PDA

View Full Version : Tax law signed...



eg8r
12-17-2010, 06:52 PM
Well we all heard the stump speeches about rolling back W's tax cuts and how bad they are for the economy and all but ever since those first decrees of change were heard we wondered just how much could this guy actually change. Well, here we are two years down the road and the only "change" we have seen is a huge deviation from the stump speech to a giant GWB butt kissing. No "change" but a lot of the "same" is what we see happening.

A lot of the "same" would include torturing prisoners (actually increasing the torture), gross spending (actually increased spending), keeping taxes low (actually lowering them even more), war on terror (actually increasing it in Ashcanistan), etc. It seems the only "change" we really see is a move to not only thank GWB for paving the way to gross negligent spending, torture and tax cuts, but to actually exaggerate them to no end. I can see why all the Dems running for election this past year were doing their best to distance themselves BushBama.

Lately all we have heard is that tax cuts do nothing to help the economy and now we have Obama bowing down to the Reps and not only approving W's tax cuts he has actually increased them by 2%. Go figure...

eg8r

pooltchr
12-17-2010, 07:07 PM
I gotta give him credit when it's due. Allowing the tax cuts to expire would have been a terrible move for the economy. When it got right down to it, he did the right thing.

Steve

Qtec
12-18-2010, 01:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well we all heard the stump speeches about rolling back W's tax cuts </div></div>... yeah, for the rich!

Do you know the difference between <span style='font-size: 14pt'>permanent</span> and <span style='font-size: 14pt'>temporary</span>?

Listen carefully.

When Bush became Pres there was a PERMANENT tax rate. Bush wanted to PERMANENTLY lower those rates but HE DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES.

Are you following me so far?

Bush pulled a fast one and managed to get his tax cuts BUT ONLY FOR 10 YEARS. Get this, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Cheney cast the deciding vote as it was 50 for, 50 against? </span>

All rates were due to revert back to the PERMANENT rates on 1 Jan 2011.
Obama offered a compromise. He agreed it would not be a good idea to raise taxes on the middle class because of the job and economy situation and he would extend the Bush tax cuts but not for the millionaires and billionaires.

What happened?

The GOP sent him a letter threatening to stop ALL legislation unless the top 2% got there's, EVEN when there was no economic justification for it. They held the whole country hostage for the top 2%, at the same time blocking HC for first responders.


For the rest of your post, I agree. Obama has been a big let down. Too many times he has gone along with the bush legacy.



Q

Qtec
12-18-2010, 01:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I gotta give him credit when it's due. <u>Allowing the tax cuts to expire </u>would have been a terrible move for the economy. </div></div>


That's exactly what he should have done. 98% would be punished because the GOP want to pay off the elite.

If all tax payers could vote on Obama,s tax cut for the 98%, what would be the result?
You think Joe Six Pack would say, " if Paris Hilton doesn't get a tax cut, then I don't want one." ?

Q

pooltchr
12-18-2010, 07:46 AM
So, the fact that Obama came out publically and admitted that raising taxes would be bad for the economy, and keeping them lower would be good for the economy means nothing to you?

And if keeping taxes lower for some people is good for the economy, why would it not be good to keep them lower for everyone?

Why do you have such animosity toward successful people that you would encourage the government to steal from them at a higher rate than others, so they can give it to the people who haven't been as successful?

From each according to his ability????????
Sound familiar??

Steve

eg8r
12-18-2010, 03:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you know the difference between permanent and temporary?

</div></div>Do you know the difference between saying you will not continue the Bush tax cuts and then actually extending them?

eg8r

eg8r
12-18-2010, 03:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You think Joe Six Pack would say, " if Paris Hilton doesn't get a tax cut, then I don't want one." ?

</div></div>Which is a great example of why this is not a democracy and you are too dumb to recognize it. Your wealth enjoy knows no bounds.

eg8r

Qtec
12-19-2010, 12:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which is a great example of why this is not a democracy </div></div>

So why are you moaning about the Estate Tax. Its been around from before you were born. Your Govt made that desicion.

Q,,what you need is more Democracy, not less.

What if you had had a referendum on invading Iraq, bailing out the banks, should we borrow 800B from the Chinese and give it to the wealthiest Americans when the majority are struggling, etc etc?

pooltchr
12-19-2010, 10:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> should we borrow 800B from the Chinese and give it to the wealthiest Americans when the majority are struggling, etc etc? </div></div>

When you post crap like that, it does nothing to boost your credibility.

Steve

eg8r
12-19-2010, 10:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So why are you moaning about the Estate Tax.</div></div>Because it is theft.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q,,what you need is more Democracy, not less.

</div></div>Last thing we need is someone like you telling us what we need.

eg8r

eg8r
12-19-2010, 10:42 AM
It proves he is still just as dumb as the day he stumbled in here. He refuses to acknowledge where tax money comes from. He is fine with borrowing from the Chinese to fund programs that are covered by our Constitution.

eg8r

Qtec
12-19-2010, 08:24 PM
Did you play BlackJack in Vegas?

Here is how it goes. You put your $5 on a box. Once the dealer draws a card, its not your money any more, its in limbo. If you lose, the dealer takes your chips and pays out the winners but he doesn't pay them out with your $5 because that money now belongs to the house.

Same with taxation. Once you pay your taxes, <u>its not your money any more</u>.

Q

Qtec
12-19-2010, 08:26 PM
Answer the question? What would be the result?

Q

Qtec
12-19-2010, 08:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">should we borrow 800B from the Chinese and give it to the wealthiest Americans when the majority are struggling </div></div>

Where does the money come from to pay for the deficit caused by giving the rich another tax break?

Q

Qtec
12-19-2010, 08:30 PM
Do you know the difference between 2007 and 2009?
Think back.
I'm sure you can remember<span style='font-size: 17pt'> before the bank bailout and the housing crisis.</span>

Q

Qtec
12-19-2010, 08:32 PM
Also, you didn't answer the Q and you totally ignored my FACTS because you don't want to know the truth.

Q.....again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you know the difference between permanent and temporary?

Listen carefully.

When Bush became Pres there was a PERMANENT tax rate. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Bush wanted to PERMANENTLY lower those rates but HE DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES.</span>

Are you following me so far?

Bush pulled a fast one and managed to get his tax cuts BUT ONLY FOR 10 YEARS. Get this, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Cheney cast the deciding vote as it was 50 for, 50 against?</span>

<u>All rates were due to revert back to the PERMANENT rates on 1 Jan 2011.</u>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Obama offered a compromise.</span> He agreed it would not be a good idea to raise taxes on the middle class because of the job and economy situation and he would extend the Bush tax cuts <span style='font-size: 20pt'>but not for the millionaires and billionaires.</span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>What happened?

<u>The GOP sent him a letter threatening to stop ALL legislation unless the top 2% got there's, EVEN when there was no economic justification for it. They held the whole country hostage for the top 2%, at the same time blocking HC for first responders.</u></span> </div></div>

pooltchr
12-19-2010, 09:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Where does the money come from to pay for the deficit caused by giving the rich another tax break?

Q </div></div>

You are asking a question based on a false idea. Our deficit wasn't caused by changing the tax rate. Our deficit is a result of allowing government to spend money on things that are not authorized by the constitution.....and by giving away money in the name of redistribution.

Why do farmers get government subsidies? Who pays for them? The government??? with what? Money collected in the form of taxes. So they take our money, and give it to a select few.

Government money that goes to the so-called green industries? Same thing. Our government takes as much as they can from everyone, and then gives it to whoever they want to give it to...typically that would be those who made large campaign contributions.

I can get a government grant to pay for me to go to school? Where does that money come from?

You just don't get it. The US isn't in financial trouble because of tax rates...it's in financial trouble because of overspending. And raising the tax rate on some people and not on everyone is wrong. Maybe if they learned how to cut back on spending, get government down to the size it should be, and live within their means, we could turn it around.

Steve

eg8r
12-19-2010, 10:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, you didn't answer the Q and you totally ignored my FACTS because you don't want to know the truth.

</div></div>When you ask dumb questions you don't get a response. It just is not worth my time.

eg8r

eg8r
12-19-2010, 10:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you know the difference between 2007 and 2009?
Think back.
I'm sure you can remember before the bank bailout and the housing crisis.

</div></div>Is this the mulligan you give the politicians you like? Hmmm, things get tough and you allow them to throw out everything they said on the stump?

eg8r

eg8r
12-19-2010, 10:58 PM
Do you think answering the question with such an extreme subject actually proves a point for you? Are you so shallow that the only thing that can come to your mind is comparing Paris Hilton to Joe Six Pack? This proves why you generally are left without much of a defense.

eg8r

eg8r
12-19-2010, 11:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where does the money come from to pay for the deficit caused by giving the rich another tax break?

</div></div>LOL, you are confusing things here. Allowing the tax payers to continue keeping the money they make is not the cause of the deficit. The cause of the deficit is spending beyond your means. You know what, those rich people you want to steal from, they actually understand this concept which is why they are rich in the first place. I recognize at this point, no honest discussion with you on this subject is not possible.

eg8r

eg8r
12-19-2010, 11:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here is how it goes. You put your $5 on a box. Once the dealer draws a card, its not your money any more, its in limbo. If you lose, the dealer takes your chips and pays out the winners but he doesn't pay them out with your $5 because that money now belongs to the house.

</div></div>Sure he does. I saw on more occasions than I wanted where the dealer picked my $5 chip and passed it to my neighbor.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Same with taxation. Once you pay your taxes, its not your money any more.

</div></div>Yep, which is why we are talking about future wages and allowing us to keep more of the money that we make instead of stealing to fund socialist programs that have stood up with chinese-fronted money.

eg8r

Qtec
12-20-2010, 04:27 AM
When you spend $5, is it still your $5?

Once you lose $5 in a casino, its your $5 any more.

Same with taxation.

I can't make it any clearer.

Q

Qtec
12-20-2010, 04:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, you are confusing things here. Allowing the tax payers to continue keeping the money they make is not the cause of the deficit. <u>The cause of the deficit is spending beyond your means. </u></div></div>

I agree but this is not a new thing. The fact is , right now, the the Govt needs x amount of cash to break even. If Govt has x amount of cash and then gives the rich $800 Billion, they have to borrow to make up the deficit.

The Govt can't give back money it has already spent.

Q

LWW
12-20-2010, 04:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you spend $5, is it still your $5?

Once you lose $5 in a casino, its your $5 any more.

Same with taxation.

I can't make it any clearer.

Q </div></div>

No casino has ever forced me to play under threat of prosecution.

The fact that you confess you can't see things any clearer than the muddy gruel of lies the party spoon feeds you is quite revealing.

LWW

Qtec
12-20-2010, 04:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You just don't get it. The US isn't in financial trouble because of tax rates...it's in financial trouble because of overspending.</div></div>

Actually I agree.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">raising the tax rate on some people and not on everyone is wrong. </div></div>

Tax rates for the top earners has never been lower. I have shown that the wealth in the USA over the last 30 yrs has been redistributed from the middle class to the top.


The two top Goldman Sachs executives got bonus's of 24 MILLION this year and you want to give them more.

Q

pooltchr
12-20-2010, 07:13 AM
So just show us where in the constitution it becomes the government's responsibility to take more money from the successful and give it away to the losers.

Until you can do that, all your other analogies are useless.

(Your casino analogy is a joke. Nobody is forced to give money to a blackjack dealer. Half of us are forced to give money to the government.)

Steve

Chopstick
12-20-2010, 07:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You just don't get it. The US isn't in financial trouble because of tax rates...it's in financial trouble because of overspending.</div></div>

Actually I agree.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">raising the tax rate on some people and not on everyone is wrong. </div></div>

Tax rates for the top earners has never been lower. I have shown that the wealth in the USA over the last 30 yrs has been redistributed from the middle class to the top.


The two top Goldman Sachs executives got bonus's of 24 MILLION this year and you want to give them more.

Q </div></div>

What happened when income tax rates were sky high before? Companies lowered the income of their executives and gave them other things like a Rolls Royce or a house. When they lowered the tax rate it just about bankrupted Rolls Royce.

Rob the rich and give to the poor will never work. There will always be a way around any tax for those who have the resources. The divergence in wealth that you so often cite came from asset appreciation not income appreciation. Raise the poor is the only thing that will work.

eg8r
12-20-2010, 10:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The fact is , right now, the the Govt needs x amount of cash to break even. </div></div>Yes and the other fact is that they can close all those Government programs that should have never been there in the first place.

eg8r