the difference in the unemployment rate? A whopping one tenth of one percent!

These inconvenient truths, however, are simply ignored by Republicans, who would have us all believe that extending upper-income tax cuts is the most crucial economic issue we face - not just this year but for all time
."



The Democrats shouldn't compromise shat and make the Repugs prove unequivocally that tax cuts for the richest should be extended. I'm sick and tired of righwting asshats trying to brainwash Americans into believing that trickle down shat works despite abundance of evidence to the contrary, facking bought-off SOBs.

it is 250,000 in income not profit....
 
Very few of those businesses earn more than $250,000 in profit

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Tax rates are based on individual's incomes, not how much profit a business makes.
 
Very few of those businesses earn more than $250,000 in profit

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Tax rates are based on individual's incomes, not how much profit a business makes.

not to mention the unemployed and poor people don't create jobs....demand for goods and services does.....you need money to buy goods and servcies....

but wtf....give the government all your money so they can build schools and roads and shit in third world countries ..... why americans let thier government send billions around the world while this places goes to hell in a hand basket is beyond me....
 
This tactic didn't work out well for Grayson. Now did it?


Trickle down didn't work, have any explanations except for unprovable partisan bullshat from the right?

bailing out the unions and banks is form of trickle down.....but i am sure you will claim that worked....

tell me how is taking more money from the citizens going to stimulate the economy and create a demand for goods and servcies thus creating jobs
 
I just have a couple of questions.

How much is enough?

How much does the government need to waste before they get cut off?

Do we need to pay 50% of our income to the government? Will 50% be enough? If we all agree to give the government 50% of our income, will they finally put together a budget that doesn't spend more than what they'll bring in?

It will never be enough. The government will just spend more and more money as long as they are allowed to spend so recklessly.

Let's focus on tightening the budget, then we can focus on how much of MY income the government can confiscate.

Rick
 
I just have a couple of questions.

How much is enough?

How much does the government need to waste before they get cut off?

Do we need to pay 50% of our income to the government? Will 50% be enough? If we all agree to give the government 50% of our income, will they finally put together a budget that doesn't spend more than what they'll bring in?

It will never be enough. The government will just spend more and more money as long as they are allowed to spend so recklessly.

Let's focus on tightening the budget, then we can focus on how much of MY income the government can confiscate.

Rick


i agree.....we have x dollars....they should only be allowed to spend that....if we can't afford to have military bases around the world or to give billions to the middle east so they won't blow each other up....or take tax dollors from one state to build bridges in another state....then we shouldn't do it.....

these idiots need to learn some fiscal responsibility...i say we cut off their salaries and perks and their funding for 12 assistants until they get their shit together....
 
come on everyone. This post has much greater meaning than his other crap. You can tell because he used a large font, funny color and bolded most of it.

And we all know that if the unemployed died the unemployment rate would go down, so OBVIOUSLY, we don't want the unemployed to die, b/c it's more inportant to make obama look bad than fix the economy.
[/
B]
 
not to mention the unemployed and poor people don't create jobs....demand for goods and services does.....you need money to buy goods and servcies....

Thats a facking strawman, nobody ever said poor people create jobs, but neither are the richest 2% for whom the Repugs want the taxcuts for, why insist on doing shat that doesn't work?

but wtf....give the government all your money so they can build schools and roads and shit in third world countries ..... why americans let thier government send billions around the world while this places goes to hell in a hand basket is beyond me....

Give the rich tax cuts to send jobs overseas and tax cut money into offshore ban accounts, screw job creation.
 

Forum List

Back
Top