• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pelosi won't budge on expiring Bush tax cuts

Donc

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
9,783
Reaction score
2,582
Location
out yonder
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Good, all the more reason to keep Nancy as the minority leader.The tax-cuts have been in effect for almost ten years now,cant see where its helped any. :thumbs:

<House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled Friday she is not softening her opposition to extending the Bush-era tax cuts for high income earners.>

<"The problem comes," she said, "when an additional tax cut to the wealthy is two percent that will heap $700 billion in debt" upon the country's children.>

<"Those tax cuts have been effect for a very long time, they did not create jobs," she said, adding later, "From day one, President Obama and this Congress have been job creators.>

Pelosi won't budge on expiring Bush tax cuts - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
 
Last edited:

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,802
Reaction score
20,626
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Good for her.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Not since the 2002 Iraq war initiative, has there been a more clear attempt to betray the interests of the American people than the current conservative efforts to permanently renew the Bush tax cuts for the richest 2%. Pelosi continues to serve us well!
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Who, I say WHO, will be the first to accuse liberals in this thread of class envy?
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
22,946
Reaction score
8,022
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Not since the 2002 Iraq war initiative, has there been a more clear attempt to betray the interests of the American people than the current conservative efforts to permanently renew the Bush tax cuts for the richest 2%. Pelosi continues to serve us well!
And will Pelosi demand that the 2% go towards debt reduction? Will she direct Congress to reduce their spending? The more any one of us gives, the more Congress spends.
 

washunut

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
11,484
Reaction score
3,294
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Not since the 2002 Iraq war initiative, has there been a more clear attempt to betray the intere

sts of the American people than the current conservative efforts to permanently renew the Bush tax cuts for the richest 2%. Pelosi continues to serve us well!
Seems a bit over the top. A lot has happened since 2002.
 

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Good, all the more reason to keep Nancy as the minority leader.The tax-cuts have been in effect for almost ten years now,cant see where its helped any. :thumbs:

<House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled Friday she is not softening her opposition to extending the Bush-era tax cuts for high income earners.>

<"The problem comes," she said, "when an additional tax cut to the wealthy is two percent that will heap $700 billion in debt" upon the country's children.>

<"Those tax cuts have been effect for a very long time, they did not create jobs," she said, adding later, "From day one, President Obama and this Congress have been job creators.>

Pelosi won't budge on expiring Bush tax cuts - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
She has the balls to say that, after that freaking health care monstrosity is going to cost our countrys children? Unless the Repubs can get it repealed, oour great grandchildren will be paying for it.

She can kiss my hairy yellow ass.

Her track record for accuracy in quoting numbers is ****.
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
She has the balls to say that, after that freaking health care monstrosity is going to cost our countrys children? Unless the Repubs can get it repealed, oour great grandchildren will be paying for it.

She can kiss my hairy yellow ass.

Her track record for accuracy in quoting numbers is ****.
Well in all fairness, there were some new taxes involved in paying for that bill. But no they didn't completly cover the cost.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Seems a bit over the top. A lot has happened since 2002.
Be my guest, what other Congressional act has harmed this nation more since 2002 than the vote authorizing the president to start an unnecessary and costly war in the Middle East. Take your time, the graves of the men and women who died in that wasted effort aren't getting any colder than they already are.

But, Pelosi rightly points out that wasting $700 Billion on the wealthiest people won't bring us economic prosperity, it'll just saddle America with more debt, precisely what Republican leadership intends; they are villains.
 

Moot

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
37,795
Reaction score
13,511
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Be my guest, what other Congressional act has harmed this nation more since 2002 than the vote authorizing the president to start an unnecessary and costly war in the Middle East. Take your time, the graves of the men and women who died in that wasted effort aren't getting any colder than they already are.

But, Pelosi rightly points out that wasting $700 Billion on the wealthiest people won't bring us economic prosperity, it'll just saddle America with more debt, precisely what Republican leadership intends; they are villains.
Not exactly fiscal conservatives are they?
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Its more important to find solutions than to look for someone to blame. Its simply mind boggling how much time each political party, politician, and how much news time is devoted to finding who's to blame for whatever is going on we don't like.

Let me ask, would you rather have unemployment never be solved or the question of which persons are to blame for the crisis never answered? Now some people may argue that finding out who was responsible for what is important because then we know who the throw out, HOWEVER even if you can prove they were responsible in some way and throw them out of whatever office or position they currently occupy, THEN you've still got the problem of solving the issue. And simply replacing whoever those people are who are kicked out doesn't mean whoever they are replaced with has any better ideas either.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal

washunut

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
11,484
Reaction score
3,294
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Be my guest, what other Congressional act has harmed this nation more since 2002 than the vote authorizing the president to start an unnecessary and costly war in the Middle East. Take your time, the graves of the men and women who died in that wasted effort aren't getting any colder than they already are.

But, Pelosi rightly points out that wasting $700 Billion on the wealthiest people won't bring us economic prosperity, it'll just saddle America with more debt, precisely what Republican leadership intends; they are villains.
You say this tax bill is the worst thing SINCE the 2002 so that vote did not count in my mind. So your post, while vile as you hoped has nothing to do with my response.

Interesting that you find the 2002 vote so disturbing but seem to be fine that we added something like 60,000 soldiers to fight in Afghanistan. Maybe you don't care if people are sent to be killed by a democratic president, I do. So that by itself is materially worse than this small tax junk that is irrelevent because the overall tax issue will have to be fixed shortly if we are to get the deficit under control.
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
As the incoming Speaker of the House, her stance is incredibly influential.


Wait....
 

Eighty Deuce

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
3,747
Reaction score
1,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The Obama economic recovery plan is a complete failure. The rest of the world just handed Obama his ass at the G-20. I even heard a couple say "Get that socialist outta here." And Nancy wants to stay the course !!

San Fran Nan ... the gift that keeps giving ;)
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
63,904
Reaction score
32,560
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Be my guest, what other Congressional act has harmed this nation more since 2002 than the vote authorizing the president to start an unnecessary and costly war in the Middle East. Take your time, the graves of the men and women who died in that wasted effort aren't getting any colder than they already are.
I would say Obamacare, if not repealed, will do more damage. combined with the Stimulus, too, which helped ensure that we would still be in a recession two years later. Despite Pelosi's best efforts, it's looking like we will see a positive return on the Iraq war; not so much for those two programs.


a couple of quick points on Pelosi's claims

1. the notion that this woman gives a fig about the deficit is ludicrous. what - 5 trillion added since she picked up the gavel and passed 'pay-go'? this is the woman who lambasted Republicans for claiming that we should pay for unemployment benefits? This is the woman who presides over the body responsible for spending bills; and our projected deficits according to her plan, according to what she wants to happen over the next 10 years currently stand at what again?

2. the notion that raising taxes on those making more than 250,000 will somehow help the country is equally ludicrous. for a quick demonstration of how this works; go back through ya'lls posts and replace the word "rich" with "employers" so, for example

Chappy said:
Pelosi rightly points out that wasting $700 Billion on the wealthiest people won't bring us economic prosperity
is actually

Chappy said:
Pelosi rightly points out that raising taxes by $700 Billion on employers will bring us economic prosperity
as a group, these people are still trying to figure out what gargantuan costs are going to be imposed on them by Obamacare. They are living in trepidation that the EPA is going to pass it's own version of Cap and Tax and send their costs skyrocketing. and now you want to increase their taxes......

and that is your plan for getting them to hire more?


3. (related to point 1) The simple and unfortunate fact is that the 700 Bn you are claiming is scored statically; that is, not taking into account how people will actually respond to higher marginal tax rates. scored dynamically, and the result is very different, and here is where we should let the states serve as the labratories of democracy; the recent history of several states who have tried to pass a "millionaires tax" bear this out.

Maryland couldn't balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O'Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were "willing and able to pay their fair share." The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it." One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.

and the story is similar elsewhere. whenever you create a powerful incentive structure for those with higher incomes to expend a great deal of money and trouble avoiding taxes, they will behave like This Guy: Politicians like to talk about incentives -- for businesses to relocate, for example, or to get folks to buy local. After reviewing the new budget, I have identified the most compelling incentive of all: a major tax break immedi ately available to all New Yorkers. To be eligible, you need do only one thing: move out of New York state. Last week I spent 90 minutes doing a couple of simple things -- registering to vote, changing my driver's license, filling out a domicile certificate and signing a homestead certificate -- in Florida. Combined with spending 184 days a year outside New York, these simple procedures will save me over $5 million in New York taxes annually.

people will change how they are compensated, they will change where they are compensated, they will change when they are compensated, all to avoid taxes; and the higher the rate on the higher the income, the higher incentive they have to do so. taxes can be high, taxes can be low, but revenues tend to average out at about 18-20% of GDP; because people find ways around them. now, not all of those bringing in above 250,000 a year are going to have the resources to do this; the vast majority of that demographic are small business owners. so instead, the burden of this tax increase will shift from the true big earners - who have the resources to find ways to avoid it - to the small business owners who are just over the line. As I've told you people repeatedly; you are aiming at billionaires, but you are hitting small businesses, innovators, and the people who create 70% of America's new jobs.


4. the likelihood is, however, that the effects of this tax hike will not necessarily be revenue negative. there is a possibility that it will be revenue neutral (similar to how the death tax ; which is similarly aimed at the uber rich and similarly merely has the effect of causing them to spend resources avoiding the tax while landing on family farms and family businesses; destroying wealth and growth), but my WAG would be that it would be slightly revenue positive. even then it will not prove a serious help the deficit, for the simple reason that deficits are spending driven, not revenue driven[/url]. revenues went up during the Bush adminstration. revenues from the wealthy went up during the Bush administration. the percent of revenues raised from the rich went up during the Bush administration. yet still the deficit climbed; especially in those last two years when Speaker Pelosi was in charge of producing the budget. why? because spending exploded faster than even the increased revenues could keep up.



SO, to recap: the claim that this will reduce the deficite is highly questionable, and the intent to do so even more so. The effect will be to reduce employment and possibly even net revenues.
 

Eighty Deuce

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
3,747
Reaction score
1,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I think the libs need a reminder of what success looks like. Then they can figure out which line Pelosi wants to extend :roll:



We don't have a taxing problem liberals, we have a spending problem. But I know, why do you care ? Its other people's money anyway !!!
 

Moot

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
37,795
Reaction score
13,511
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think the libs need a reminder of what success looks like. Then they can figure out which line Pelosi wants to extend :roll:



We don't have a taxing problem liberals, we have a spending problem. But I know, why do you care ? Its other people's money anyway !!!
Did Carter leave Reagan with a $10 trillion debt and 10% unemployment?
 

Eighty Deuce

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
3,747
Reaction score
1,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Did Carter leave Reagan with a $10 trillion debt and 10% unemployment?
Why don't you look up the mess Reagan inherited. The inflation. The high interest rates. Monetary policy all a mess. Unemployment on the way up. And oh yeah, the beginning of a Recession. Reagan solved it without any BS "Stimulus", and he did it with a Democrat Congress. Regardless, the graph screams Reagan success and Obama failure. Liberals have to wear ear-muffs and shades just to look at it.

But go ahead and stay the Obama-Pelosi course. God help the country between now and Nov 2012, but we'll fix it all then. With prejudice.
 

pragmatic

"Pawn in game of life"
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
1,027
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Good, all the more reason to keep Nancy as the minority leader.The tax-cuts have been in effect for almost ten years now,cant see where its helped any. :thumbs:

<House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) signaled Friday she is not softening her opposition to extending the Bush-era tax cuts for high income earners.>

<"The problem comes," she said, "when an additional tax cut to the wealthy is two percent that will heap $700 billion in debt" upon the country's children.>

<"Those tax cuts have been effect for a very long time, they did not create jobs," she said, adding later, "From day one, President Obama and this Congress have been job creators.>

Pelosi won't budge on expiring Bush tax cuts - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
Am suspecting that Pelosi and crew may lose some steam when the issue starts getting framed correctly. The topic at hand has nothing to with a "tax cut". What she (Pelosi) and her posse are pushing for is a 4% tax increase on the income group that provides all the jobs. And she wants to do it in the middle of bad economic/employment times.

The GOP will push to keep tax rates where they are. The Democrats are pushing for a notable tax rate increase. No "tax cuts"in the discussion.


.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Am suspecting that Pelosi and crew may lose some steam when the issue starts getting framed correctly. The topic at hand has nothing to with a "tax cut". What she (Pelosi) and her posse are pushing for is a 4% tax increase on the income group that provides all the jobs. And she wants to do it in the middle of bad economic/employment times.

The GOP will push to keep tax rates where they are. The Democrats are pushing for a notable tax rate increase. No "tax cuts"in the discussion.


.
The rich provide ALL the jobs? in what world?
maybe in the dark ages of Europe when we were mostly serfs and peasants who lived at the whim of royalty....

The average consumer is what drives the economy. There are the ones who need housing, food, clothing, etc. on a daily basis and they provide more jobs than the multi-millionaires.
 

pragmatic

"Pawn in game of life"
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
1,027
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The rich provide ALL the jobs? in what world?
maybe in the dark ages of Europe when we were mostly serfs and peasants who lived at the whim of royalty....

The average consumer is what drives the economy. There are the ones who need housing, food, clothing, etc. on a daily basis and they provide more jobs than the multi-millionaires.
Uuhhh, spoiler alert. The average consumer drives the economy by spending the money they got from their employer.....

.
 

Eighty Deuce

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
3,747
Reaction score
1,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The rich provide ALL the jobs? in what world?
maybe in the dark ages of Europe when we were mostly serfs and peasants who lived at the whim of royalty....

The average consumer is what drives the economy. There are the ones who need housing, food, clothing, etc. on a daily basis and they provide more jobs than the multi-millionaires.
Dittos to what the post before this said, but consumers, and the money they spend ............ drumroll ...... do not grow on trees ......... and are not created by government, despite what Obama and his sidekick Biden tell you.

FYI, small business, and the entrepeneurs behind each one, drive this economy.

Regarding Obama's failure, as you may know, there's upwards of $3 trillion sitting on the sidelines in the U.S., 2/3rds with business, and 1/3rd with our individual citizens. In Reagan's America, that money was active in the economy, as those in the know trusted Reagan's policies. Its sitting out right now (that's 3 times Stimulus, btw) precisely because the Obama-Pelosi-Reid cabal has accurately convinced all that government will expand again, exponentially, just as soon as there's even a smidgeon of opportunity. Look to Obamacare, and the amount of Stimulus that essentially was just Union bailouts, both such as the UAW and the Government Employees Union via state government grants, if you need proof. Cap and Trade too. Earned money knows that Obama is all BS.

OBTW, the "rich" to Obama-Pelosi-Reid are those individuals making $200K per year, couples $250K. Look it up. That's your small business here and now. If you want to call it "the Dark Ages" ........ well, Obama is half black.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom