The fiscally irresponsible right refuted on extension of Bush taxcuts

[Bass v 2.0]

How much money will the tax cuts save?

Now, bear in mind...the government promised us job creation and unemployment no higher than 8% with that number decreasing 6 months into the stimulus.....at the cost of about a trillion dollars.

And that did not happen.

So they were wrong with THEIR theory...

Sop hoiw much will the tax cut rollback save?

Monkey, your reasoning is unsound, it has already been proven that keeping the tax cuts will increase the deficit so asking me the question about how much will it save is stupid, the point is to not increase the budget.

Yes, I know that.

I was responding to your "the Republican party wants to sell to the American people that these very same people are more trustworthy than the government".....

So they are simply the pot calling the kettle black.

Dont you get who I am? I think both parties are a bunch of politicalhacks with only party in mind and as opposed to discussing all the good they are doing they are continually talking about all the bad the other party is doing....becuse neither party has done much good for our country over the past 10 years.

The fiscally irresponsible Republican, rightwing monkeys on the right are the ones claiing for less government and not to trust the government while trying to convince the people that they should put more trust in the "job creators" that took the money, ran and created no jobs and did nothing to stimulate economic growth, in fact the opposite happened. Now only a bunch of retards drunk off of partisan ideological monkey talk would put their trust in these same scammers and when they fleeced again who are the Republicans going to blame? The Democrats, but who took the money and got richer while working class and poor got nothing? The same rich so called "job creators," I rest my case.

Dude is a deluded monkey for trying to sell that Republican monkey speak while simultaneously ignoring reality, his logic is do nothing and leave everything the same for him to only come along and blame the Dems for doing nothing.

 

[asterism]

As long as we have our "leaders" saying that things are bad and would been worse without a stimulus...and the businesses are evil and greedy.....and the end is not near.....and we need to tighteen our belts...and being a business owner means you are evil and greedy....and the rich dont care.....

We will go nowhere.

It is all about leadership and knowing what to say and when to say it.

McCain was a bad choice of candidate....but he did one thing right. He tried to quell the fears of the public when he said the "fundamentals of the economy are sound".....He was acting as a leader.

But you know how children can be. They took it and ran with it.

Ironically, part of the problem was that for years leading up to the financial disaster, people like Alan Greenspan and Barney Frank were telling the Congress and thus the American people that everything was hunky-dory. Suddenly, Hank Paulson got a heads up when Bear-Stearns (one of the biggest investment banks on Wall Street) was about to go belly up, causing a run on banks. That was almost a year before TARP was passed (you might study that, yourself), and the banking ceos did everything in their power to save their own asses from the chopping block because they were all doing the same thing. If anyone with any sense, and power, had seen the writing on the wall long before a bailout was necessary and NOT continued to hoodwink everyone into thinking all was well, the crisis might have been milder.

In my 52 years I have seen industries die...I saw the advertising industry boom and then die...I watched Shearson buy up American Express and EF Hutton and then lose half their wealth...I watched Fiurst Boston go belly up....I watched top law Frims build up and die like Finley Kumble Wagner Hein and Unterberg...and they all had a major impact on their industries.....

The problem was government intervention. Let them fail. There are plenty of people out there that will pick up the slack and meet the demand for the industry.

TARP was a farce. Sure it worked, but who needed it? Let them fail and the little boys and girls would have gladly picked up the slack.

That is how capitalism CORRECTS itself. It lets the free market correct it.

I recall how ad agenices were being swallowed up by the big boys....and the little ones sat around and waited.....Sure enough, those top agencies tried to manipulate the oligopoly and set prices too high thinking the little boys would follow...and they didnt......and the big boys suffered and the little boys picked up the slack.

Oligopolies control themselves...and when the big boys try to deviate, they collapse and the little boys pick up the slack.

TARP did nothing but punish the pateince of the little boys while it rewarded the manipulators.

Using money from the "little boys." The large entities not making profits were not paying taxes. UGH.

 

[asterism]

The tax provisions kick in next year. Perhaps you missed that part.

W-2's in 2011 will include Obamacare Health care costs as income >> Four Winds 10 - fourwinds10.com

Health Care Law and W-2 Forms | FactCheck.org

Q: Does the new health care law require workers to pay income tax on the value of employer-provided health insurance?

A: No. The value will appear on employees’ W-2 forms for information purposes, but will not be considered taxable income.

Tax Help News: How Your Taxes and W-2 will Be Affected by New Health Care Law | Tax Attorney and Tax Resolution Services: IRS Help Blog

There’s a great article on Snopes.com that talks about this further. Basically, H.R. 3590 imposes a 40% excise tax on the value of employer-sponsored medical insurance that exceeds a give threshold. This will be paid be the insurance company, not the employee and is initially expected to affect fewer than 10% of the families covered by health insurance

Go to links for full analysis.

Show it in the tax code, that's the only proof that matters.

 

[asterism]

What you're failing to understand is that there once was a time not too long ago when the top wage earners were also much more interested in maintaining their businesses by hiring the best and the brightest and making sure they kept those people on board by giving them decent wages and benefits. But over the last decade, the top 2% have invested their windfall tax cuts abroad, not in this country and rarely in their own companies.

That is pure speculation.



Marxist theories are not fact. Marxist talking points certainly do win elections though.

Do some reading; do some research. We're not making any of this up.

Start your own business and get back to me on your "research."

Although neither is a perfect solution, if it ever came down to choice, I would most definitely prefer Marxism over Corporate fascism, which is where we were headed (and still are). Sorry, you'll never convince me otherwise.

Wealth And Inequality In America

Interesting. Well at least progressives aren't denying their Marxist tendencies anymore. Now they are just denying that it's going on right now.

 

[MaggieMae]

Excuse me but I disagree.

This was very much a usual recession. What made it unusual was it was used to scare people to vote for a candidate. ANd as we all know, when the consumer is scared, they make decisions that are not in the best interest of economic growth.

What caused this recession had nothing to do with the credit meltdown.

I suggest you spend a bit more time understanding economics.

Omagod. Please tell me you don't believe that. Download this, and hear it straight from some of the people who caused it and how their risky decisions brought down the big investment banks, who were also risking investors' money they could not back up with assets:

News Headlines

I am well aware of what caused the downturn in the market and well aware of what caused the credit meltdown.

Likewise, I am well aware of what casued the subsequent increase in the market.

I simply responded to your comment that this is not your typical recession.

It is your typical recession.

Do not confuse a market drop and a credit crunch with a recession. With or without them, we had a recession coming.

Thus why I made the economics comment.

What made this recession worse was our leadership claiming it was the worse recession since the great depression. Seems he forgot about the Carter years when we had double digit unemployment and prime rates of over 20%....

Fear dictates spending habits.

So if Obama Co. had simply said it was "as bad as"?? the 1981 recession, that would meet with your personal characterization of a "usual" recession. (Every economist on the planet says otherwise, by the way.)

Ironically, it was the Republican Treasury Secretary and Republican President who recognized the house was on fire and that if something weren't done to stop it, there would be a world-wide run on banks, collapsing the entire global economy. Did you miss all those earlier reports (and facts)?

 

[MaggieMae]

That is pure speculation.



Marxist theories are not fact. Marxist talking points certainly do win elections though.



Start your own business and get back to me on your "research."

Although neither is a perfect solution, if it ever came down to choice, I would most definitely prefer Marxism over Corporate fascism, which is where we were headed (and still are). Sorry, you'll never convince me otherwise.

Wealth And Inequality In America

Interesting. Well at least progressives aren't denying their Marxist tendencies anymore. Now they are just denying that it's going on right now.

I would not be espousing Marxist tendencies at all, had the so-called free market conservatives not gone in the complete opposite direction. I don't think anybody would.

 

[MaggieMae]

Here is what 60-year old Randian "free market capitalism" failed to consider as the private sector mega corporations and multi-billion dollar investment houses ultimately became the controlling entities of our economy.

Markets can be irrational, can misunderstand risk, and misallocate resources, which is fine as long as they are leveraged with enough assets to absorb any errors creating losses. But financial systems without vigorous government oversight and the capacity for pragmatic intervention if they don't constitutes a recipe for disaster. Which is precisely what happened. Both Alan Greenspan and Christopher Cox (former SEC chair) have stated in Congressional hearings that they overestimated the ability of the financial entities to police themselves.

I wonder if Ayn Rand ever thought about "too big to fail" as being a reality.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Omagod. Please tell me you don't believe that. Download this, and hear it straight from some of the people who caused it and how their risky decisions brought down the big investment banks, who were also risking investors' money they could not back up with assets:

News Headlines

I am well aware of what caused the downturn in the market and well aware of what caused the credit meltdown.

Likewise, I am well aware of what casued the subsequent increase in the market.

I simply responded to your comment that this is not your typical recession.

It is your typical recession.

Do not confuse a market drop and a credit crunch with a recession. With or without them, we had a recession coming.

Thus why I made the economics comment.

What made this recession worse was our leadership claiming it was the worse recession since the great depression. Seems he forgot about the Carter years when we had double digit unemployment and prime rates of over 20%....

Fear dictates spending habits.

So if Obama Co. had simply said it was "as bad as"?? the 1981 recession, that would meet with your personal characterization of a "usual" recession. (Every economist on the planet says otherwise, by the way.)

Ironically, it was the Republican Treasury Secretary and Republican President who recognized the house was on fire and that if something weren't done to stop it, there would be a world-wide run on banks, collapsing the entire global economy. Did you miss all those earlier reports (and facts)?

OF COURSE they knew the house was on fire.

They're the ones that poured the gas and lit the match!