Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
C'mon Paperboy, you know that is too simplistic a criticism to make. The purpose is to stimulate (hence stimulus package) the economy. Although we will borrow, thereby hurting the economy, to stimulate the economy, in the end the money that is stimulated will go toward keeping us from borrowing more and maybe even paying down some the deficit.
If it's not a big deal why raise them to begin with?
Simple, you HAVE TO. To pay for implementing new plans to actually fix the economic crisis.
Over one trillion has already been approved and they want more? Are we all really that stupid?
Here's how to do it without spending money:
1. Announce a freeze on Capital Gains taxes.
2. Announce a freeze on spending.
3. Announce support of the renewal of the Bush tax cuts.
4. Announce support of the lowering of corporate tax rates to the level of Ireland.
Watch revenue soar.
Watch Obama get impeached.
Over one trillion has already been approved and they want more? Are we all really that stupid?
Here's how to do it without spending money:
1. Announce a freeze on Capital Gains taxes.
2. Announce a freeze on spending.
3. Announce support of the renewal of the Bush tax cuts.
4. Announce support of the lowering of corporate tax rates to the level of Ireland.
Watch revenue soar.
Watch Obama get impeached.
You are going be so very, very, very disappointed.
Well if we end the trickle down theory, and implement an equalibrium theory where both the middle class helps build profits equally and the rich business owners allow some of thier tax dollars to be fairly put into the growth of such a project for the greater good of the economy, then i dont think I will be disappointed.
You heard it first here from my mouth. A new era of equalibrium theory, not trickle down theory. This new era will consists of the middle class leaning on the upperclass for allowing a tax of capital gains to benefit overall sales and economic growth........ and the upper class leaning on the more appreciated and larger working middle class.
I must be an alternate universe because she is making sense!WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for a two-stage effort to boost the shaky U.S. economy: a $60 billion-to-$100 billion stimulus package this month, followed early next year by a companion measure that would include a "permanent tax cut".
In the long term, Rep. Pelosi said a capital-gains tax cut, as pushed by congressional Republicans, should be considered as part of a "tax simplification" bill, not a stimulus package. Rep. Pelosi did stress, however, that the "second piece" of the Democratic stimulus agenda should include a tax cut and would be part of a bill moved early next year.
Details have yet to be determined and will depend on further discussions with Mr. Obama. But the speaker prefers a tax cut over a tax rebate. The speaker said a tax cut would have a more immediate impact on the economy, especially if the government speeds dollars into worker paychecks by adjusting tax-withholding tables. "The impact is faster than a rebate, which takes a few months to get into people's hands."
As someone who does public speaking as part of my job, I would say he rates in the upper 10% of speakers in politics today. He didn't get to where he is by being a poor speaker. He has that rare ability to motivate and excite people. That isn't a celebrity, it's called charismatic power. It is one of the basis of power that a leader can use.
He did a good job both from form and substance. If you hate him, you are going to say what you want. Compared to our previous prez, he is outstanding both from how he speaks and how he can respond to questions that aren't pre placed. To try and defend Bush as a better speaker is pure partisan stupidity.
He isn't at the level of Clinton or Kennedy as a speaker, but he is very good. He will get better the longer he is in office.
As someone who does public speaking as part of my job, I would say he rates in the upper 10% of speakers in politics today. He didn't get to where he is by being a poor speaker. He has that rare ability to motivate and excite people. That isn't a celebrity, it's called charismatic power. It is one of the basis of power that a leader can use.
What we saw is a calm, deliberative, and responsible President elect. I think Obama has been wise to hold off Cabinet Nominees so they can properly vent them so the confirmation process runs smoothly.
He did a good job both from form and substance. If you hate him, you are going to say what you want. Compared to our previous prez, he is outstanding both from how he speaks and how he can respond to questions that aren't pre placed. To try and defend Bush as a better speaker is pure partisan stupidity.
He isn't at the level of Clinton or Kennedy as a speaker, but he is very good. He will get better the longer he is in office.
As someone who does public speaking as part of my job, I would say he rates in the upper 10% of speakers in politics today. He didn't get to where he is by being a poor speaker. He has that rare ability to motivate and excite people. That isn't a celebrity, it's called charismatic power. It is one of the basis of power that a leader can use.
Twelve years as a constitutional lawprofessor. 8 years as a state senator. 3 as a US Senator. Ran the most organized campaign in recent history.
He is a lot more than a gifted speaker. He will surround himself with people who are real experts and not political cronies. That's what real leaders do.
- Was not a professor
- Did nothing in the State Senate
- Did nothing as a US Senator
- Axelrod ran the campaign
My guess is that Obama's legacy will be that he was elected. Important and good for the country but I don't expect he will accomplish much more than that. His domestic agenda is nothing more than failed rehashed liberal silliness.
If he leaves a mark beyond his actual election it more likely to be from foreign policy successes.
do you have links to back up what you are saying? Or did you just skim drudge,malkin,and hannity sites?
