[B][U]The Background:[/U][/B]
[INDENT]
Printable View
[B][U]The Background:[/U][/B]
[INDENT]
The predicted effects of us falling over the cliff if no deal is reached by the end of the year:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKFzFUj_EV0"]US NEWS report[/URL]
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), along with the CBO, and anyone who lived through the stagnant economy during the Bush tax cuts era concluded:
[INDENT][B]Multiple CRS Reports Show Tax Cuts for Rich Will Not Harm Economic Growth[/B]
The New York Times recently reported that a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report was "withdrawn from circulation" at the behest of Senate Republicans. The CRS report finds no relationship between upper-income tax rates and economic growth, undercutting Republican claims that an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is necessary for economic growth. Senate Republicans called the report's validity into question, and CRS eventually withdrew it. However, the report's findings are only the latest in a series that suggest only a tenuous relationship between the economy and upper-income and capital gains tax cuts.
[URL="http://www.ombwatch.org/node/12273"]Rest of the Article[/URL]
[URL="http://www.ombwatch.org/files/budget/pdf/CRS-Taxes_and_the_EconomyAn_Economic_Analysis_of_the_Top_Tax_Rates_Since_1945-R42729_-09-14-2012.pdf"]The Report[/URL][/INDENT]
History and facts tells us that the times of highest economic growth coincide with the times of highest top tax rates. For a recent example, just compare the economy under the Clinton era tax rates with the economy under the Bush tax cuts. It's a no brainer, really.
Barry O lays down the law:
[INDENT][B][U]Obama to open talks with $1.6 trillion plan to raise taxes on corporations, wealthy[/U][/B]
[IMG]http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/11/11/National-Enterprise/Images/Obama_Veterans_Day_04afc.jpg[/IMG]
By Zachary A. Goldfarb and Lori Montgomery, Published: November 13
President Obama is taking a hard line with congressional Republicans heading into negotiations over the year-end
Barry isn't holding back.
Either they cave and leave taxes on the middle class/poor the same and raise them for the rich and impose new ones on millionaires, or taxes for EVERYONE go up when the Bush cuts expire.
Your move, House.
[QUOTE=Droid101]Barry isn't holding back.
Either they cave and leave taxes on the middle class/poor the same and raise them for the rich and impose new ones on millionaires, or taxes for EVERYONE go up when the Bush cuts expire.
Your move, House.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, Grover Norquist and his minions have already been check-mated. It's either raise the taxes on 2% of Americans to levels similar to what they were when our economy was strong (which is what the vast majority of Americans agree with, 60-35) or let taxes go up on 100% of the population, drastic spending cuts to occur, unemployment to skyrocket, and a new recession to kick in.
How is Boehner (Norquist) going to explain to the American people that the reason they are losing jobs in droves and we are plunged into another deep recession is only because they don't want to raise income taxes on 2% of the population by a handful of percentage points? It's either get with the program or pay for it come election time.
More blame for GOP if a deal isn't reached...
[url]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/13/poll-public-concern-over-effects-of-the-fiscal-cliff/?hpt=hp_t2[/url]
i knew they would impede and fight Obama's actions to address the fiscal cliff like they have everything else until they get their way. i'm glad public sentiment is against them and putting blame on the House GOP if a deal doesn't get done, puts most of the pressure on them to give in, otherwise i don't think they would since they're so anti Obama stubborn.
its so annoying how they already lost the popular vote on raising taxes for the rich, and still able to fight it thru the House.
Those fukcing rich people. Gotta hate them. Shame on them for making all that money and not giving us any of it.
[QUOTE=rufuspaul]Those fukcing rich people. Gotta hate them. Shame on them for making all that money and not giving us any of it.[/QUOTE]
Tar and feather them! You didn't see the last Batman movie? There's a storm coming, Mr. Paul :D
But seriously though, has nothing to do with hate, shame, etc. Like I said, look at the top tax rates in this country for the past say 70 years, then check how they correlate with the GDP and other factors of economic health.
Watch Republican Ben Stein explain it to one of the innumerable blond ditzes on Fox News:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAtJaJf1mUI"]It's basic common sense[/URL]
[QUOTE=rufuspaul]Those fukcing rich people. Gotta hate them. Shame on them for making all that money and not giving us any of it.[/QUOTE]
:roll:
This old canard? Taxes are lower for rich people than any time in our history. Give us one good reason why their rates can't go back to Clinton levels (the same time we had our last economic boon). Go on, one reason.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Exactly, Grover Norquist and his minions have already been check-mated. It's either raise the taxes on 2% of Americans to levels similar to what they were when our economy was strong (which is what the vast majority of Americans agree with, 60-35) or let taxes go up on 100% of the population, drastic spending cuts to occur, unemployment to skyrocket, and a new recession to kick in.
How is Boehner (Norquist) going to explain to the American people that the reason they are losing jobs in droves and we are plunged into another deep recession is only because they don't want to raise income taxes on 2% of the population by a handful of percentage points? It's either get with the program or pay for it come election time.[/QUOTE]
Let him go wild I say to my fellow Republicans, The country will learn the hard way that socialism does not work. Once Obama gets his tax hikes HE WILL OWN THIS ECONOMY, I don't want to hear Bush's name ever again from a liberal stating this was his fault. This is Obama's economy from now on.
[QUOTE=General]Let him go wild I say to my fellow Republicans, The country will learn the hard way that socialism does not work. Once Obama gets his tax hikes HE WILL OWN THIS ECONOMY, I don't want to hear Bush's name ever again from a liberal stating this was his fault. This is Obama's economy from now on.[/QUOTE]
So if I'm hearing you correctly, whatever happens from the point of Obama getting the concessions from Congress on, is on him?
I'll bookmark this so in 4 years when (as the CBO, Moody's Analytical, and other organizations) the country has added a record 12-12.3 million jobs, there is a housing boom, the dysfunctional healthcare system is fixed, the GDP has doubled, etc... you can eat a nice helping off hot off the stove crow :D
[QUOTE=General]Let him go wild I say to my fellow Republicans, The country will learn the hard way that socialism does not work. Once Obama gets his tax hikes HE WILL OWN THIS ECONOMY, I don't want to hear Bush's name ever again from a liberal stating this was his fault. This is Obama's economy from now on.[/QUOTE]
it sure is and its been recovering quite well ever since just prior to the debates. the fiscal cliff is the one big obstacle we have to get thru, hopefully the Republicans won't keep trying to leverage our country's well being for their party agendas. i mean you lost, about time you back down to what the country voted for...
[QUOTE=rufuspaul]Those fukcing rich people. Gotta hate them. Shame on them for making all that money and not giving us any of it.[/QUOTE]
woe is rich people :lol:
taxing rich people is a whole lot better than screwing over old people who rely on SS to live...by the same guilt trip you must hate poor people. gotta hate them. shame on them for making a lot less money because they're all supposedly lazy :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Godzuki]it sure is and its been recovering quite well ever since just prior to the debates. the fiscal cliff is the one big obstacle we have to get thru, hopefully the Republicans won't keep trying to leverage our country's well being for their party agendas. i mean you lost, about time you back down to what the country voted for...[/QUOTE]
The funny thing is, the recovery is pretty much unstoppable. The 'cliff' would be a major stumbling block but the CBO predicted that even if we go over with no deal, the economy is still due to add 9.6 million jobs in the next 4 years. So no deal would mean a loss of up to 3 million jobs and another recession, but the economy will still chug along. Barry's work during his first term, much to the chagrin of anti-American Civil War reenactor neo-secessionists such as some on this board, saved us from another great depression and put us on the road to a strong recovery.
[QUOTE=Droid101]:roll:
This old canard? Taxes are lower for rich people than any time in our history. Give us one good reason why their rates can't go back to Clinton levels (the same time we had our last economic boon). Go on, one reason.[/QUOTE]
:lol I'm not crying for rich people, but I don't think they should be vilified either. Yeah a few percentage points here and there won't mean the end of the world but what happens after that? Come back the next year and say we still need to squeeze you more? Where does it end?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: A country cannot tax itself into prosperity.
[QUOTE=rufuspaul]:lol I'm not crying for rich people, but I don't think they should be vilified either. Yeah a few percentage points here and there won't mean the end of the world but what happens after that? Come back the next year and say we still need to squeeze you more? Where does it end?
[/QUOTE]
It ends when our deficit and debt is looking a little better. You get there by reducing spending and increasing revenue. I know it's hard for most conservatives to understand.
I'm content going back to Clinton era tax rates, making capital gains the same as regular income regarding taxes, creating some new brackets with higher rates for income after 1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 100 million, and 1 billion.
A good start.
[QUOTE=Droid101]It ends when our deficit and debt is looking a little better. You get there by reducing spending and increasing revenue. I know it's hard for most conservatives to understand.
I'm content going back to Clinton era tax rates, making capital gains the same as regular income regarding taxes, creating some new brackets with higher rates for income after 1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 100 million, and 1 billion.
A good start.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://images.politico.com/global/2012/10/121031_grover_norquist_ap_605.jpg[/IMG]
[SIZE="3"][B]"Say increasing revenue and higher rates one more goddamn time. I dare you"[/B][/SIZE]
[QUOTE=DonDadda59][IMG]http://images.politico.com/global/2012/10/121031_grover_norquist_ap_605.jpg[/IMG]
[SIZE="3"][B]"Say increasing revenue and higher rates one more goddamn time. I dare you"[/B][/SIZE][/QUOTE]
Grover Norquist is a weaselly little idiot and I have no idea how his essay he wrote when he was 12 years old became the mantra of the modern Republican party.
[QUOTE=Droid101]It ends when our deficit and debt is looking a little better. You get there by reducing spending and increasing revenue. I know it's hard for most conservatives to understand.
I'm content [B]going back to Clinton era tax rates[/B], making capital gains the same as regular income regarding taxes, creating some new brackets with higher rates for income after 1 million, 5 million, 10 million, 100 million, and 1 billion.
A good start.[/QUOTE]
I'm with you there to a degree but sticking it to the wealthy much more beyond that is counter productive and won't reduce the deficit by any noticeable amount. But no doubt true reform is needed. I think the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was fair and balanced (no pun intended) and should be looked at as a map for further reform.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]So if I'm hearing you correctly, whatever happens from the point of Obama getting the concessions from Congress on, is on him?
I'll bookmark this so in 4 years when (as the CBO, Moody's Analytical, and other organizations) the country has added a record 12-12.3 million jobs, there is a housing boom, the dysfunctional healthcare system is fixed, the GDP has doubled, etc... you can eat a nice helping off hot off the stove crow :D[/QUOTE]
I'll bookmark this so in two years when there is a double dip recession and there are massive job losses you can eat crow.
That will never happen though because the Republicans won't let Obama go wild. They got elected too and they have their own mandate to keep taxes low. They are the last defense to stop Obama from destroying this nation.
[QUOTE=Droid101]Grover Norquist is a weaselly little idiot and I have no idea how his essay he wrote when he was 12 years old became the mantra of the modern Republican party.[/QUOTE]
It is strange that he somehow has the entire Republican party by the balls, isn't it? I'm no conspiracy theorist but if people are still looking for the leader of the 'illuminati' or whatever shadowy organization is controlling the world, start by checking this dude out :roll:
He killed the American Jobs Act which would've added 2-2.6 million jobs to the economy, 1.5% to the GDP and now he wants to plunge the country into another recession... and Boehner and co. will ride with this guy until the end even though they must know better by now. Very strange. Take a look cons- if anyone is going to 'destroy' the country (and by extension the world at large), it's not Barry, it's your republican overlord Norquist.
[QUOTE=General]I'll bookmark this so in two years when there is a double dip recession and there are massive job losses you can eat crow.
That will never happen though because the Republicans won't let Obama go wild. They got elected too and they have their own mandate to keep taxes low. They are the last defense to stop Obama from destroying this nation.
[/QUOTE]
That will only happen if Lord Norquist gets his wishes. All of the forecasts concerning from now until 2014 say jobs will be added, the unemployment rate will decrease, the GDP will grow, housing will strengthen. Everything is bullish outside of the fox news keep em scared and ignorant bubble. There's only one way we suffer a setback, and if that happens the Repubs will get a new mandate:
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NYJjoT-A8C0/UAP7JsS9DVI/AAAAAAAAB6g/S_VVq2I21BU/s1600/jeremy-piven-gtfo.gif[/IMG]
I don't really understand how the main GOP can be so stupid and do such a poor job of solidifying its base. I consider myself an independent but I have seriously conservative leanings. At several times throughout history, I'd have been a clear cut republican but they've just gotten so hypocritical.
You can't simultaneously cry about the debt being too high and steadfastly refuse to increase revenue. The fact of the matter is when you overspend your means you have to either increase your income or decrease your expenses. At this particular point in time there is no way a spending cut alone could get us back to where we need to be. We have to increase taxes. The fact that it's being fought so hard just boggles my mind. Ask for spending cuts to go with it? Sure, but to go in saying that raises aren't an option is just stupid. You back yourself into a corner where you are forced to either screw the country or give your future opponent a golden campaign video showing that you didn't do what you promised.
I really don't understand why they haven't come in saying. We realize there need to be tax/revenue increases. While we believe these increases go against our general party policy, we realize that they are at least temporarily necesarry and therefore we will agree to them on a basis to be a reevaluated at a later date. While we are willing to make these cuts, we also need dems to understand that some spending cuts will also need to take place(and while some of them will be military in nature, some also need to be entitlement programs)
[QUOTE=raiderfan19]I don't really understand how the main GOP can be so stupid and do such a poor job of solidifying its base. I consider myself an independent but I have seriously conservative leanings. At several times throughout history, I'd have been a clear cut republican but they've just gotten so hypocritical.
You can't simultaneously cry about the debt being too high and steadfastly refuse to increase revenue. The fact of the matter is when you overspend your means you have to either increase your income or decrease your expenses. At this particular point in time there is no way a spending cut alone could get us back to where we need to be. We have to increase taxes. The fact that it's being fought so hard just boggles my mind. Ask for spending cuts to go with it? Sure, but to go in saying that raises aren't an option is just stupid. You back yourself into a corner where you are forced to either screw the country or give your future opponent a golden campaign video showing that you didn't do what you promised.
I really don't understand why they haven't come in saying. We realize there need to be tax/revenue increases. While we believe these increases go against our general party policy, we realize that they are at least temporarily necesarry and therefore we will agree to them on a basis to be a reevaluated at a later date. While we are willing to make these cuts, we also need dems to understand that some spending cuts will also need to take place(and while some of them will be military in nature, some also need to be entitlement programs)[/QUOTE]
i like dis guy :applause:
[QUOTE=raiderfan19]I don't really understand how the main GOP can be so stupid and do such a poor job of solidifying its base. I consider myself an independent but I have seriously conservative leanings. At several times throughout history, I'd have been a clear cut republican but they've just gotten so hypocritical.
You can't simultaneously cry about the debt being too high and steadfastly refuse to increase revenue. The fact of the matter is when you overspend your means you have to either increase your income or decrease your expenses. At this particular point in time there is no way a spending cut alone could get us back to where we need to be. We have to increase taxes. The fact that it's being fought so hard just boggles my mind. Ask for spending cuts to go with it? Sure, but to go in saying that raises aren't an option is just stupid. You back yourself into a corner where you are forced to either screw the country or give your future opponent a golden campaign video showing that you didn't do what you promised.
I really don't understand why they haven't come in saying. We realize there need to be tax/revenue increases. While we believe these increases go against our general party policy, we realize that they are at least temporarily necesarry and therefore we will agree to them on a basis to be a reevaluated at a later date. While we are willing to make these cuts, we also need dems to understand that some spending cuts will also need to take place(and while some of them will be military in nature, some also need to be entitlement programs)[/QUOTE]
Someone should forward this to the death star so Emperor Norquist and Darth Boehner can read it.
Repped :applause:
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]That will only happen if Lord Norquist gets his wishes. All of the forecasts concerning from now until 2014 say jobs will be added, the unemployment rate will decrease, the GDP will grow, housing will strengthen. Everything is bullish outside of the fox news keep em scared and ignorant bubble. There's only one way we suffer a setback, and if that happens the Repubs will get a new mandate:
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NYJjoT-A8C0/UAP7JsS9DVI/AAAAAAAAB6g/S_VVq2I21BU/s1600/jeremy-piven-gtfo.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I certainly hope the forecasts are right. Remember very few people saw 2008 coming.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Barry O lays down the law:
[INDENT][B][U]Obama to open talks with $1.6 trillion plan to raise taxes on corporations, wealthy[/U][/B]
[IMG]http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/11/11/National-Enterprise/Images/Obama_Veterans_Day_04afc.jpg[/IMG]
By Zachary A. Goldfarb and Lori Montgomery, Published: November 13
President Obama is taking a hard line with congressional Republicans heading into negotiations over the year-end
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]That will only happen if Lord Norquist gets his wishes. All of the forecasts concerning from now until 2014 say jobs will be added, the unemployment rate will decrease, the GDP will grow, housing will strengthen. Everything is bullish outside of the fox news keep em scared and ignorant bubble. There's only one way we suffer a setback, and if that happens the Repubs will get a new mandate:
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NYJjoT-A8C0/UAP7JsS9DVI/AAAAAAAAB6g/S_VVq2I21BU/s1600/jeremy-piven-gtfo.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]
The "growth" we are seeing now would not exist if Republicans didn't own the House.
[QUOTE=rufuspaul]I certainly hope the forecasts are right. Remember very few people saw 2008 coming.[/QUOTE]
The forecasts before the stimulus passed were all saying unemployment would be below 6% by now. Take anything the liberals cite with a grain of salt. The complete opposite is usually true. The only reason unemployment is not at 10-11% percent now is because the labor force shrunk so much, it's in a 30 year low.
[QUOTE=raiderfan19]I don't really understand how the main GOP can be so stupid and do such a poor job of solidifying its base. I consider myself an independent but I have seriously conservative leanings. At several times throughout history, I'd have been a clear cut republican but they've just gotten so hypocritical.
[B]You can't simultaneously cry about the debt being too high and steadfastly refuse to increase revenue.[/B] The fact of the matter is when you overspend your means you have to either increase your income or decrease your expenses. At this particular point in time there is no way a spending cut alone could get us back to where we need to be. We have to increase taxes. The fact that it's being fought so hard just boggles my mind. Ask for spending cuts to go with it? Sure, but to go in saying that raises aren't an option is just stupid. You back yourself into a corner where you are forced to either screw the country or give your future opponent a golden campaign video showing that you didn't do what you promised.
I really don't understand why they haven't come in saying. We realize there need to be tax/revenue increases. While we believe these increases go against our general party policy, we realize that they are at least temporarily necesarry and therefore we will agree to them on a basis to be a reevaluated at a later date. While we are willing to make these cuts, we also need dems to understand that some spending cuts will also need to take place(and while some of them will be military in nature, some also need to be entitlement programs)[/QUOTE]
It's different when raising revenue is taking from one group and giving to another.
[QUOTE=Math2]It's different when raising revenue is taking from one group and giving to another.[/QUOTE]
That is essentially what Medicare and SS does. Take from young workers and give to old folks.
What people generally think of as welfare (aid to the poor/lazy or w/e you want to call it) is prob comparable in terms of spending to our national defense budget.
[QUOTE=Math2] Does that not discourage growth by punishing the successful?[/QUOTE]
Yep, you're right. If I get my taxes increased, and only take home $1,500,500 instead of $1,675,000 this year, I quit. I'm going to quit my job and go on Food Stamps. It's just so much easier to NOT be rich!
[QUOTE=Droid101]Yep, you're right. If I get my taxes increased, and only take home $1,500,500 instead of $1,675,000 this year, I quit. I'm going to quit my job and go on Food Stamps. It's just so much easier to NOT be rich![/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter how you put it, you're discouraging success just like you discourage work when you give to the poor. That $1675000 you mentioned becomes less and less as welfare costs rise and rise and rise. It's unsustainable without having the rich pay upwards of 90% by 2050.
[QUOTE=Jailblazers7]That is essentially what Medicare and SS does. Take from young workers and give to old folks.
What people generally think of as welfare (aid to the poor/lazy or w/e you want to call it) is prob comparable in terms of spending to our national defense budget.[/QUOTE]
And that's why Medicare and SS need to be abolished.
[QUOTE=Math2]And that's why Medicare and SS need to be abolished.[/QUOTE]
Medicare and SS were created because there was a massive problem of poverty in older age groups in America. I think the current estimate is that SS keeps 35-40% of the 65+ year old American population out of poverty.
[QUOTE=Math2]It doesn't matter how you put it, you're discouraging success just like you discourage work when you give to the poor. That $1675000 you mentioned becomes less and less as welfare costs rise and rise and rise. It's unsustainable without having the rich pay upwards of 90% by 2050.[/QUOTE]
It's not encouraging poverty or discouraging success.
Nobody on welfare wants to be on welfare.
Nobody making hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars wants to make less.
Guess what they both have in common? They'll both try to make more money.
"Oh, if only the stupid masses would listen to our good ideas! We'd get this country back on track!"
"Okay, lay out these 'good ideas' for us."
"THE DUMBOCRAPS ARE DOING IT ALL WRONG!"
"Uh, that's not an 'idea' per se."
"Tax cuts! More and more tax cuts!"
"Yeah, we've tried that lots of times. Doesn't work."
"WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?"
"Okay, then. See you later."
"WHY ARE ALL OF THESE STUPID PEOPLE NOT LISTENING TO US ANYMORE?"
[QUOTE=Droid101]"Oh, if only the stupid masses would listen to our good ideas! We'd get this country back on track!"
"Okay, lay out these 'good ideas' for us."
"THE DUMBOCRAPS ARE DOING IT ALL WRONG!"
"Uh, that's not an 'idea' per se."
"Tax cuts! More and more tax cuts!"
"Yeah, we've tried that lots of times. Doesn't work."
"WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?"
"Okay, then. See you later."
"WHY ARE ALL OF THESE STUPID PEOPLE NOT LISTENING TO US ANYMORE?"[/QUOTE]
And spending unsustainable amounts of money on welfare works....how?
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Employment_growth_by_top_tax_rate.jpg[/IMG]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Income_tax_rates_in_history[/url]
[quote]Employment has grown with higher top marginal tax rates.[/quote]
Where is your god now, Norquist?
^Pssht, everyone knows facts have a liberal leaning. Disregard everything we've seen from a Bush tax cut era economy, everyone knows if you raise taxes on 2% of the country there will be job stagnation and the economy will be destroyed. Trickle down, people, trickle down.