Pelosi won't budge on expiring Bush tax cuts

[Donc]

Kind of pointless to debate such, and frankly, the Repubs are far less about blame than the Dems. Look at W and his book tour .. there's even a thread about it. And while he was president, W was not pegged with a "Blame Clinton" mantra, while Obama seems to have "Blame Bush" tattooed on his forehead, and its on TOTUS every time its plugged in.

What business knows is that Obama's recovery plan is smoke and mirrors at enormous cost. I am not going to argue economics with you, as it is for each of us to educate ourselves, and I have been an economic genius for a couple decades already But unemployment did not stay below 8%, did it. There was no Recovery Summer. And we are still on the wrong road with Obama's policies. Its reaching the point where the Obama Administration is becoming the definition of insanity ... you know, the repeating the same behavior and expecting a different outcome.

So far, those Conservatives who have said from the beginning that Obama's economic plans were disaster have been proven entirely correct. Guess what. We're still screwed cause that dumb bastard dug a far deeper hole than Clinton had to climb out of in '94. Clinton had no anchors around his neck. Obama has several that he put there himself already, and he won't take them off. And even if he hadn't, he has not the political savvy and smarts to pivot as Clinton did. We got a rough couple more years ahead of us, and then a couple more after that as Republicans turn the boat around.

You must have a rather short memory when you say, “while he was president, W was not pegged with a "Blame Clinton" mantra “. On the subject of past Presidents some of us, that were around when the Gipper (whom I had the misfortune of voting for…once) was playing his award winning role as President. We remember that he made a career of blaming Carter for everything imaginable, burnt toast for breakfast, toilet wont flush…its Carters fault. Any thing; it was Carters fault.

As for a economic recovery; being a strong believer in Keynesian economics, I think that the stimulus wasn’t large enough. It should have been at least twice what it was and put into developing our crumbling infrastructure.

Oh…Yes.. The topic. Boner will keep the seat warm for Pelosi for the next two years.:2wave:

 

[pragmatic]

Not a raise, but an expiration of an unreasonable tax cut. Which BTW should have been canceled to help pay for Bush's war.
Middle income people who buy into low taxes for the rich must have a thirst for grape koolaid...

At least stay on the same page with reality. Yes, it is a raise in taxes. (are you even paying attention....?)



.

 

[UtahBill]

Here we go with all this future stuff. Sorry, but I prefer the here and now. We're in the mess we are in now because of government. Not capitalism. Not Wall Street. But government manipulation of a capitalist market where they tampered with the usual risk-reward restraints. The problem is not our competitive markets. They will have their hiccups. The problem is government manipulation of the markets. There would have been no housing bubble if not for government intervention and manipulation.

After government policy caused this recession, Obama compounded it my sticking even more government into the system. To no surprise of at least a few of us, it was a magnificent fail. OBTW, did you know that we have twice the number of federal employees making over $150K per year as we did in 2008 ? Let the good times roll eh ?

Obama is the problem now.

You are correct. government is to blame, because they assumed the financial markets would regulate themselves. Govt allowed the foxes to be in charge of the chicken coops.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

You are correct. government is to blame, because they assumed the financial markets would regulate themselves. Govt allowed the foxes to be in charge of the chicken coops.

Spoken like a true liberal. And not the culprit. :roll:

 

[Eighty Deuce]

You must have a rather short memory when you say, “while he was president, W was not pegged with a "Blame Clinton" mantra “. On the subject of past Presidents some of us, that were around when the Gipper (whom I had the misfortune of voting for…once) was playing his award winning role as President. We remember that he made a career of blaming Carter for everything imaginable, burnt toast for breakfast, toilet wont flush…its Carters fault. Any thing; it was Carters fault.

As for a economic recovery; being a strong believer in Keynesian economics, I think that the stimulus wasn’t large enough. It should have been at least twice what it was and put into developing our crumbling infrastructure.

Oh…Yes.. The topic. Boner will keep the seat warm for Pelosi for the next two years.:2wave:

I voted for him twice. And you are mistaken.

 

[Moot]

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.

First of all, it wasn't inflation, it was stagflation. Secondly, Reagan reappointed Carter's chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volker, a democrat to fix the stagflating economy. Volker did this by raising interest rates which shocked the economy out of stagflation in 1983.

So, if high interest rates were the problem, then why did Volker raise them higher?

Reagan also raised income taxes on the middle class, social security, and gas taxes on the trucking industry.

By his second year in office (1983), Reagan had an approval rating of 35% compared to Obama's 42%.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

First of all, it wasn't inflation, it was stagflation. Secondly, Reagan reappointed Carter's chairman of the Federal Reserve, Paul Volker, a democrat to fix the stagflating economy. Volker did this by raising interest rates which shocked the economy out of stagflation in 1983.

So, if high interest rates were the problem, then why did Volker raise them higher?

Reagan also raised income taxes on the middle class, social security, and gas taxes on the trucking industry.

By his second year in office (1983), Reagan had an approval rating of 35% compared to Obama's 42%.

LOL ....... this borders on clueless. But in your effort to mischaracterize and cherry-pick to the point of absurdity, let's illustrate for the reader this mini-version to attempt to parrot the left-ninny Press. Note how the impression left changes.

Your statement: By his second year in office (1983), Reagan had an approval rating of 35% compared to Obama's 42%.

A more accurate assessment: In is second year in office, 1983, as unemployment was peaking, Reagan's message as the midterms approached was "Stay the Course". In those midterms he lost 28 House seats and zero net Senate. Barack Obama, in his first midterms in 2011, who's motto seemed to be "I am toxic" lost 65 House seats and 6 Senate seats. He also lost a record 680 state legislature seats. All in all, an historic ass-whupping.

Two years later, with inflation, interest rates, and unemployment all markedly improved, Reagan was reelected in a landslide. How things looking for Obammy ?

Which gets us back to the thread topic, Pelosi continuing to follow a path to ruin, oblivious to the wishes of the American people and still as arrogant as ever. Things not looking good

You struggle with staying on topic Utah.

 

[Slartibartfast]

If I were Pelosi, I would just ignore extending the tax cuts and just pass a brand new tax cut (with no riders attached, just a pure tax cut) targetting the demographics I want and dare the Republicans to fillibuster it.

 

[cpwill]

Now all of a sudden she is worried about heaping debt upon our children? Hypocrite.

yeah, this is the woman who called the Debt Reduction Commissions' report "completely unnacceptable". she couldn't care less about the amount of debt she leaves to the rest of us.

 

[cpwill]

Wrong, in the 10 year lifespan of the health care reform, CBO has stated that it will save hundreds of billions. Indeed, flat out repeal of the bill will create further federal debt.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/AmendReconProp.pdf#page=2 (pdf)

wrong again; first off, the CBO was ordered in that report to assume that the Doc Fix ($500Bn) never went through, that growth was at higher levels than we are currently seeing, and that the Health and Human Services Administration would be somehow magically more efficient at putting the relevant programs into place than any government agency in history. Secondly, in order to get that figure, they had to account for 10 years of taxes and 6 years of benefits; so what happens in years' 11-20? thirdly, the CBO has recently come out and stated that the actual effects of the bill thus far have been to bend US Government expenses up. The Doc Fix got passed (which instantly put the whole thing in the red), and the High-Risk pools and other facets of the bill going into place are already threatening to run over budget.

Obamacare is - beyond merely a massive brake on the economy - a serious addition to the long term debt of this nation.

 

[cpwill]

The rich provide ALL the jobs? in what world?

those making above 250,000 do provide the majority of them, absolutely. and the small businesses which will be disproportionately hit by this tax hike provide 70% of the new job creation.


but hey, what do you care, eh? you're retired, your 'income is assured', screw the rest of us still trying to make it in the economy, huh?

we'll see what your tune is when inflation cuts your income in half.

 

[UtahBill]

LOL ....... this borders on clueless. But in your effort to mischaracterize and cherry-pick to the point of absurdity, let's illustrate for the reader this mini-version to attempt to parrot the left-ninny Press. Note how the impression left changes.

Your statement: By his second year in office (1983), Reagan had an approval rating of 35% compared to Obama's 42%.

A more accurate assessment: In is second year in office, 1983, as unemployment was peaking, Reagan's message as the midterms approached was "Stay the Course". In those midterms he lost 28 House seats and zero net Senate. Barack Obama, in his first midterms in 2011, who's motto seemed to be "I am toxic" lost 65 House seats and 6 Senate seats. He also lost a record 680 state legislature seats. All in all, an historic ass-whupping.

Two years later, with inflation, interest rates, and unemployment all markedly improved, Reagan was reelected in a landslide. How things looking for Obammy ?

Which gets us back to the thread topic, Pelosi continuing to follow a path to ruin, oblivious to the wishes of the American people and still as arrogant as ever. Things not looking good

You struggle with staying on topic Utah.

You talking to me? you are quoting someone else.....
as for cherry picking, you uberneocons do that all the time...and you only have one cherry, lower taxes. :2razz:

 

[Eighty Deuce]

You talking to me? you are quoting someone else.....
as for cherry picking, you uberneocons do that all the time...and you only have one cherry, lower taxes. :2razz:

The entity I quoted claims to be from Utah. Seems to be something out there in the water though.

We got a giant cherry, btw ............. courtesy Nov 2nd. And if the idiot Dems in charge, such as Pelosi, think the message was to not only stay the same, but just fight harder for more of the same, then we got a cherry-bomb to drop on her. Boom

 

[UtahBill]

those making above 250,000 do provide the majority of them, absolutely. and the small businesses which will be disproportionately hit by this tax hike provide 70% of the new job creation.


but hey, what do you care, eh? you're retired, your 'income is assured', screw the rest of us still trying to make it in the economy, huh?

we'll see what your tune is when inflation cuts your income in half.

But I do care. I care enough to educate 2 kids, and set up education trusts for 7 grandkids. They are going to need all the education they can get so they can earn enough to live well and at the same time pay extra taxes to help partially pay the incredible debt that our govt is building up. Between Obama's efforts and the Bush war legacy, we are heading toward a black hole of financial servitude to our national debt. The self proclaimed conservatives here are RINO, because REAL CONSERVATIVES don't get into a deep hole of debt and try to get out of it by more digging, down, to China.

Do you think my wife and I got where we are by being liberal with our money? There is more to being conservative than crying out for lower taxes.

Not to mention that it is downright unpatriotic to being part of the problem instead of being part of the solution.

Don't worry about inflation cutting in to my retirement. If the cost of living goes up, I get a COLA raise on my SS, and my military retirement. Not so with my 2 civilian jobs, but then they don't pay much. Haven't had a COLA in 2 years, but then prices for so many things are so low now that it doesn't matter. Plus by the time I get really old, I will be at 100% disability for Parkinson's Disease, and the VA will be paying me another $34K per year, tax free.
OF course, we still have a bit over $200K in savings and a second house that we can eventually sell for $350K. We will move into the cheaper of the 2 houses, the one in AZ, where it is warmer, and they don't tax social security. Utah does....
Compared to me, YOU are the liberal. You want to spend like you have money, and then expect the govt to lower your taxes so you can spend some more.
Here is a clue for all the self professed conservatives here that are in debt up to your eyeballs, you ain't a conservative if you spend more than you earn...
Funny thing about the few liberals I do know, most of them are better off than me.....more education, more money stashed away.
I wonder how they do it while so many "conservatives" cannot...

 

[RightinNYC]

But I do care. I care enough to educate 2 kids, and set up education trusts for 7 grandkids. They are going to need all the education they can get so they can earn enough to live well and at the same time pay extra taxes to help partially pay the incredible debt that our govt is building up. Between Obama's efforts and the Bush war legacy, we are heading toward a black hole of financial servitude to our national debt. The self proclaimed conservatives here are RINO, because REAL CONSERVATIVES don't get into a deep hole of debt and try to get out of it by more digging, down, to China.

Do you think my wife and I got where we are by being liberal with our money? There is more to being conservative than crying out for lower taxes.

Not to mention that it is downright unpatriotic to being part of the problem instead of being part of the solution.

Don't worry about inflation cutting in to my retirement. If the cost of living goes up, I get a COLA raise on my SS, and my military retirement. Not so with my 2 civilian jobs, but then they don't pay much. Haven't had a COLA in 2 years, but then prices for so many things are so low now that it doesn't matter. Plus by the time I get really old, I will be at 100% disability for Parkinson's Disease, and the VA will be paying me another $34K per year, tax free.
OF course, we still have a bit over $200K in savings and a second house that we can eventually sell for $350K. We will move into the cheaper of the 2 houses, the one in AZ, where it is warmer, and they don't tax social security. Utah does....
Compared to me, YOU are the liberal. You want to spend like you have money, and then expect the govt to lower your taxes so you can spend some more.
Here is a clue for all the self professed conservatives here that are in debt up to your eyeballs, you ain't a conservative if you spend more than you earn...
Funny thing about the few liberals I do know, most of them are better off than me.....more education, more money stashed away.
I wonder how they do it while so many "conservatives" cannot...

I think his objection is to the fact that you're saying you don't care what happens to taxes now that you've got yours all stashed away.

Thanks to Medicare, SS, and our spending over the past few decades, people of your generation and the one behind you received a massive subsidy on the backs of the people from my generation. That tends to irk us, particularly when your generation retires, votes en masse against any reform (no matter how minimal), and then tsk tsks us whenever we mention that we'd like to be able to take a bigger chunk of our income home so that we can start saving for ourselves.

 

[UtahBill]

The entity I quoted claims to be from Utah. Seems to be something out there in the water though.

We got a giant cherry, btw ............. courtesy Nov 2nd. And if the idiot Dems in charge, such as Pelosi, think the message was to not only stay the same, but just fight harder for more of the same, then we got a cherry-bomb to drop on her. Boom

What is that old expression, "counting chickens before they hatch", or something like that?
I am all for the GOP taking over, but not with the TeaParty hanging on like a bunch of dingleberries.
I want to see an EDUCATED candidate, with brains, knowledge in financial matters, and balls big enough to tell the American public that the carnival rides are over. Time to go to work earning more and spending less on frivolous pursuits.
Another Utahn is posting? I will have to check that out. Must be a smart person, if YOU don't agree with his posts...:2razz:

 

[UtahBill]

I think his objection is to the fact that you're saying you don't care what happens to taxes now that you've got yours all stashed away.

Thanks to Medicare, SS, and our spending over the past few decades, people of your generation and the one behind you received a massive subsidy on the backs of the people from my generation. That tends to irk us, particularly when your generation retires, votes en masse against any reform (no matter how minimal), and then tsk tsks us whenever we mention that we'd like to be able to take a bigger chunk of our income home so that we can start saving for ourselves.

I am 64, how old are you? I agree that boomers have had it easy, and set up the next generations to pay the price. All the more reason to bring back the inheritance tax.:2razz:

I, and my wife, got our wealth the hard way. Neither of our parents had money to help us pay for college, etc. except her parents did sacrifice to pay for her first 2 years of college. I did mine on the GI bill, she did the rest of hers on my income. She didn't start teaching til 1979, when our youngest started first grade. We have been successful, and who complains the most when we talk about it? Conservatives who lived their lives like liberals.....
I do care about taxes, I want them to go up for those who can pay. I think Obama is being generous to set the bar at $250K for a family. BTW, our last 3 years we took out all of my IRA/401k funds to pay for our retirement home in Utah, AND about a third of my wife's 403b. We paid the top rate one year, the next one down the next 2 years.
It was a bit painful to write those checks, but such is life. I think we are good to go from now on, with taxable income per year of a bit over $100K from now on.
If unsophisticated investors like us can do it, others can as well. Of course, it means having a conservative lifestyle instead of living large on the credit card....

 

[Eighty Deuce]

What is that old expression, "counting chickens before they hatch", or something like that?
I am all for the GOP taking over, but not with the TeaParty hanging on like a bunch of dingleberries.
I want to see an EDUCATED candidate, with brains, knowledge in financial matters, and balls big enough to tell the American public that the carnival rides are over. Time to go to work earning more and spending less on frivolous pursuits.
Another Utahn is posting? I will have to check that out. Must be a smart person, if YOU don't agree with his posts...:2razz:

Not predicting a bit about who the nominee will be on 2012, except that it will not be Obama if he continues to pursue the same objectives. That Pelosi wants to stay on, and that the uber-lib Democrats remaining in the House might also endorse her, is a huge bonus to the Republicans with regard to the 2012 electoral outlook. Personally, I would rather the country make some corrections and actually recover as it can with the proper government influence, and then let the chips fall as they may in 2012. What I see, however, is an unnecessary continued stagnation of the economy under the same Pelosi-Reid-Obama influence until we get them all out in Jan 2013.

Its not a whole lot of fun being able to point out how big a dope Obama and his minions are, as it means we're all still in the crapper.

 

[RightinNYC]

I am 64, how old are you? I agree that boomers have had it easy, and set up the next generations to pay the price. All the more reason to bring back the inheritance tax.:2razz:

25. I don't know if the estate tax would really do much - it only takes in $30b or so per year.

The problem is that over the past 30 years, the public benefited to the tune of $12,500,000,000,000 more than it contributed. In addition, they built up a $100T+ unfunded liability in SS and Medicare. The older generations took my generation out to dinner, ordered the surf and turf, and then excused themselves to go to the bathroom before darting out the back.

I, and my wife, got our wealth the hard way. Neither of our parents had money to help us pay for college, etc. except her parents did sacrifice to pay for her first 2 years of college. I did mine on the GI bill, she did the rest of hers on my income. She didn't start teaching til 1979, when our youngest started first grade. We have been successful, and who complains the most when we talk about it? Conservatives who lived their lives like liberals.....
I do care about taxes, I want them to go up for those who can pay. I think Obama is being generous to set the bar at $250K for a family. BTW, our last 3 years we took out all of my IRA/401k funds to pay for our retirement home in Utah, AND about a third of my wife's 403b. We paid the top rate one year, the next one down the next 2 years.
It was a bit painful to write those checks, but such is life. I think we are good to go from now on, with taxable income per year of a bit over $100K from now on.
If unsophisticated investors like us can do it, others can as well. Of course, it means having a conservative lifestyle instead of living large on the credit card....

It's not that people nowadays are unwilling to work or unable to save, it's that today's economy is far different from the one you grew up in.

*You've mentioned before that you have a couple pensions. If you're talking to someone from my generation, you might as well tell them that your employers gave you fairy dust and rainbows - pensions are non-existent nowadays, much like employer loyalty and stability.

*When you got your education via the GI bill, that put you at a substantial advantage to everyone else around you. You were highly qualified to take a well-paying job and had no debt to burden you. Nowadays, everyone and their mother has a four year degree, leaving college kids ****ed eight ways from sunday. I have friends who graduated from some of the best law schools in the country who are unemployed. Not having a hard time finding a high paying job, not having a hard time finding a job in the field they want, but straight up unable to find jobs. Did I mention that most have $100k+ in student loan debt?

*Back when you were working and saving for retirement, I'm betting you didn't pay too much for health insurance. Many people nowadays pay 15-20% of their income toward it.

*As mentioned above, the economy over the past 30 years benefited from our country's profligate spending. How great do you think the economy would have been had the government not spent that $12.5T? How much money do you think you'd have saved for retirement had the government imposed tax rates high enough to pay for that debt?

Forgive me if I'm being a bit rude, but I just don't understand how you can talk about how everyone else should stop "living large on the credit card." You might have paid off your personal credit card, but your entire generation lived large on the government credit card. We're the ones who are going to be stuck with the bill.

 

[UtahBill]

You do the best you can with the cards dealt to you.....my wife and I started out with nothing but our desire to have a secure future. We probably overdid it.
Friends in the same boat initially took other paths, and have very little to show for 40 years in the work force.

The same thing is happening now, and like has been said, during darker hours. Some of us are living large, even tho we can't afford it.
I know too many young people who spend like there is no tomorrow, and they spend on things they don't need while ignoring essentials like health care insurance.
WE can't blame their lifestyles on the boomer generation. Yes, they have it hard, and so many of them just make it harder...

 

[Donc]

RightinNYC

Forgive me if I'm being a bit rude, but I just don't understand how you can talk about how everyone else should stop "living large on the credit card." You might have paid off your personal credit card, but your entire generation lived large on the government credit card. We're the ones who are going to be stuck with the bill.

Swingen a pretty wide brush their dude.Care to get into the details of the "but your entire generation lived large on the government credit card "

 

[Barbbtx]

You are correct. government is to blame, because they assumed the financial markets would regulate themselves. Govt allowed the foxes to be in charge of the chicken coops.

Yea, foxes like Barney Frank

 

[pragmatic]

Yea, foxes like Barney Frank

Both parties were in the mix pandering for votes. Barney and Dodd were as central to the eventual mess as anyone.

.

 

[UtahBill]

I think his objection is to the fact that you're saying you don't care what happens to taxes now that you've got yours all stashed away.

Thanks to Medicare, SS, and our spending over the past few decades, people of your generation and the one behind you received a massive subsidy on the backs of the people from my generation. That tends to irk us, particularly when your generation retires, votes en masse against any reform (no matter how minimal), and then tsk tsks us whenever we mention that we'd like to be able to take a bigger chunk of our income home so that we can start saving for ourselves.

There has never been a year that I did not have to pay taxes. Even as a married E5 in the Navy. The tax rates people want to keep are a recent misadventure. I agree that my generation has had it easy, but not as easy as you would have us believe. Especially the front runners....we had Vietnam. But when has govt given us a true choice? What war have we gotten into since Vietnam have the voters had a say in?
Since the Bush tax cuts were enacted, how much of it did the average young American save? Not much....
Make all the excuses you want, the average person in the USA spends more than he earns. It is considered normal to have credit card debt to these people, while in my younger years, hardly anybody had credit card debt....

 

[TOJ]

Sorry, the simplest part of economics dictates consumers first. If there is no consumption, there is no need for production.

Really? How many consumers were clamering for personal computers, cell phones, TVs, radios, etc before they were invented? :doh

.