Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 142
  1. #11  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_781992.html



    That damn Marxist.

    Where will this socialist nightmare end?!
    For those that do not pay Income taxes, there is no skin off their ass. Is that you?
    Stupid liberals that think we do not pay enough taxes can always include a donation to the Treasury when they file. Did you know that, dummkopf?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    8,814
    And now they are backtracking on this Wei.

    How Far will the White House Compromise on the Bush Tax Cuts?
    November 11, 2010 10:01 AM <-- Note, Less then two hours ago!


    White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod is giving further indication that the White House may be ready to cede ground to Republicans on the issue of extending the Bush tax cuts -- but only to a certain extent.

    The tax cuts enacted in the early years of the Bush administration are set to expire at the end of the year if Congress does not act. President Obama has urged Congress to extend the tax cuts for all Americans, except for the top 2 percent of income earners. Letting the tax cuts lapse for the top 2 percent would save the government $700 billion over the next 10 years, the president has repeatedly argued....


    Axelrod reiterated to the Washington Post's Greg Sargent, "Our two strong principles are that we need to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, but we can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy."

    White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer tried to downplay the Huffington Post article, telling Sargent that the article was "overwritten."

    He added, "Nothing has changed from what the president said last week."
    http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A2KJ3CfaHt...90-503544.html

    So nothing has changed at all, save Axelrod shoving his foot in the Presidents mouth again and now the WH has to backtrack out of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Zoomie djones520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ft. Campbell
    Posts
    10,220
    Axelrod, who confirmed to Fox News comments he made to The Huffington Post, suggested that the administration is ready to accept an across-the-board continuation of current tax rates, marking a turnaround from the White House's pre-midterm election stance on impending tax increases.

    "We have to deal with the world as we find it," he said. However, Axelrod made clear to Fox News the White House is not conceding a permanent extension for the top 2 percent of earners.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...come-tax-cuts/

    The confusion here is a permanent extension. It's going to be across the board temporary extension.
    In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

    In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by djones520 View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...come-tax-cuts/

    The confusion here is a permanent extension. It's going to be across the board temporary extension.
    It goes further then that if you read it.

    Repubs. want an across the board extension of tax cuts for every one, making them all perm. The WH wants them Perm for every one save the top 2%. They want those to expire. Your snipe of Axelrod says that "the White House is not conceding" on the GOPs demands on cross the board extensions, and he is not coming out and saying they are looking at giving in on the top 2% ether. Just saying that the situation has changed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,741
    yeah...because they know that top 2% pay 50+% of the taxes in this country and just want to leach more money out of them. The New GOP in the House need to take steps at pushing a restructured Tax structure, simplified or completely gotten rid of. The Senate may stop them, but if Boehnner can get the House to pass it with as big of a Majority as possible and get the People behind it, Obama and the Senate wont have much of a choice unless they are stupid enough to kill it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by fettpett View Post
    yeah...because they know that top 2% pay 50+% of the taxes in this country and just want to leach more money out of them. The New GOP in the House need to take steps at pushing a restructured Tax structure, simplified or completely gotten rid of. The Senate may stop them, but if Boehnner can get the House to pass it with as big of a Majority as possible and get the People behind it, Obama and the Senate wont have much of a choice unless they are stupid enough to kill it.
    During the most rapid expansion of the middle class in history, in the 50's (the "good ol days" the elderly likes to reminisce about) the top tax bracket was taxed at around 90%, and now they are screaming and crying that 35% is socialist takeovers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    8,446
    I see you conveniently failed to reply to my earlier post here, WWW. How unsurprising.
    "The efforts of the government alone will never be enough. In the end the people must choose and the people must help themselves" ~ JFK; from his famous inauguration speech (What Democrats sounded like before today's neo-Liberals hijacked that party)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member malloc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Queen Creek, AZ
    Posts
    2,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    During the most rapid expansion of the middle class in history, in the 50's (the "good ol days" the elderly likes to reminisce about) the top tax bracket was taxed at around 90%, and now they are screaming and crying that 35% is socialist takeovers?

    Again, something we've gone over at length, and you still haven't learned economic history. How can you spout the same talking points off over and over after being repeatedly proven wrong?

    Really, it's just pathetic.
    "In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived."
    —Thomas Paine, Common Sense
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    1,619
    Letting the tax cuts lapse for the top 2 percent would save the government $700 billion over the next 10 years, the president has repeatedly argued....

    The more honest, and correct way to say this is..."Grabbing more money from the top 2 percent would allow the government to take in and spend $700 billion over the next ten years,...."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Lager View Post
    The more honest, and correct way to say this is..."Grabbing more money from the top 2 percent would allow the government to take in and spend $700 billion over the next ten years,...."
    Funny part is, dems keep snipping about the 800 billion from the top 2%, claiming that we can't afford to keep that tax break, completely not talking about the 3.1 Trillion that the rest get. As some how 800 Billion is a budget breaker, but 3.1 Trillion is pocket change.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •