Reply #8: No, [View All]

"These tax cuts go against everything that is in our best interest."

The tax cuts for the rich do, and the biggest complaint against them is they are unneccessary and will add to the deficit.

In fact, had the middle class tax cuts been made permanent they would have added $1.4 trillion more to the debt over ten years compared with the tax cuts for the rich.

Rich people shouldn't be given a tax cuts.

Still, the purpose of this deal on the Democratic side was to extend relief to millions of low-income, middle-class and unemployed Americans.

Why is that being ignored in favor of no deal? Why is the tiny change in the amount to low-income Americans being hyped as a real negative in relation to no deal?

No deal, letting the tax cuts expire, would have been a much bigger burden on low-income Americans and not good for the economy.