PDA

View Full Version : Iowa’s GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor



Qtec
08-04-2011, 06:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Iowa’s GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor Because It Didn’t Lower Corporate Taxes

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) has a curious justification for <span style='font-size: 14pt'>vetoing a tax break last week for 240,000 Iowa families making $45,000 or less a year: the plan didn’t also include a tax break for corporations.</span> Members of both parties in the Iowa House and Senate agreed to increase the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which reduces the amount of income taxes lower-income families owe:

The change would have saved Iowa families an estimated $28.5 million in taxes over two years.

Branstad vetoed that part of the bill writing that it is his desire to approach tax policy in a more comprehensive and holistic manner. [...]

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s corporate income tax rate by 50 percent,</span> which he said would attract businesses while costing the state about $200 million a year in lost revenue. That proposal also failed.

Ironically, given Branstad’s fondness for expensive corporate tax breaks, he said he was concerned about the cost of the measure, estimated at $28.5 million a year. Branstad explained that he would only support “an overall tax reduction package that both fits within our sound budgeting principles while reducing those taxes that are impeding our state’s ability to compete for new business and jobs.”

Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for the governor, reiterated that Branstad would have supported the tax break if it had been part of a “larger effort” that <u>included lower taxes for corporations.</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>But since this tax break was only for poor families, Branstad suddenly abandoned his “strong support for tax relief.”</span> </div></div>

Q

LWW
08-04-2011, 09:31 AM
So he tried to do what he said he would do and this bothers you?

eg8r
08-04-2011, 10:15 AM
First of all your position makes no sense, but let's get back to that in a minute. I am in disagreement with both sides of the aisle on this one. I personally do not see any reason at this time to offer tax cuts to anyone. I am against the EITC (it should be abolished across the board) and the Corp tax rate can stick around for a little while.

Back to your position...you and gayle harp on us that America has a "revenue" problem all the time but now you are "fighting" for a tax cut? Can't you make up your mind.

eg8r

LWW
08-04-2011, 10:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back to your position...you and gayle harp on us that America has a "revenue" problem all the time but now you are "fighting" for a tax cut? Can't you make up your mind.

eg8r </div></div>

Only when dear leader tells them what they have "DECIDED" their "OPINION" is.

Sev
08-04-2011, 10:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Back to your position...you and gayle harp on us that America has a "revenue" problem all the time but now you are "fighting" for a tax cut? Can't you make up your mind.

eg8r </div></div>

HAHHAHAAHA!!!

LWW
08-04-2011, 11:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Back to your position...you and gayle harp on us that America has a "revenue" problem all the time but now you are "fighting" for a tax cut? Can't you make up your mind.

eg8r </div></div>

HAHHAHAAHA!!! </div></div>

Seriously ... this is unfair criticism.

You can't expect them to clarify their "OPINION" until the regime tells them what their opinion is.

cushioncrawler
08-04-2011, 05:53 PM
"....Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s corporate income tax rate by 50 percent, which he said would attract businesses while costing the state about $200 million a year in lost revenue. That proposal also failed....."

I can see it now. A long line of bigbizness entering Iowa. And a long line of workers leeving Iowa.
mac.

Gayle in MD
08-04-2011, 11:21 PM
<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">Iowa’s GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor Because It Didn’t Lower Corporate Taxes

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) has a curious justification for <span style='font-size: 14pt'>vetoing a tax break last week for 240,000 Iowa families making $45,000 or less a year: the plan didn’t also include a tax break for corporations.</span> Members of both parties in the Iowa House and Senate agreed to increase the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which reduces the amount of income taxes lower-income families owe:

The change would have saved Iowa families an estimated $28.5 million in taxes over two years.

Branstad vetoed that part of the bill writing that it is his desire to approach tax policy in a more comprehensive and holistic manner. [...]

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s corporate income tax rate by 50 percent,</span> which he said would attract businesses while costing the state about $200 million a year in lost revenue. That proposal also failed.

Ironically, given Branstad’s fondness for expensive corporate tax breaks, he said he was concerned about the cost of the measure, estimated at $28.5 million a year. Branstad explained that he would only support “an overall tax reduction package that both fits within our sound budgeting principles while reducing those taxes that are impeding our state’s ability to compete for new business and jobs.”

Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for the governor, reiterated that Branstad would have supported the tax break if it had been part of a “larger effort” that <u>included lower taxes for corporations.</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>But since this tax break was only for poor families, Branstad suddenly abandoned his “strong support for tax relief.”</span> </div></div>

Q </div></div>


The "Christian Family Values" Repiglicans only approve of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, not for those in need,

G.

Qtec
08-05-2011, 12:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I personally do not see any reason at this time to offer tax cuts to anyone. </div></div>

What about last year? You were<u> ALL FOR tax cuts for billionaires.</u>..and at that time, the growing deficit obviously wasn't a problem for you either!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back to your position...you and gayle harp on us that America has a "revenue" problem all the time but now you are "fighting" for a tax cut? </div></div>

Am I? Or did you just make that up?
All I did was post an article that highlights the hypocrisy of the RW.

I will try and make it simple for you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) ..vetoed a tax break last week for 240,000 Iowa families making <u>$45,000 or less a year:</u> ..
.....Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s <u>corporate income tax rate by 50 percent</u>...

...Branstad would have supported the tax break if it had been part of a “larger effort” that included <u>lower taxes for corporations.</u> But since this tax break was <u>only for poor families, Branstad suddenly abandoned his “strong support for tax relief.”</u> </div></div>

Tax cuts for the poorest families...no.
Tax breaks for big business...yes.

Q

eg8r
08-05-2011, 07:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What about last year?</div></div>What about it? You made a post about something happening right now and I gave my opinion about how I feel right now. Would like you like discuss my current opinion on your subject matter or do you want a discussion about the past?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Am I? Or did you just make that up?
</div></div>I made nothing up. Maybe you would like to read your post again and then clarify your point in making it?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All I did was post an article that highlights the hypocrisy of the RW.
</div></div>In your own words, please point out this hypocrisy. This is why you are called the copy/paste whore. The problem is that you are letting someone else speak for you. We already know your position on most issues is stupid so why not just come right out from the get go with your opinion. The part you quoted shows absolutely zero hypocrisy. The guy said he was going to try and slash corporate taxes and that is exactly what he is doing.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tax cuts for the poorest families...no.
Tax breaks for big business...yes.
</div></div>I get it now, you are too stupid to understand the definition of hypocrisy. You are now starting off day two as a complete fool. Hypocrisy is if he says on thing and then does another. He never stated (at least from your quotes) that he wanted tax breaks for the poor so he has acted hypocritically by trying to get the tax breaks for the corporations.

On top of all this you are too stupid to realize that the tax breaks for corporations will actually help the poor more than a tax break will. Having a job and bringing in some money is a LOT better than having no job with the incentive of paying less taxes on that lack of income.

eg8r

ugotda7
08-05-2011, 06:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><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">Iowa’s GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor Because It Didn’t Lower Corporate Taxes

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) has a curious justification for <span style='font-size: 14pt'>vetoing a tax break last week for 240,000 Iowa families making $45,000 or less a year: the plan didn’t also include a tax break for corporations.</span> Members of both parties in the Iowa House and Senate agreed to increase the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which reduces the amount of income taxes lower-income families owe:

The change would have saved Iowa families an estimated $28.5 million in taxes over two years.

Branstad vetoed that part of the bill writing that it is his desire to approach tax policy in a more comprehensive and holistic manner. [...]

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s corporate income tax rate by 50 percent,</span> which he said would attract businesses while costing the state about $200 million a year in lost revenue. That proposal also failed.

Ironically, given Branstad’s fondness for expensive corporate tax breaks, he said he was concerned about the cost of the measure, estimated at $28.5 million a year. Branstad explained that he would only support “an overall tax reduction package that both fits within our sound budgeting principles while reducing those taxes that are impeding our state’s ability to compete for new business and jobs.”

Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for the governor, reiterated that Branstad would have supported the tax break if it had been part of a “larger effort” that <u>included lower taxes for corporations.</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>But since this tax break was only for poor families, Branstad suddenly abandoned his “strong support for tax relief.”</span> </div></div>

Q </div></div>


The "Christian Family Values" Repiglicans only approve of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, not for those in need,

G. </div></div>

http://www.hamovhotov.com/fun/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/i-see-dumb-people-everywhere.jpg

Gayle in MD
09-14-2011, 10:53 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">Iowa’s GOP Governor Vetoes Tax Break For The Poor Because It Didn’t Lower Corporate Taxes

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) has a curious justification for <span style='font-size: 14pt'>vetoing a tax break last week for 240,000 Iowa families making $45,000 or less a year: the plan didn’t also include a tax break for corporations.</span> Members of both parties in the Iowa House and Senate agreed to increase the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which reduces the amount of income taxes lower-income families owe:

The change would have saved Iowa families an estimated $28.5 million in taxes over two years.

Branstad vetoed that part of the bill writing that it is his desire to approach tax policy in a more comprehensive and holistic manner. [...]

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Branstad additionally campaigned last year to slash Iowa’s corporate income tax rate by 50 percent,</span> which he said would attract businesses while costing the state about $200 million a year in lost revenue. That proposal also failed.

Ironically, given Branstad’s fondness for expensive corporate tax breaks, he said he was concerned about the cost of the measure, estimated at $28.5 million a year. Branstad explained that he would only support “an overall tax reduction package that both fits within our sound budgeting principles while reducing those taxes that are impeding our state’s ability to compete for new business and jobs.”

Tim Albrecht, a spokesman for the governor, reiterated that Branstad would have supported the tax break if it had been part of a “larger effort” that <u>included lower taxes for corporations.</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>But since this tax break was only for poor families, Branstad suddenly abandoned his “strong support for tax relief.”</span> </div></div>

Q </div></div>


<span style='font-size: 20pt'> We Must Destroy Repiglican Fascism Before It's Too Late! </span>