If Repubs in congress are so concerned about government spending, why the hell...

[C_Clayton_Jones]

... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?

WHY?????

They continue to adhere blindly to rightist dogma and the fallacy that the wealthy create jobs. It’s the myth of the benevolent capitalist. In reality such tax cuts are used only to maximize profits, enrich shareholders, and create no jobs; not to mention the fact those very tax cuts contributed to the deficit.

 

[bripat9643]

You were whining about government spending, not the deficit. Those are two separate things.

No, I was whining about the tax cuts clearly. The tax cuts have added trillions to the deficit.

Christ, you really aren't worth the effort.

Allow me to remind you of the title of your thread:

"If Repubs in congress are so concerned about government spending, why the hell..."​

As far as "not being worth the effort" is concerned, did you really think your lame post was going to change my mind about anything?

I think that pretty much defines "naivete."

 

[bripat9643]

... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?

WHY?????

They continue to adhere blindly to rightist dogma and the fallacy that the wealthy create jobs. It’s the myth of the benevolent capitalist. In reality such tax cuts are used only to maximize profits, enrich shareholders, and create no jobs; not to mention the fact those very tax cuts contributed to the deficit.

If the wealthy don't create private sector jobs, then who does, the government?

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Don't talk to me about government jobs. The last thing the taxpayers need is more tics to feed.

 

[Billy000]

Are you referring to the Bush tax cuts that 92% of House Democrats and 77% of Senate Democrats voted to extend in 2010?

1) GovTrack: House Vote #604 (Dec 2, 2010)

2) GovTrack: Senate Vote #276 (Dec 15, 2010)

3) H.R. 4853 [111th]: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (GovTrack.us)

Still waiting on your response, Billy boy. I just want to make sure that we're discussing the same Bush tax cuts that you blame the Republicans for and 89.2% of Congressional Democrats voted in favor of extending.

I was never defending the democrats. There is also a difference between the tax cuts for the rich and the tax cuts for the middle class. Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary. However, they still contributed to the deficit.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?

WHY?????

For the same reason they signed that asinine pledge never to raise taxes and then raised payroll taxes on the 99%.

They're owned by the 1%.

Facts the pubs can't deny -

Critics Still Wrong on What
Shows very clearly the amount the Bush tax gifts are responsible for. And, no, they're not "paid for". That lie came from from the same place as "the 1% are the job creators". If that's true, when are they going to start creating jobs? LOL

PERRspectives: 10 Republican Lies About the Bush Tax Cuts
Read it and weep.

Frankly, I think the real question is, why do pubs/bags vote against their own best interests?

 

[BluePhantom]

I was never defending the democrats. There is also a difference between the tax cuts for the rich and the tax cuts for the middle class. Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary. However, they still contributed to the deficit.

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I was never defending the democrats. There is also a difference between the tax cuts for the rich and the tax cuts for the middle class. Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary. However, they still contributed to the deficit.

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

How?

Where are all those jobs they supposedly created over the past 10 years?

 

[rdean]

Are you referring to the Bush tax cuts that 92% of House Democrats and 77% of Senate Democrats voted to extend in 2010?

1) GovTrack: House Vote #604 (Dec 2, 2010)

2) GovTrack: Senate Vote #276 (Dec 15, 2010)

3) H.R. 4853 [111th]: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (GovTrack.us)

Yea, you got it. That one. The one where Republicans held millions of Americans hostage, threatening to cut off their unemployment just before Christmas unless Democrats passed these tax cuts that benefit mostly millionaires and billionaires. See, we're on the same page. Talking about the same thing. Republicans willing to let millions of American suffer to bring in a few bucks for their corporate masters while even the GOP base gets screwed.

 

[BluePhantom]

I was never defending the democrats. There is also a difference between the tax cuts for the rich and the tax cuts for the middle class. Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary. However, they still contributed to the deficit.

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

How?

Where are all those jobs they supposedly created over the past 10 years?

Well Billy said in defending the Democrats support for the tax cuts that:

Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary.

His words, not mine. And I might remind you that unemployment under Bush was pretty much exactly the same as under Clinton UNTIL the Democrats took over Congress in January of 2007. Feel free to look that one up if you wish (you'll have to change the range at the top of the page) Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[BluePhantom]

Yea, you got it. That one. The one where Republicans held millions of Americans hostage, threatening to cut off their unemployment just before Christmas unless Democrats passed these tax cuts that benefit mostly millionaires and billionaires. See, we're on the same page. Talking about the same thing. Republicans willing to let millions of American suffer to bring in a few bucks for their corporate masters while even the GOP base gets screwed.

When did the Republicans say they were going to "cut off" unemployment benefits? They were none too hot about "extending" unemployment benefits, but they never said they would "cut off" benefits for anyone who would normally qualify for them. This is a perfect example of liberal thinking. You think people were "entitled" to an extension of benefits. And you wonder why we're broke.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

How?

Where are all those jobs they supposedly created over the past 10 years?

Well Billy said in defending the Democrats support for the tax cuts that:

Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary.

His words, not mine. And I might remind you that unemployment under Bush was pretty much exactly the same as under Clinton UNTIL the Democrats took over Congress in January of 2007. Feel free to look that one up if you wish (you'll have to change the range at the top of the page) Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Uh, I was responding to what you said -

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

- and I said,

How?

Where are all those jobs they supposedly created over the past 10 years?

TIA for your answer.

 

[DaGoose]

... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?

WHY?????

No worries. With the failure of the Super Committee and since the GOP refusing to work with President Obama I forsee those incredibly ignorant TEMPORARY tax cuts expiring soon.

Just as they were supposed to when Bush first signed them into law.

 

[BluePhantom]

... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?

WHY?????

No worries. With the failure of the Super Committee and since the GOP refusing to work with President Obama I forsee those incredibly ignorant TEMPORARY tax cuts expiring soon.

Just as they were supposed to when Bush first signed them into law.

Well in case you haven't noticed, the Democrats aren't real interested in working with Obama either.

 

[Sirkarl101]

That vote on extending the Bush tax cuts in 2010 was not a stand alone vote. Look at what else was on the table to get a clear view of why the vote went the way it did. I do agree however that they are all crooked thieves with a hidden agenda for America.

 

[DontBeStupid]

No. It doesn't.

If your boss cuts your salary, has he spent any of your money?

Nope.

If you think that the Bush tax cuts haven't been a huge contributor to the debt crisis, then you are terribly misinformed.

Or I simply understand that our problem is spending and not revenue.

We brought it $2.15 Trillion dollars last year. Are you honestly suggesting we can't balance the budget and pay down the debt with that much revenue? We can't run the government at the same cost as we did just a few years ago?

In 2000 we brought in $2T in tax receipts. Just based on a simple inflation rate of 3% per year, in 2009 we should have brought in $2.61T. We didn't. We brought in almost $500B less than that.

But keep telling yourself we don't have a revenue problem.

 

[Billy000]

I was never defending the democrats. There is also a difference between the tax cuts for the rich and the tax cuts for the middle class. Obviously, congress felt the tax cuts for the middle class were necessary. However, they still contributed to the deficit.

Oh so the Bush tax cuts DO benefit the middle class. Thank you for confirming that.

I never said they didn't, jackass

 

[bripat9643]

In 2000 we brought in $2T in tax receipts. Just based on a simple inflation rate of 3% per year, in 2009 we should have brought in $2.61T. We didn't. We brought in almost $500B less than that.

But keep telling yourself we don't have a revenue problem.

Even if we brought in the full $2.61 trillion, we would still be $1 trillion in the hole, so your claim doesn't wash. Spending is the problem, not revenue.