White House Gives In On Bush-Era Tax Cuts

lol at that... If I don't have that money, I don't get to create those jobs. If the government repeals the tax cuts and take more of our money, we don't get to create those jobs. It really is that simple.

Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty ***' fee.
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?

who said you wouldn't have any money?

how much are these tax cuts exactly?
I don't really know much about the subject but saying that you being a "wealthy individual" wouldn't have money is silly at best.
so let's just make up a hypothetical since you like those...we'll be using hell a church tax rate at best..10%

let's say you have a million...they take what 100k?
so you still have 900k

let's say you are a billionaire
that's 100 million
you still have what?
900 million.
you can't be serious man.
I think the reason I hate arguing about taxes is that I just never really know this magic invisible number that everyone likes to *** about that they haven't even experienced yet.

I thought everyone already knew that basically all news stations were biased especially a certain well known one *cough*fox*cough*

I'm sorry but your logic just doesn't flow, how does depriving me of that 10% help me invest and create jobs?

The argument isn't "if you take money from me i wont have any money." The argument is "I can put my money to better use than you can."

Been watching too much Faux News again?

Why haven't you been creating jobs already then?

So all of a sudden now if you don't get your *** tax cuts, you won't create jobs that you haven't been creating already? All of a sudden now if you do get the tax cuts you going to start creating jobs with money you already have? (cuts haven't expired yet so you still have the money)

Defecit wise:

G.W. Bush 2000-2008: 5.6 to 10.7 in 8 years
Math definitely must be hard for you, because that's 5.1 Trillion in 8 years

Obama 2008-2010 10.7 to 13.7 = 3 Trillion in 2 years

Nobody has been creating jobs over the past 6 years with the tax cuts already in effect. In fact we've been losing them. In case you didn't know we lost more jobs during the median (middle) era of the tax cuts.

So now by extending them, by doing the same thing we should expect different results now?

Stay the Course! Do the exact same thing you've been doing and expect different results! Definitely sound logic.

Why don't you invest in the government?
They protect your wealth.
The tax rate in 2001, pre-bush tax cuts was 33% for the wealthy.
so that's a 33% investment to secure your wealthy and ensure that you are being "protected"
You can say that the wealthy pay more taxes in one hand...but you see you pay for what services you get.
The government is a system that actually facilitated you becoming wealthy.

Not just a republican, but a proud Tea Party member. So expect lots of sanity.

you're assuming that they'll reinvest their money here, ever hear of outsourcing? they won't continue to keep their money here, you're delusional of you think they will.

I'll agree the man needs to grow a set.

They won't answer the simple question of why haven't they been creating jobs with the tax cuts in the past already.

Watch them avoid this question. They just spout off fail trickle down theories.

oh they just part of that reason, whatever the reasons are, they obviously haven't been doing what they thought they would. To continue such a ridiculous thing so the rich *** can keep more of the wealth they obtain is absurd.

outsourcing, tax deduction, land ownership
they tax you on your profit, so lets say you make 100 million a year
with the 33% tax rate that's 33million they'd "take away", does this make you not rich anymore?
are they taking away the money that you have already invested?
you didn't make this money on your own, you made it by the help of others, so why must you then think that this game has to be fair?
the rich live in luxury, the poor do not of course...but this is a symbiotic relationship.
you should know this as good as i do.
one dies and they both are in worse shape than before so something needs to happen since as you guys *** all the time we are in trillions of dollar of debt...and guess what? the poor man can't bail you out when the US gets invaded if it happens to collapse and they take all your wealth.
You pay for the services provided.

lol

2000 5,628.7
2008 9,985.8 (that's more like 4.3 trillion over 8 years)
2010 13,724.0 (as of Nov 2nd) (that's pretty close to 3.8)

I'd say my math is just fine.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all sir.

i was just extending your statement so to speak.

word.

You guys see that! LOL! Zandra totally avoids the question about why haven't the tax cuts have been creating jobs already.

Tax cuts haven't been creating jobs for the past 6 years, but all of a sudden now they will.

Well okay then...

Hypothetically, lets pretend that the Bush Tax Cuts would not be extended. So everyone is taxed at a pre-2003 rate again. According to the:

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001
~and~
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003

That's anywhere between 2-6% increase depending on which bracket your family falls into.

I am trying to understand your stance in this conversation. Are you stating you want the Bush Tax Cuts to expire, which in turn raises the Income Tax for all households? If so, why would anyone want to raise taxes in an economy like this and what do you think would happen to the economy if these tax cuts were allowed to expire?

When you take money from the working it stagnates growth depending on how much is taken. If you reduce taxes it doesn't help the government offset the debt with revenue which is also bad. There needs to be a balance and it seems to me that when the economy is in bad shape you loosen the noose around businesses and families so they can invest and promote growth. When the economy is booming then the government should be able to bring back some higher taxes and pay down the debt before the next economic cycle comes.

It's the reason why the government gave out stimulus with Tax returns for two years straight because they knew that putting money in the hands of the tax payer promotes growth.

It's the reason why the government lowered the Federal Reserve Rate to its lowest in 70 years, dropping from 6& in January of 2001 to 0.25% in December 7 years later because they knew that the economy wasn't improving and that lowering the Fed rate would promote lending and borrowing.

There are other actions that the government has taken that I don't agree with. Bailouts for Chrysler for example. That was shady stuff there. Perhaps some congressman had $$$ in Chrysler stock and voted to bail them out. Who knows but I don't agree with buying and bailing out companies by our government.

Perhaps those against the extension are paranoid with an Act being extended that contains the name "Bush" in it. If we just renamed it "The Obama Tax Cuts of 2010" and it contained the same exact provisions would you be okay with extending it?

If you're HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE, then yeah.


12/31/2008: 10,699,804,864,612.13

It's called http://www.treasurydirect.gov will give you the exact amount.

Tax cuts to the middle class is fine, but to the rich, let them expire

Obama pussied out. But really if he didn't agree to the whole thing, the party of NO wouldn't have let any of the cuts be extended. Which he would have taken the blame for anyway.

Well... the simplest answer I can give you is that there are many more things that affect the economy aside from tax cuts. Don't you agree? Or are you really saying that the only thing that affects job growth are tax cuts?

To your other claims, they were started in 2001, we've had very high employment till about the 2nd half of 2008. So that's 6.5 years of a positive job environment and 2 years of an awful environment. Not 6 years of an awful environment like you claim.

I just don't understand why the wealthy thinks it has to be fair.
If the poor had the money to afford increased taxes on the in line with the wealthy do you think it's fair that the poor have to scrape along to make a living?
Or do you think the people that have immense wealth.
This shouldn't be a game of what's fair or not.
It should be a game of what will fix the economy?
pushing our majority further into debt or taxing billionaires a bit more to decrease overall debt?
Do you think that decreasing the overall debt won't encourage profit for your businesses and the way you make a living?
Will a tax increase lower your quality of life?
Or are you just being selfish?

HAHAHAHAHA this cracks me up

1) It assumes that if we give them more of our money they will spend it to reduce the deficit, instead of some other big government program.

2) It makes the ridiculous claim that my keeping some of my OWN money (that I earned by myself btw, no one earned it for me), is somehow selfish.

3) How about before I give them anymore money they promise to stop spending it on dumb wasteful things.

Why don't you tell me why you think you are entitled to the money I earn?

I love statements like:

Like that's not hard to fact check?

Or


Cause 3 Trillion is = 5.1 Trillion

They're nearly the same number, lol!

So you went out and earned every dollar by your self?
what a joke.