TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS

TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS TAX CUTS

ENOUGH!!! THEY DONT WORK!!! THATS WHAT GOT US HERE!!!

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:rofl:

:spray:

there with some I saw on the "Chimpmunks meet Jenna Jameson" thread at KOS. And that's saying something.

that he will add more tax cuts IF they can bring him ANY credible evidence of tax cuts creating jobs.

Not just an assertion, but bring him evidence.

That should just about end the discussion and show the Rethuglican's for the empty suits they are.

Tax Cuts=Jobs has been the mantra for the past 28 years but without much basis in reality. I would love to see an example of a business that took the extra money provided by tax cuts and actually created good paying AMERICAN-BASED jobs with benefits and if they do manage to show us that it actually works, I'd like to know why so few jobs have actually been created over the past 28 years (the 1990's notwithstanding).

OK, we'll give 100 billion more in tax cuts, but we have to cut out $100 Billion spending, STARTING IN TEXAS...

as long as corporations and wealthy individuals were actually already paying what they legitimately owe. Unfortunately, as we all know, some corporations and wealthy individuals do some "fuzzy math" and take advantage of the upward-tilted tax cuts already in existence so as to get even more (undeserved) money for themselves. I think that Obama and the Democrats need to condition any future tax cuts to corporations and/or wealthy individuals paying what they rightfully and legitimately owe the government-their "fair share". It's almost hysterical to hear the rich complain about their taxes being too high when they're not even paying what they rightfully owe to begin with.

over the nearly 30 years that had to do it since Reagan took office? They were in power for all that time, yet here we are 30 years later and they still haven't cut taxes down to the bare minimum.

Were they screwing Americans for the past 30 years? Or is it just possible that tax cuts aren't the answer for EVERY situation the nation finds itself in?

though you are quite right that they haven't worked (and i agree that it wont work this time either), the theory is that having a one time windfall of money doesnt cause a change of spending habit. the new plan calls for changing the tax brackets so that you now have more money left over on an ongoing basis, the hope being that you will feel able to order than new whatever. (and you would be able to, actually)

so, it _may_ do something, at least it has a more rational sound to it. i also like the idea of individual people deciding how to stimulate the economy rather than govt. officials spending it for us. i mean, that's another thing that also DOESNT WORK and WHAT GOT US HERE!!!

all of it is a big money grab imo. the housing bubble was just a crazy greed-fest and the only real solution to it is time and work. people rebuild, corporations rebuild...adding a mountain of new debt only adds to the pain. this whole emergency bailout is going down exactly like the invasion of Iraq. i think a small number of people will make out like bandits on it and the rest of us get to pay for it.

http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/legislation?id=0273#tax

:shrug:

this is how it was being sold up till now, not sure what language is in the final bill however. i just googled this, January 23, 2009 , similar to what i've been reading in various places;

"Obama has proposed a $500-per-worker tax break, the first stage of the middle-class tax cut he promised during his campaign.

The Republican counterproposal centers on a reduction of the two lowest marginal tax brackets -- the 10 percent bracket for the first $8,350 in income and 15 percent for the first $33,950. That means that all taxpayers who owe taxes would get roughly a $500 tax cut, or $1,000 for a married couple. There would be no phase-out for higher income earners.

Democrats argue that the GOP approach does nothing to help Americans who don't owe income taxes. About 40 million Americans file tax returns but have too little income to pay any taxes. Senate Democrats' plan would extend a $300, one-time bonus benefit to Social Security recipients."

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/38254854.html?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUHPYDiaK7DUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

but i'm just now noticing that this article claims it is a GOP proposal to do it that way, i thought it sounded smart so maybe i've assumed it was an Obaman idea. that's depressing, just handing everyone a $500 dollar check is indeed a failed experiment. have you read the exact language as it stands today? what is the plan?

maybe i'll read it to my daughter each night for the next 3 months, since she'll be paying for it!

from your link:

"The Make Work Pay Tax Cut provides immediate and sustained tax relief to 95 percent of American workers through a refundable tax credit of up to $500 per worker ($1,000 per couple filing jointly), phasing out at $200,000 for couples filing jointly and $100,000 for single filers. These tax cuts would be distributed to millions of families by reducing tax withholding from workers’ paychecks."

reducing the withholding is what i was referring to. (tax brackets may be the wrong wording, i'm referring to the chart of withholding). though Obama did talk quite a lot in the campaign about adjusting the brackets/percentages as well, as an aside.

point is that it's money in each paycheck as opposed to one time payouts. small but could shift perceptions, which is the scheme. (i'm still not buying it)

a tax cut doesn't help you.

WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON
WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON WE WON

They need to have someone remind them that they fucking lost and we won.

8 fucking years of tax relief and look where the hell we are.

I was barely tax relief - it was all essentially cuts. The tax cuts of the last eight years went to the rich. The items in the stimulus bill are aimed at the middle class, and are actual tax RELIEF.

To reiterate: Tax items in stimulus bill aimed at THE MIDDLE CLASS. Some of these are what President Obama CAMPAIGNED UPON.

President Obama proposed $500-per-worker tax break is more beneficial than the Republican proposed reduction of the two lowest marginal tax brackets. That is because:
A) Obama is using his proposal to sell the rest of the stimulus while including a form of "tax cut" expecting some republicans to buy in.
B) The $500-per-worker tax break MIGHT instigate some businesses to hire workers.
c) Obama main stimulus is the non "tax cut" portion of the proposal. These include infrastructure developments etc. These are jobs that are targeted heavily towards the lowest income individuals (although architects, engineers, and other such professionals, to a smaller extent, will also be employed). These individuals will be having jobs instead of being "told" to go out and spend money which most likely might not be spent out of their fear of being jobless.
D) The republicans dont care for the well being of the lower income earners who they consider mindless spenders. They dont realize that these people also have ambitions and work hard for the little they have. Thoughts such as these easily evade a republicans mind.

Or would you like to have Obama back out on his promises of tax cuts?

The promises he's been making for the last two years or so?

:P