Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Tax Cuts For Wealthy May Remain  
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2856 times:

Let's see, first he back tracked on getting the troops out immediately upon taking office. Now, according to sources, those eeeevillll wealthy people may get to keep their tax cuts beyond 2010!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081123/pl_nm/us_usa_obama_taxes

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President-elect Barack Obama may consider delaying a campaign promise - to roll back tax cuts on high-income Americans - as part of his economic recovery strategy, two aides said on Sunday.

Now just how is he going to pay my mortgage and buy my gas if he doesn't charge those evil rich people for them?      

Even more interesting......

Obama said on Saturday he was crafting an aggressive two-year stimulus plan to revive the economy, aiming to save 2.5 million jobs by January 2011 through projects including transportation infrastructure, school modernization and alternative energy.

Is that revision number 3 or number 4? I keep losing track since I thought he had this all mapped out and ready to roll at the last debate. If I were an Obama supporter I'd be feeling a little like the President-elect was practicing a form of shock and awe on me.

If he does follow through and does the smart thing by extending those tax cuts then he is smarter than I gave him credit for, tell em one thing to get elected, turn around and do the opposite once you've got the election in the bag. Now that's CHANGE we can believe in! YES WE CAN!!!!!!      

[Edited 2008-11-23 11:09:23]

106 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2854 times:



Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
If he does follow through and does the smart thing by extending those tax cuts then he is smarter than I gave him credit for, tell em one thing to get elected, turn around and do the opposite once you've got the election in the bag. Now that's CHANGE we can believe in! YES WE CAN!!!!!!

As much as I enjoy the irony (and there is lots of it), I enjoy the fact that Obama is going to be enacting sensible policy and taking a moderate course even more.

One thing is for sure, Obama and his team are shrewd operators.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2849 times:

BTW, if President-elect Obama follows thru with this, does it mean, that according to VP-elect Biden, the President-elect is now unpatriotic?  scratchchin   rotfl   rotfl 

User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2810 times:

Yep lie #2. Man if Ii voted for him I would feel slighted. This guy blew so much smoke and is going to govern 180 degrees from what he promised. Which is actually the better scenario.

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!

I think he is beginning to realize that if he did follow through with this lame promise he would lose more jobs than what is happening now when the businesses he attempted to tax to death just moved to Malasia or India. Man I can see that free health care coming any day now.  sarcastic 


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2796 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3):
Man if Ii voted for him I would feel slighted. This guy blew so much smoke and is going to govern 180 degrees from what he promised.

How so? He promised an aggregate tax cut.

The economic circumstances have changed profoundly, even since the election (seen the latest unemployment numbers? ) and I don't think anyone could have expected that the present Treasury Secretary would just shrug and sit on his hands.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2787 times:



Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
Let's see, first he back tracked on getting the troops out immediately upon taking office. Now, according to sources, those eeeevillll wealthy people may get to keep their tax cuts beyond 2010!

What a big, fat liar that Obama guy has to be!

There's just a tiny little worldwide financial crash and he already has the gall to make minor adjustments to the campaign ideas he presented before the crash!

What an unreliable jerk!  crazy 


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2781 times:



Quoting Klaus (Reply 5):
There's just a tiny little worldwide financial crash

This is BS, even if we didn't have the crisis we have now he would have still flipped on this promise for the companies would have fled this country or subbed their work out of the country, in turn costing many jobs to be lost. His promise to punish the big bad upper class to finance his fantasies for the lower class was empty long before the economy went bad. Long before.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2765 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 4):
How so? He promised an aggregate tax cut.

And he promised to raise the tax burden on top income earners. This is a policy reversal from the campaign, pure and simple

Quoting Mariner (Reply 4):
The economic circumstances have changed profoundly, even since the election (seen the latest unemployment numbers? ) and I don't think anyone could have expected that the present Treasury Secretary would just shrug and sit on his hands.

The developments in the last 3 weeks still pale in comparison to the month of September and October when Obama's campaign was still in full swing. There's no way around it. If Obama maintains the Bush-era tax rates, it is a broken campaign promise. But don't get me wrong, it's a promise I'm glad to see broken.

And what part of approx $240 billion in federal assistance that has been authorized by Paulson qualifies as "sitting on his hands?" I'm sure the guy has really been kicking back and taking it easy lately.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 5):
There's just a tiny little worldwide financial crash and he already has the gall to make minor adjustments to the campaign ideas he presented before the crash!

Which started well before November 4  

The greatest irony of all was that as the economy got worse through September and October, the Obama campaign kept lowering the threshold for the "top income earners" who would pick up the tax burden. First $500k, then $250k, then $125k. And now, there won't be any tax increases at all. But it's only because of what has happened since the election.

You know what scans better? That Obama ran to the left to win the election but knows that centrist/right policies are the way out of this.

[Edited 2008-11-23 12:24:28]

User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2750 times:



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7):
You know what scans better? That Obama ran to the left to win the election but knows that centrist/right policies are the way out of this.

Also the way to win in 2012.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2750 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7):
And what part of approx $240 billion in federal assistance that has been authorized by Paulson qualifies as "sitting on his hands?"

Secretary Paulson said he would buy up toxic debt from the banks. Didn't happen.

We were told there would be no more bank failures - and now Citi is collapsing, right before our very eyes.

Secretary Paulson demanded $700 billion fgorm Congress as a matter or urgency. But, as of now, he has not requested the use of half of that - $350 billion.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7):
If Obama maintains the Bush-era tax rates, it is a broken campaign promise.

How is it a deferral a broken promise?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2742 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 9):
How is it a deferral a broken promise?

Oh, it's just a deferral. Like Iraqi Airways deferred their A310 order. You've got to be a real homer to buy into such an obvious euphemism.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 9):
Secretary Paulson demanded $700 billion fgorm Congress as a matter or urgency. But, as of now, he has not requested the use of half of that - $350 billion.

It was crystal clear from the very beginning of the Bailout that the Treasury would not release all $700 billion in one go. I think we can agree that doing so would have been a terrible idea? So why obtain permission from Congress for up-to $700 billion? Perhaps so the Treasury doesn't have to go back to Congress and go through the political process of requesting even more money if the $350 billion isn't sufficient?

Quoting Mariner (Reply 9):
Secretary Paulson said he would buy up toxic debt from the banks. Didn't happen. We were told there would be no more bank failures - and now Citi is collapsing, right before our very eyes.

Changing the nature of the bailout does not equal inaction. The Treasury is most certainly taking action. And besides, Paulson is not the one who ran for office here and he is working within the bounds of the bailout package that a Democratic Congress authorized.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2719 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 10):
It was crystal clear from the very beginning of the Bailout that the Treasury would not release all $700 billion in one go.

So now you are saying it is a deferral, not a broken promise? Funny that.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 10):
I think we can agree that doing so would have been a terrible idea?

Why would I agree to that? It was presented as a matter of urgency. Look at what happened the first time Congress knocked it back.

On the whole, I'll go with the assessment in The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/world/unite...displaystory.cfm?story_id=12668365

"Mr Obama is assembling a formidable economic team. With the economy perhaps on the precipice of its worst recession since the Depression, he will need it."

If these formidable economists are now suggesting a deferral of one element of the tax package, that's fine by me.

T'ain't the Obama Administration that brung this recession on.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 12, posted (6 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2698 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
This is BS, even if we didn't have the crisis we have now he would have still flipped on this promise for the companies would have fled this country or subbed their work out of the country, in turn costing many jobs to be lost.

Sorry, but after you and your co-ideologues have been in charge since (at least!) the Reagan era and have managed to lead the world economy into the worst crash since the Great Depression, you have a really hard time of convincing anyone that a departure from your grandiosely failed ideology would be even worse.

Sorry, but the emperor is naked, and before giving advice on the economy you'd be well advised to get some new clothes so people can listen to you with a straight face.  mischievous 


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2678 times:



Quoting Klaus (Reply 13):
Sorry, but after you and your co-ideologues have been in charge since (at least!) the Reagan era and have managed to lead the world economy into the worst crash since the Great Depression

Oh please, the idiots like Barney Frank and the Dem congress are more to blame than Bush. You can't blame the guy for the economy. It's mostly the people's fault. We just kept borrowing with no way to pay it back and our car companies kept making crap cars while the Japanese made better cars for half the price now everyone wants a handout. Not Bush's fault.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 14, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2663 times:

Good deal. I always felt the talk of throwing the tax code at those considered "wealthy" was a stupid thing anyhow.

Once people realize yes its those folks that earn >$250,000 or run businesses are a key component of any economy its simply dumb to take money out of their pockets which would get invested back anyhow in the economy. Taxing simply robs people of those dollars that could go towards consumption or business investment and employment that these folks very much help create.

While I am no fan of Obama, I certainly hope he realizes he needs to lead the country down a centrist path if he wishes to succeed.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2663 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14):
Not Bush's fault.

His watch. His choices at Treasury. His power of veto.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8472 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2661 times:

Let's face it - no one really knows how bad things are going to get. Every time new economic numbers come out economists (and the market) say "Oh, $hit!".

Every national politician is looking towards sound advice on what is needed this month, or this even week.

I believe that Obama will respond with a bit more vigor than Bush, but we're looking at a problem that won't be solved in 3 to 6 months. Deferring the tax increase at the top level doesn't bother me, just as it won't bother me when he raises it to the same level set by Ronald Reagan. Surely conservatives won't complain about a Reagan tax level for those making over a quarter of a million a year.

At some point Obama is going to need to look at tax revenues, but right now he needs to look at spending money to generate jobs. Personally I like the idea of a WPA type of program to improve our infrastructure. We actually get something out of the spending that we can use and jobs are created.

Right now, though, Bush is still in charge. It's his job to address the problems of the Big 3 auto makers, the crisis at major banks like Citi, and the level of economic stimulus that is needed now.

Obama doesn't count for another 2 months and things could change dramatically by the time he takes office.


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2652 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 18):
His watch. His choices at Treasury. His power of veto.

Oh yea, l forgot every bad mortage went across his desk as well as every bad decision at GM. Give me a break.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2653 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 11):
So now you are saying it is a deferral, not a broken promise? Funny that.

I sure missed the "promise" that:

a. The entire $700 billion would even be released
b. The entire $700 billion would be released immediately

It was understood from the very beginning that the Bailout assistance would be distributed incrementally. No broken promises.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 11):
Why would I agree to that? It was presented as a matter of urgency. Look at what happened the first time Congress knocked it back.

It was urgent, and a quarter-trillion dollars have gone out the door of the Treasury in a little over a month! Do you think it is at all responsible to use all $700 billion in one blow? Releasing the money over time on a case-by-case basis allows the market to respond and will result in bailout funds being allocated much more efficiently.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 11):
If these formidable economists are now suggesting a deferral of one element of the tax package, that's fine by me.

And like I said in my first post, I'll be glad to see it happen.

The point is, it would still constitute a broken campaign promise. One of the biggest faults of the Bush administration was the apparent inability to admit mistakes. I don't see why Obama and his supporters should be held to a different standard, especially if he is truly the self-anointed pioneer of a "new style of politics."


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2642 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 20):
Oh yea, l forgot every bad mortage went across his desk as well as every bad decision at GM. Give me a break.

If you are going to absolve the President - any President - of all responsibility, for almost everything, can we hope that you will extend the same courtesy to the President-elect?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 20, posted (6 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2639 times:



Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14):
Oh please, the idiots like Barney Frank and the Dem congress are more to blame than Bush. You can't blame the guy for the economy. It's mostly the people's fault. We just kept borrowing with no way to pay it back and our car companies kept making crap cars while the Japanese made better cars for half the price now everyone wants a handout. Not Bush's fault.

I'm talking of you and the economical ideology you are peddling here.

Trying to deflect Bush's co-responsibility for the state of affairs from him is just par for the course within a much bigger picture. That is the trouble with pure ideology: When it fails, it fails big!


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8974 posts, RR: 39
Reply 21, posted (6 years 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2581 times:

Classic Keynesian. Increase government spending, cut taxes, all to prop up spending and to hell with deficits. We had this too for the last 8 years.

One thing he might change though is the stimulus checks policy. People are using it to pay off debt instead of going out and spending, which is a good thing, but not what the theory calls for.

Big problem is whether the rest of the world will continue lending to the U.S. Government.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineYellowstone From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3071 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (6 years 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2546 times:

Mariner's got it when he points out that this is a deferral. The tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010. In his campaign, Obama said that he would push to end the tax cuts in early 2009, and it is true that he has backed off on that plan, because he believes the government needs to pump money into the economy at this point to help the economic crisis. But I haven't seen anything suggesting that he would extend the tax cuts beyond 2010.


Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 4 weeks ago) and read 2478 times:



Quoting ACDC8 (Reply 27):
So whats the difference between Obama and pretty well every other politician around?

Well judging by how MSNBC and CNN act he is the next coming of Christ when he turned out to be just another politico saying anything to get votes. The thread starter drove that point home.

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 30):
Mariner's got it when he points out that this is a deferral. The tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010. In his campaign, Obama said that he would push to end the tax cuts in early 2009, and it is true that he has backed off on that plan, because he believes the government needs to pump money into the economy at this point to help the economic crisis. But I haven't seen anything suggesting that he would extend the tax cuts beyond 2010.

I will give him two years and I will stilll bet he renegs on it. He can't possibly start punishing business to pay for his welfare programs. We will lose too many companies to countries that don't tax businesses to death and lose a ton of jobs too. Trust me he lied to get the lower class all riled up and on his side.


User currently offlineFruteBrute From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2452 times:

Funniest thread I've read in a week. Gotta love the hate spewers already going into apoplexy when Obama is still 8 weeks away from even becoming the President.

Personally, I think he's doing the incredibly intelligent thing. Bush, fortunately in this case, was a moron about the tax cuts. They put the sunset clause or phase out clause in the original tax cuts. Guess what? They were sold as "temporary tax cuts" by the Bushies and expire Dec. 31st 2010. They automatically revert to their old rates on their own, with no legislative action needed. Even if Obama made it one of his top priorities by the time he is sworn in and can get a bill thru Congress the soonest he could have probably enacted this raise was Jan. 1st 2010. Hmmmmm, which is smarter? Spend political capital and a great deal of time tying up Congress and taking political heat for raising taxes in 2012, or simply wait an additional 12 months for the problem to fix itself without spending a dime of your political capital? This frees him up and the Congress up to work on other issues.

Besides.... if there are actually any Republicans left in Congress in 2010 and 2012 that originally voted for the tax deal in the first place the Democrats can target them, and use campaign ads saying, "Senator Neo-Con voted to increase your taxes!" Which would be true. They did vote for the bill that increase the taxes starting on Jan. 2011.

I love it! Obama is doing great, and making great choices and it just burns those chicken littles that were all squawking that Obama was a leftist, Socialist, Communist, and yet every decision that he's talked about so far prove he's a centrist.

[Edited 2008-11-23 18:25:49]

25 Post contains links DXing : Fox news? Who the hell believes what they say? This is just getting better by the minute. The tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010 whether he doe
26 WunalaYann : But you and everybody else on this forum is much too smart to take MSNBC and CNN's propaganda at face value, correct? Bugger, you beat me to it, amig
27 NIKV69 : Yea the same ones McCain would have made and completely 180 degrees from what he said in his campaign. Le't see, talk to countries about our problems
28 FruteBrute : Meh. And Obama is the President-elect. McCain lost. What McCain promised or said at this point is meaningless, as his Presidential ambitions have sai
29 Mt99 : Hmm interesting.. care to elaborate on this?
30 Bok269 : Are you guys really getting up in arms over the fact that Obama MIGHT CONSIDER DELAYING a policy?
31 Mt99 : They are getting up in arms, because unlike some people who blindly "stay the course" Obama doesn't have horse blinders on and realizes that policies
32 Post contains links FruteBrute : No, the Republicans are just so bitter about being decimated in this last election they can't see straight. Two days after the election Drug Limbaugh
33 Mariner : Know the enemy. I watch Fox a lot (well, not Hannity or the self-serving Dick Morris), but the only news that I believe is al-Jazeera. However, in th
34 DfwRevolution : Elaborate on what? The news? The collapse of the credit markets in September and the initiation of the Bailout package in October overshadow any of t
35 Mt99 : You made the claim first. Burden of proof is on you buddy.
36 Post contains links Mariner : Since my post included a reply to a deleted post, it was deleted, too. So - I have to repost my response to you. I don't think anyone imagined he woul
37 Post contains links DXing : Not really, I'm laughing all the way to the bank. I'm also laughing at all those here, well some of them have yet to chime in like Falcon, who were a
38 Mariner : I still don't understand your point. I've given my opinion: And if we're going to apply similar standards - as DfwRevolution wants - of holding polit
39 MAH4546 : Hopefully he realizes that the tax cuts for the high income earners need to become permanent.
40 Aaron747 : Ya'll are forgetting the reverse irony - which is that, contrary to what Limbaugh and Hannity wanted to scaremonger their audience into believing, the
41 Bok269 : If by greens you mean a couple of bloggers who are completely clueless to the requirements of building a secure vehicle for the president and the pro
42 DfwRevolution : Oh, I didn't realize this was a courtroom. Staff, please don't hold me in contempt. I've made 4 constructed posts and thoroughly elaborated upon them
43 Mt99 : Your claim was made on your second post with a total of 68 words before it - and with nothing of value after. Palin spews more than 500/minute and do
44 NIKV69 : Yes he is, his record up this point shows it and he is just flipping now so he doesn't get laughed out of office. Is neither wise or experienced but
45 DXing : My point is and has been that according to campaigner Obama the rich were getting an unfair break in the lower amount they were being taxed by Bush t
46 Mariner : I understand the principle - and I agree with it as a concept. To me, it is not only the socially responsible thing, it is also the decent thing to d
47 OA412 : Do you even know what a Socialist is?
48 Bok269 : And in doing so not renew them...its the same thing. Point is, there is no evidence to suggest that come January 20, 2013, whether Barack Obama is be
49 DXing : We will have to agree to disagree on this point since I feel it is not the governments responsibility, or even charge, to take wealth disproportinate
50 WunalaYann : Maybe his record up to this point as a senator shows one thing (I trust your information on this). Sitting in the White House and being in charge is
51 Mariner : You've lost me there. You're reading into it something that I do not believe exists. However, and for the record, not the least part of the problem i
52 DXing : If, as campaigner Obama did what he said he was going to do upon taking office, i.e. repeal the Bush tax cuts, make the wealthy pay more while at the
53 Seb146 : You Bush apologists are unbelievable! The only thing you all saw out of that whole article is "Obama...keep tax breaks for the rich." None of you saw
54 DXing : You Obama supporters are as well. I never said that. As a matter of fact I have appluaded his seeing the light. I just brought up the fact that this
55 NIKV69 : He said that as a way of trying to placate the lower and middle care when he promised them free health care which he and everyone with half a brain k
56 Seb146 : Iraq would be my first guess. Corporations would be my second guess. But none of you conservatives even saw the word "MAY" even though you typed it i
57 Mariner : This has all been answered so many times, I feel as if I'm just wasting my time. If you are looking for ideological purity, I doubt you are going to
58 Post contains links WunalaYann : China came frighteningly close to it during the effing Cultural effing Revolution. Most economists and sociologists seem to agree that this is the cl
59 DXing : I don't see President-elect Obama as a centrist. As I said above, the current fiscal crisis has probably saved us from some of the more outlandish pr
60 LAXintl : Listen, I'm was not an Obama supporter, but the election is over and the conditions of the country has changed also. Whether he is moving off a campa
61 WunalaYann : Same here, no Obama fan, and I share you views on how the situation has changed. I guess this is a special day as I find myself agreeing with the ent
62 Post contains links and images Mariner : Then we disagree at the very core of the debate. Everything he has done has been centrist. You mean left-wingers should be upset. Some of them are. W
63 DXing : And I maintain that the fiscal crisis has forced that. It's not been done by choice based on the policies he campaigned on. I don't know, you continu
64 Mariner : I don't know of any halfway-decent ideologue who would be swayed by circumstance. Maggie Thatcher forced the circumstances to suit her, to her ideolo
65 WunalaYann : Same here. And I agree with the Lexington column in last week's edition just as wholeheartedly. I wonder if we will be able to find much praise for t
66 DXing : No, rarely if ever does an outgoing administration carry much praise with it if there is even a hint of trouble. I don't think I remember even one.
67 Bok269 : That was a double negative on my part. Point is, there is nothing to suggest that the reversal of the tax cuts won't happen, other than a rumor that
68 Mariner : They've never been shy of political comment. There was a famous Economist front page about President Clinton at around the time of the impeachment: "
69 Post contains links Mariner : And just as fun footnote, the UK government has just hiked the tax rates on the rich: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f...ise-adds-to-high-earners-
70 DXing : As I said earlier, if one advisor had come out and floated the idea it might just be that, his idea. Since two adivsors came out on the same day on d
71 Post contains links Aaron747 : Other than the coming L-shaped recession, if not extended period of global deflation. Well it doesn't really matter now, does it? Obama huffed up a c
72 NIKV69 : Cop out, even if the economy was good he wouldn't deliver on his promise. If he taxes businesses or upperclass it would be a disaster as the business
73 WunalaYann : And you know that from...?
74 Bok269 : That still doesn't mean that the hike won't occur, but simply that he may wait for the economy to recover.
75 DXing : Whether the economy recovers or not those tax cuts, all of them to include the middle class, are set to expire Dec 31, 2010 unless the Congress and t
76 Post contains links DXing : The tag line of this article sums up President-elect Obama's situation as now very nicely. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081125/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_ec
77 NIKV69 : Be here in 2 or 3 years and we will go over each one of Obama's actions while President. I would be williling to be most if not all with be night and
78 Seb146 : I guess no jobs have been moved overseas yet? I guess all those unemployment numbers are because people left their jobs of their own accord? See, thi
79 Ken777 : Obama has made it clear that he won't be able to do everything on Day One. Increasing the top tax rate may be delayed a bit, but I have no doubt that
80 FlyPNS1 : I know lots of liberals, but I don't know a single-one that believed Obama would solve all their financial ills, so I doubt people will be upset, but
81 RayChuang : Actually, I blame the Federal income tax system for a majority of the economic mess here in the USA. Consider the following: 1) We have 35,000 lobbyis
82 Dougloid : Yep. Once again you are right Klaus. The right in this country resembles a chicken with its head cut off that hasn't yet figured out that it's dead.
83 DXing : Does that mean the Paul Volcker wasn't the best choice of the week?
84 Post contains links DXing : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI Now you do.
85 Falcon84 : God, just wait till he gets into office. All the disgruntled righties on here are going to be going ape. Fortunately, I believe, they'll be even more
86 DXing : And how much is that going to cost us?
87 MarSciGuy : You do realize you could probably find a Youtube video to back up just about any possible claim, bogus or otherwise, right?
88 Seb146 : Not our integrity, that's for sure. "Let's throw away the goodwill of the entire planet and invade a nation that has nothing to do with anything! Let
89 Falcon84 : It's going to cost A LOT, DXing. Sorry, but no matter who had won this election, he was faced with sobering prospects on this economy. This meltdown
90 Seb146 : But, you have to understand from their point of view: Instead of "Let's just suck it up and see how this party does" they are used to deamonizing eve
91 DXing : Sure but that one is dead on target for how a lot of those voters feel. He has no one to blame but himself based on what he was saying during the cam
92 Falcon84 : Wrong. That's just pure delusion . It ISN'T going to be easy; it isn't going to be painless; and it probably will get a little worse before it gets b
93 DXing : I'd love to hear how you reconile that line. If you think the housing credit problems started in the last 8 years then you are blind. Paul Volker is
94 Falcon84 : It started with this sub-prime loan mess, and that started within the last 8 years. So, yes, I do think that's when it started. FDR saved this Republ
95 Pyrex : Don't forget, 9/11 happened under Bush's watch, with his choice for National Security Advisor. I am sure 9/11 is Bush's fault as well.
96 Falcon84 : No, it's not. And it should not be seen as "his fault". It was "our fault", as a nation, for a number of years, for denying that such a huge attack c
97 Pyrex : No argument with you there.
98 DXing : If you really believe that then you don't understand economics and maybe that is why wealthy people upset you so much, because they do. I suggest you
99 Seb146 : Which means......? Let me translate: Raising taxes and that this mess will not fix itself overnight. Which is what Obama and the Democrats have been
100 Post contains images DXing : Incorrect translation but not one unexpected from a liberal. And that is not what what the democratic party and soon to be President Elect Obama have
101 Seb146 : I mention taking care of our own and immediatly Communism comes into the picture. Not Sweden, Denmark, or Canada, but Cuba. Funny. Really? So: Does n
102 Luckyone : The last two elections seem to have been decided IMHO by the idiots who take the rhetoric spewed by the political windbags as concrete and prophetic a
103 DXing : Hey, it's the workers paradise and most closely fits the things you were ticking off that the United States needs to emulate. No, it means people liv
104 PPVRA : True, even Keynesians tend to agree that long-term the classical view (i.e., the much maligned "trickle down") is appropriate.[Edited 2008-12-01 18:2
105 Seb146 : Ah... here's where we get down to it: When the Republicans took over, everyone was doing well. Everyone was doing well enough that these "sub prime m
106 DXing : No they weren't. In 1995 we were still rebounding from the recession of 92-93. Remember "it's the economy stupid"? In 2001 we were again in a recessi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Bush Tax Cuts Are A Boon For The Wealthy posted Wed Apr 5 2006 15:54:07 by Falcon84
Beware What You Ask For, You May Be Surprised posted Sat Aug 16 2008 12:49:34 by Oly720man
Damn Those Tax Cuts...... posted Sun Jan 14 2007 02:41:35 by RJdxer
Tax Cuts posted Thu May 4 2006 14:51:36 by Pope
Tax Breaks For SUV's posted Sun Feb 19 2006 03:23:27 by EWROwznj00
Tax Relief For Katrina Victims posted Thu Sep 15 2005 21:29:00 by AeroWesty
We Need More Tax Cuts... posted Tue Mar 22 2005 23:50:23 by N5176Y
U.S. Economy Grows! Thanks, Tax Cuts. posted Wed Oct 27 2004 22:44:20 by Dl021
I Guess The Tax-cuts Must Be Working... posted Thu Jul 29 2004 01:06:04 by Dan-air
Gephardt To Eliminate Tax Cuts, In Favor Of..... posted Thu Apr 24 2003 02:01:22 by Jcs17