- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,443
- Reaction score
- 733
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Excerpted from “John Boehner speaks of tax compromise” By MARIN COGAN, Politico, 9/12/10 8:31 AM EDT
[SIZE="+2"]H[/SIZE]ouse Minority Leader John Boehner said he would be willing to vote for a bill that phased out the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans provided that it extends tax cuts for the middle class, signaling for the first time a rare opportunity for negotiations between the two parties ahead of a contentious legislative debate. …
nice to see him getting on board“If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for it.” — House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Finally, something Democrats and Republicans can agree on.
nice to see him getting on board
Of course what Democrats and Republicans appear to be on the verge of agreeing on is to further increase the indebtedness of the next generation.
I support one time, limited stimulative spending, but, I oppose permanent economic irresponsibility. It's time Americans came to terms with their budget deficit and how it will be constrained; one of those solutions will be for those that can, paying more.
Too early. Let's wait until the election actually puts him in the driver's seat
Too early. Let's wait until the election actually puts him in the driver's seat
“If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for it.” — House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Finally, something Democrats and Republicans can agree on.
nice to see him getting on board
Finally!!!!!!! A Party of Maybe!!!!!!!
It's midterms. Play to the 98% voters. Once you get the people in you want then reinstate the tax cut for the top 2% and make it permanent. Short term play for long term goal.
Of course what Democrats and Republicans appear to be on the verge of agreeing on is to further increase the indebtedness of the next generation.
I support one time, limited stimulative spending, but, I oppose permanent economic irresponsibility. It's time Americans came to terms with their budget deficit and how it will be constrained; one of those solutions will be for those that can, paying more.
Warning! You're about to be called every name in the far-right playbook.
we need everyone paying more so that everyone realizes that increased government spending is going to cost everyone money
this nonsense of telling the vast majority of voters only the rich need to pay more will never cause the majority to realize that the increased spending has to end
Kinda look like Boehner had a vision of what the headlines would read, next month, if he said NO once again. “ REPUBLICANS BLOCK MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS”. :2wave:
People often forget that while the wealthy "create jobs," it's the masses that actually create the demand for those jobs. There's no reason to hire 10 more waiting staff at a restaurant if nobody is coming in to eat there.
from each according to their ability
where Have I heard that before?
I'm sure the President's position on tax cuts has been viewed that way, but the reality is there has to be a revenue stream within the American tax base somewhere. The nation had a deficit before Obama came into office. If this were just a matter of paying down the debt or getting the deficit under control I'd be right on that bandwagon that says "no tax increases for anyone." But the present economic climate isn't conducive to do that. Instead, we have to generate revenue somewhere while also stimulating job growth while also paying down the deficit.
The only viable way to do that is to allow the greater number of consumers who have the ability to influence productivity in various domestic markets while also imposing taxes on that segment of the consumer base that can afford to pay into the tax system - the wealthy. And let's be honest, even if you tax the wealthy more at this point, they'd very likely earn more through the investments they already have in place over the long term anyway since they are the only economic class who can afford to make investments. Granted, they would have more to invest if they weren't taxed at a higher rate, but considering that most wealthy individuals will seek ways to conveniently invest their pre-tax dollars in a variety of ventures anyway, I doubt their post-tax earnings will be that adverstly affected.
Sean Hannity says that all the time when he's trying to misinform his viewers...
we need everyone paying more so that everyone realizes that increased government spending is going to cost everyone money
this nonsense of telling the vast majority of voters only the rich need to pay more will never cause the majority to realize that the increased spending has to end
that is another hall of fame of the stupid comments. Someone just said those who can pay more (I believe everyone can pay more btw-poor people don't need computers etc if they clamor for more government services) should pay more which is clearly a From each according to their ability
deny it if you want
how is Hannity misinforming his viewers --that makes no sense
Bush borrowed $500 billion from China so he could give a tax cut to the wealthy.
You asked where have we heard that before -- I answered, Hannity says it all the time...
Do you deny that Hannity says it all the time when trying to reinforce false beliefs about Dem policy and socialism?
Since you asked:
1) Straw Man fallacy (climate, Dem policy)
2) Cherry-picking (health care reform, stimulus bill, partisan attacks on Dems)
3) Red Herring (Obama's middle name, faith)
4) False Dilemma (GOP vs Dems)
5) Guilt by association (Dems)
It's 1 hour of GOP propaganda every night, or, as Fox likes to call them, News-based opinion shows.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?