Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

As of January 1, 2011........How might you personally be affected taxwise without a deal?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:30 PM
Original message
As of January 1, 2011........How might you personally be affected taxwise without a deal?
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 12:14 AM by FrenchieCat
Do you know?

If not, here's some info on the Federal tax regulations with no deal,
effective as of 01/01/2011:


Top tax bracket goes up for top tax bracket from 35% to 39.5%, which is a 13% increase.

The 33% bracket rises to 36%, which is a 9% increase

The 28% bracket rises to 31%, which is a 11% increase

The 25% bracket rises to 28%, which is a 12% increase

The bottom tax rate for those in the 10% tax bracket goes up to 15%, which is a 50% increase.




2011 Tax Bracket table

-------------Married Filing ----------Jointly Single
15% Bracket $0 – $70,040 ----------$0 – $35,020
28% Bracket $70,040 – $141,419 ----$35,020 – $84,872
31% Bracket $141,419 – $215,528 ---$84,872 – $177,006
36% Bracket $215,528 – $384,860--- $177,006 – $384,860
39.6% Bracket Over $384,860 --------Over $384,860
http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2010/02/15/2011-federal-income-tax-brackets-irs-income-tax-rates/




Additional Changes in the following Tax credit provisions and other write offs,

The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. For those filing jointly, the tax credit begins to phase out at $110,000 (AGI) and for taxpayers completing a single tax return at $75,000.

The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level.

The dependent care tax credit will be cut.

Earned Income Tax Credit Reduced for Some – This is a tax credit for low-income working families with earned income less than or equal to $48,362. The income limits on this credit vary by your filing status and by the number of children you claim as dependents. In 2011, EITC to decrease for families with three or more children with higher income phase outs eliminated.

Adoption tax credits will be cut.

Making Work Pay Tax Credit eliminated – tax credit for 6.2% of earned income with a maximum credit of $400 for single filers and $800 for married couples.

The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available.

Hope Tax Credit Changed – This tax credit goes back to being only applicable for the first 2 years of college and the limit goes from being $2500 to $1800.
Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut.

Teachers can no longer deduct classroom expenses.

Student Loan Interest Deduction Limit Changes – For 2011, individuals or married couples can only deduct interest from the first 60 months of the repayment term.

Credit for principal residence homes making changes to housing insulation, windows, doors, HVAC equipment, water heaters and more expires.

The AMT will be computed on 28 million families, up from 4 million in 2010.

Mortgage Insurance Premium Deduction expires - taxpayers will no longer be allowed to deduct mortgage insurance premiums from their tax returns.

Additional provisions expired listed here.....
http://weakonomics.com/2010/07/28/details-about-tax-changes-in-2011-that-can-help-you-plan-accordingly/


Cost breakdown for the 2 year extension in the Obama Compromise.





The American Tax Reform Tea Party Website has a clock ticking down the days,
hours and minutes till January 1st.

It looks like this:


You can see it here: http://atr.org/update-days-untilbr-largest-tax-hikes-a5418


in conclusion......



The True Culprits

Thursday, 09 December 2010

Over the course of the last several weeks, we have diligently watched as our President, Barack Obama, and the Democratic Party withstood filibustering and stonewalling from the right. Conducting hearings on the weekend, and doing everything they conceivably could to assist the poor and middle-class, their repeated attempts at compromise were met with fierce resistance and an utter disregard for the majority of this nation by the Republicans. And now, after holding the American people hostage as our President so rightfully pointed out, these self-aggrandizing politicians are sitting back and allowing Obama to be the scapegoat for all that ails us. It’s time we call them out.

“I think it’s tempting to negotiate with hostage-takers, unless the hostage gets harmed,” explained President Obama at a press conference on Tuesday following a potential deal on tax cuts. “Then people will question the wisdom of that strategy. In this case, the hostage was the American people, and I was not willing to see them get harmed.”

In a rare Senate session on Saturday, December 4th, Republicans first shot down a measure to grant tax cuts for those making $250,000 or less. Instead of assisting struggling middle-class and poor families during these turbulent economic times, the GOP effectively shut the door on a quick maneuver to help those most in need. Senate Democrats then proposed an extension of tax cuts for all those making a million dollars or less – in essence taking a significant step towards meeting their Republican counterparts halfway. Again, this measure was voted down.

Last week, we also witnessed the failure of Republican leaders to pass an extension of unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed. The result: some 600,000 American workers immediately saw an end to the money they rely on for mere survival, and a total 2 million were set to lose theirs by the end of the month. After paying into unemployment through years of work, many of these individuals would soon find it difficult to simply put food on the table. At a time when families gather for the Holidays, Republicans deemed it appropriate to take away these people’s livelihood all for the sake of garnering tax cuts for their wealthy friends and associates.

Politics can often be a dirty game. Many a times, people act and vote in favor of their own vested interests. But when you allow the well being and sustainability of millions of our citizenry to hang in the balance, you must be held accountable. And we, the people, must never forget that these Republican leaders were ready, willing and only eager to allow tax cuts for everyone to expire, and allow 2 million to lose their unemployment checks. We must never be shy in calling out these elected representatives for who they are, and for whom they serve. And we must always bear in mind that they were prepped to sacrifice everything in order to benefit the wealthy and progress their own personal agendas.

President Obama was effectively caught between a rock and a hard place. Yes, he could have remained steadfast on his insistence of a tax cut for the middle-class only, but at what cost? Unlike those on the right, he could not in good conscience gamble on the lives of innocents suffering during these difficult and unpredictable times. And for that simple notion, we should all thank him – not attack him.

Rev. Al Sharpton
http://nationalactionnetwork.net/media-info/revs-written-opinions/515-the-true-culprits.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Making Work Pay is eliminated
Edited on Thu Dec-09-10 11:33 PM by bigwillq
regardless, right?

on edit: I don't believe it was included in the "deal" if that is the bill passed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. The SS 2% is supposed to make that up.
Which is why some are upset that people under 20k/40k won't get what they used to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. The 2% reduction in FICA replaces it, although isn't as good for
folks making under $20,000....

However, it should also be noted that families making under $40,000,
with two children usually do not end up paying income taxes for some years now.....
and usually end up with a EIC refund.....So the two percent in FICA reduction
does help them above and beyond the EIC (as FICA is not an income tax).
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Thanks for your reply (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #7
56. MWP is a refundable credit.
So those who pay no federal income tax should still get the credit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #56
63. Yep. The poorest Americans get a smaller refund check next year.
That won't take money out of the economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. Your statement is devoid of numbers.......
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 02:45 PM by FrenchieCat
which in the world of any reasonable tax discussions,
makes it unconstructive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. Here are the numbers
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?Docid=2866&DocTypeID=7

You can the brackets and the difference between the payroll tax cut and the Make Work Pay tax credit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. The Make work pay tax credit
was to expire......so it isn't like if we do nothing, folks would have continue getting that.

That's the problem with you comparing what would happen if all of the tax break remain as they are (which isn't a scenario being offered) and what would happen with the tax compromise is enacted.
even if we were to compare tax credit that can't be compare because they are not part of any framework being offered......we are talking about $197.00 at worse for those earning under $10,000 and $173.00 for those making under $20,000. Again......it can't be compared that way, although you insist.


Of course you neglect to address the issue that if the tax compromise doesn't go through, they lose much, much more than if it does, as the child tax credit is cut in half.....and that's $500 difference per child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. You're making excuses instead of working for a solution
However you want to 'frame' it, the poorest workers will pay more in taxes next year than they did this year. They are the only group this is happening to and it's wrong and unfair.

So how about calling your members of Congress to ask them to address this? It's an easily corrected problem and if they hear from enough of us they'll fix it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. It isn't about how I frame it, it is about what the possible scenarios are,
and the one where all tax regulations stay as they were in 2010 for 2011 simply
isn't one to debate. We can dumb down, but it would only misinformed folks as
to what will happen to their wallets during a time of economic hardship
for so many based on what the true possibilities are....not what we wish them to be.
That's why it was a compromise, but not as bad as it could have been....
exactly because the changes in how it translate to most is minimal, when instead
the changes could be devastating.

I have already contacted my senators to tell them to support the compromise,
and that any tweeks should be to help more of those who need it the most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. This particular tweak needs to be in it
You should call them again to ask them to address this problem. They will not do it unless they hear from us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
62. The only people who end up paying more in taxes than last year are the lowest income
Brilliant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. Comparing apples to oranges can certainly make things be as you want to paint them.....
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 02:29 PM by FrenchieCat
but the apple to apple comparison that faces us is not as flexible
as your statement suggests, simple as it may be.

The truth is that our choices are as they are; folks will either pay as my op illustrates,
which is WAY MORE.....or a very small percentage will pay a LITTLE BIT MORE,
if the compromise passes.

See, you neglect to deal with what the EIC actually does for lower income families.
In your statement, you don't reveal that the lowest income families actually don't pay anything
but payroll taxes currently, and in fact, many receive refunds that is money that they did
not pay to the government.

You are correct, that there will be folks affected by the compromise who are of lower income folks;
They are those without children (although EIC is also available to the very lowest earners even if they are single).....and they are affected minimally in the compromise....about $100 per year at the worse, if that.

I would say that the compromise is actually MUCH better for 98% of working folks than doing nothing,
and letting it all expire....

If you disagree with the premise of this post, please explain to us, using facts and numbers
how we are all better off economically in 2011 if nothing is done at all....?
which is what Republicans will make sure happens if this compromise fails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #64
67. They traded a refundable tax credit for a lesser payroll tax cut.
It's a $200 increase for people making $10K. What I find remarkable is how blase and accepting people are of this injustice. It's also rather un-stimulative, since it's taking money out of the pockets of the people most likely to spend it.

Do you know what I did yesterday, Frenchie? I called my members of Congress to alert them of this and ask that it be addressed in any final bill. This is something that can easily be corrected. They could reinstate a partial Make Work Pay tax credit or adjust the EITC to make up the disparity. Since it looks like this is the deal we're going to get or close to it, why not be a part of the solution to get this problem corrected? They need to hear from people about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #67
75. My critters have heard from me.......
So are you suggesting that folks support this tax compromise with caveat on preferring the MWP
as opposed to a payroll tax reduction,

or

are you saying letting the tax cuts expire and wait for something better?

cause it now sounds like the debate is based on just one portion of the compromise.

So which is it?

Where do you stand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #75
77. I'm saying it looks like this plan, or something close to it, is what we're going to get.
This problem needs to be amended in the final bill. It's unjust and bad PR to boot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. Well, I think we kind of agree....this compromise ain't the best,
in fact, I do believe that Pres. Obama agrees too. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
69. If the cap was raised to $140,000
the 2% cut could be matched. This 2% 'reduction' is going to be used in just a couple of years as an excuse to either cut benefits or the meet urgent need to privatize SS because the shortfall looms. I am extremely suspicious of this 'cut'. It will be used by rethugs in the near future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #69
78. I agree in the remedy of raising the SS cap,
which I believe is what will happen......

But to be frank, I don't believe that Republicans are
as stupid to touch SS at this time.......

they might try later, but they have always tried,
so that's nothing new.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. The question should not be how we do as individuals...
but how the country does.

We could not afford the tax cuts when Bush got the enacted. The country can not afford the Tax cuts now. The next step should be to make real, substantive cuts in defense, the single largest chunk of the budget, and the current third rail of politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. This is more for informational use......
Once can clearly see who falls in the 50% Tax increase on the tax bracket table.

It is certainly those who make the least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think I got $600 from the bush cuts then I guess it's $400 from Obama.
Hmm I guess that's a vacation to San Fran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. You got more than $400 from Pres. Obama....because the tax tables
as to how much to withhold were also reduced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #11
40. Withholding doesn't matter...it all comes out even at tax time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
young but wise Donating Member (760 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FirstLight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. well let's see...
Edited on Thu Dec-09-10 11:37 PM by FirstLight
You have to have an actual INCOME to pay taxes, right?
so ya, I'm unaffected...

However, the EIC I need for annual essentials, like new pots & pans or a vacuum cleaner, or tires for the car...

well....ya, that gets confiscated by the student loan people/dept of education


so I'm at net zero affect i suppose... still sucks tho
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. Of course, in addition to taxes going up,
Edited on Thu Dec-09-10 11:47 PM by FrenchieCat
the unemployed don't get that benefit extension......

and we already saw that the Senate voted down the additional $250 to seniors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vikegirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #10
34. And the 99ers?
What did Obama do for them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. What would you suggest?
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 01:32 AM by FrenchieCat
How many of them are there.......?
and how many would you like to have join their rank?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vikegirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. How many of "them" are there?
More than the "deal" "helps".....

Stand up for extensions for those 99ers. But I have yet to hear Obama even SAY 'their' name. I applaud Obama trying to help the unemployed, but he doesn't get that those who have suffered, have suffered the longest .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. You are correct, the tax compromise doesn't help them.......
and right again, the President and Congress should do more for them.....
but heck, when dealing with a senate not willing to extend benefits for those
who aren't 99ers, how could we believe that congress would pass anything
to help the 99ers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vikegirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. So does the president?
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 03:58 AM by vikegirl
Sarcasm? Ugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vikegirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #43
46. You don't care?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #46
57. Why....because I can't solve a problem that exists by typing here?
I can't feed all of the hungry children in the world either....
Doesn't mean I don't care....just means that most of us, if not all of us
can have answers, but it is implementing such that matter....and if you didn't notice,
we did not elect a dictator to office who was going to just save the world from itself....
although perhaps that would be an IDEAL.

So I care, but that doesn't mean that there is political will in congress to solve
the issue you raise...and I think that blaming the President for folks who have been
out of work for such an extended period is not going to actually solve the problem.
I think the President should and could propose some plan for those folks,
but I also am doubtful that Congress would approve such. But yeah....
chronic unemployment is a growing issue that needs help. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
12. Feeling more likely to not have my Social Security slashed?
We'll have thwarted another attempt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Ok.....
This is for informational use. Life is a series of choices.

Personally I see your speculation to be as valid as the catfood commission
talks....done by those who use fear as opposed to facts or evidence to influence others
to stand against their better interest for the sake of cynicism.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Why do you think Simpson and Bowles were picked
To head that commission?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Are those your facts and evidence for your one liner smears?
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 12:11 AM by FrenchieCat
Because I understand believing and speculating the worse, especially for one cynical enough....

however, I never believed that citing nothing but some warmed over talking points could actually
impress those who normally seek to be better informed, To simply be told what will happen,
by those who don't really know without any proof shouldn't be good enough.

What are the specific rules of the road for that committee
you keep referring to when trying to scare up enough people
into following you like a tweet on a phone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Well, apparently understanding that Social Security is a "milk cow" was a qualification.
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 12:23 AM by Pholus
Alan Simpson's opinions on Social Security are hardly new, nor were they hardly a secret. The man was a senator and picked his fights as far back as 1979. Yet he was selected for the commission. Are we surprised that he took aim at Social Security as a result?

Edit: Add to that the fact that Mr. Bowles is a director for Morgan Stanley, who would make out pretty nicely if the system were privatized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. What are the rules of the road for this commission?
can they enact the shit they haven't even voted on?
How many votes needed to clear the committee?
And once it does, if it does, then what?

I need some actual information, please.....
not inference on the fact that these people
are right up there next to Hitler.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. And you're off on hyperbole. You know quite well where the rules are.

Not that it matters a bit. And since the sole qualification of the co-chairs were appointment by the President where they serve at his sole discretion we're ALL a bit short on "actual information."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. I'm asking you what they are.
If you don't want to debate using facts, then leave the thread...
otherwise, you only look like you are picking for a fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. Look them up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. OK....Thanks!
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 01:15 AM by FrenchieCat
Charter for the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform


It appears that the commission is without authority and is an advisory committee only,
and that it doesn't even report to congress, just to the President.

In addition, it appears that the commmittee needs an awful lot of votes, just to get
anything as a suggestion for the President to review.

Looks like a bunch of folks in a room have discussions, none of which has any consequences
but keeps them busy and perhaps they may come up with an idea of two that might be worthwhile.

I would have thought they had a lot of power, considering the way they are used
to drum up support against our President by some folks here at DU.
That's a neat trick, to be able to get away with that....and looks like
it's worked on the few who don't read much. :rofl:

In otherwords, some of y'all have turned this commission into a bunch of self-serving hyperbole....
to help with your agenda. That's neat.

And I"m being called the propagandist!

Meter once again needed! http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_P7sRm3N5I8k/SK6p8Qzh41I/AAAAAAAAAMc/RqTQD4zcNOQ/s400/irony+meter.gif
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #33
37. It isn't an easy issue.
To you, I'm a rude ingrate who doesn't see that the President has done the best he could with the cruddy hand he's holding.

To me, you seem a bit uncritical in your support.

We all do the best we can.

I cannot say this enough -- I really like this President. I want him to succeed. I think he's done a great job in 90% of what he's done.

That's an 'A.' But I have a tendency towards high standards and the times are extraordinary.

I did *not* appreciate the self-deprecation ("shellacking") talk after the election. That wasn't really the time for it -- it didn't play well with the people around me either. Leaders shouldn't talk that way (at least when the mic is on).

It also bothers me though, that compromise seems to be the first play of the game against people who are
willing to stab him as soon as look at him. We've seen Republican bluster fade pretty quickly when they're outplayed.
I just wish he'd try it at least once, just to see if it would work. He's smart, he can think on his feet. It's not
like they can think of worse things to say about him -- right?

When they were saying how they'd vote no on EVERYTHING except extending the tax cuts, they set themselves up for a PR disaster.

I'll admit I'm a lesser person than the President, but I would have made them eat their words. How long could they hold out
when every bill that obviously supports the 98% gets voted down and they got weekly dressings-down about it. Do you think that if
President Obama repeated the magnitude of the disaster that not extending unemployment insurance would represent that they would
feel no pressure?

Anyway, we *are* playing for the same team but we have different ideas about how to move forward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #37
42. Democrats like you are the ones who don't mind seeing 98%'s tax rates go up
during terrible economic times.

Why is that? So that you can give the President your own good shellacking?

Yes, we have a different POV.

The President is not a perfect President, I will admit that.
But just like I can't drive the car from the back seat to where
I need to get to, I'll root for my own team and for the 98% prior to giving the Republicans any leeway and/or a pass on what they are doing; them and their media. They are the culprit,
and I will not forget it....and I refuse to be distracted from their culpability by yelling at the
one person in the room with any power to get us out of a mess that may result in us losing
all power in the government, not just in one or both houses.

The livelihood of the 98% are just far more important to me than the 2%, period.
and it appears that the President is that same page. For right now, that's enough
for me.

See, I'm sure you know that at the end of the day...Democrats will be blamed for raising taxes, period.....because good intentions never pay the rent or buy groceries; money does.
If Democrats are pinned with the deed, they will be made to pay, no matter
how much they pound their fist on the table; that is just a fact.
The Republicans are well aware of that, and they will play.
They don't care that we are their toys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #42
51. If anything the past 25 years of watching the show has shown me that blame is coming no matter what.
As a result, do what's right, not expedient. And I don't think the compromise was right
in the long game. UI would stand on its own and on principle Social Security should
never be put in a position where its detractors can truthfully claim that the deficit
is higher because of it.

But that is a difference in opinion at this point. We both root for the same team, just
for different goals.

Next week, we'll agree again. We (including me) just all have to remember to not burn the bridges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #51
70. Doing what's right for whom?
Answering that question is key to this debate.

I say doing what is right as we continue into this economic downturn
is NOT hiking the lowest earning amongs us by 50%.
Doing what is economically more advantageous for 98% of us is doing what's right.
Obama is actually showing the type of courage that few will recognize
because we have been programmed to believe that strong partisan ideology
trumps the individual plight of too many, and that the complexity of our political system,
when dealing with those of bad faith has to be kept in focus. The GOP are the bad guys,
and no, 98% of Americans shouldn't have to pay for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:07 AM
Original message
I'll assume that you choose not to answer that question
I suspect that you know as well as I, that they were selected for their unquenchable lust for slashing Social Security. That's really the most unique characteristic of those two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:07 AM
Original message
I'll assume that you choose not to answer that question
I suspect that you know as well as I, that they were selected for their unquenchable lust for slashing Social Security. That's really the most unique characteristic of those two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #15
50. I'll assume that you choose not to answer that question
I suspect that you know as well as I, that they were selected for their unquenchable lust for slashing Social Security. That's really the most unique characteristic of those two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansasVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
16. -1 for more white house propaganda!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. How's that?
I put that OP together.
I'm an accountant.
I thought folks would appreciate
actual, factual information.

Is what you are doing is calling me a propagandist?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Morbius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #18
27. I appreciate it. Thanks.
You propagandist, you. Take heart; Thomas Paine was a propagandist, too - a pretty good one at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bornskeptic Donating Member (951 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #18
54. When folks on one side of a dispute label facts as propoganda
it makes me feel even more comfortable about being on the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
19. The bottom tax rate for those in the 10% tax bracket goes up to 15%, which is a 50% increase.
that's me...THANK GOD FOR THIS TAX CUT PLAN....I was worried that Obama would fight the repubs but I know he would be facing a definite fillubuster and can never win and then all taxes go up and if that happens to me and my family we would be in BIG trouble!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
20. ATR is Grover Norquist 's group
FYI:

'Early in his career, Norquist was executive director of both the National Taxpayers Union and the national College Republicans organization, holding both positions until 1983. Afterward, he held the positions of Economist and Chief Speechwriter at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce from 1983 to 1984.<23>

Norquist traveled to several warzones across the world to help support anti-Soviet guerrilla armies in the second half of the 1980s. He worked with a support network for Col. Oliver North's efforts with the Nicaraguan Contras and other insurgencies, in addition to promoting U.S. support for groups including Mozambique's RENAMO and Jonas Savimbi's UNITA in Angola and helping to organize anti-Soviet forces in Laos.<13>

In addition to heading Americans for Tax Reform, Norquist serves on the board of numerous organizations, including the Hispanic Leadership Fund, Indian-American Republican Caucus, and The Nixon Center. He has long been active in building bridges between various ethnic and religious minorities and the free-market community through his involvement with organizations such as the Islamic Free Market Institute, Acton Institute, Christian Coalition and Toward Tradition.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist

Norquist's association with, and support of, the mujahideen:

'Other early conservative advocates for the Reagan Doctrine included influential conservative activist Grover Norquist, who ultimately became a registered UNITA lobbyist and an economic adviser to Savimbi's UNITA movement in Angola,<12> and former Reagan speechwriter and current U.S. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, who made several secret visits with the mujahideen in Afghanistan and returned with glowing reports of their bravery against the Soviet occupation.<13> Rohrabacher was led to Afghanistan by his contact with the mujahideen, Jack Wheeler'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Doctrine


Some Reagan Doctrine critics assert
that funding the mujahideen played
a role in causing the September 11
attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Seems relevant, doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. Yep.....it is. Their plan is to allow the tax rates to go back to what they were
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 12:31 AM by FrenchieCat
so that they can then blame Barack Obama for raising taxes on those making under 250K.

That is why we are being held hostage for the sake of them defeating Obama in 2012.

That's why their clock proclaiming the biggest tax increase in history has the Obama logo on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. So if we surrender to them, what do you suppose will occupy that clock next.
It sure is heck isn't going to say "We Wuv Barack Obama" now is it....

My guess is that it will blame him for raising the deficit by several hundred billion dollars.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. Yes, that's so totally it.

First off. I post when I feel like it and don't need to let my insecurity drive up my post numbers. I've been here a long time, yes. Most of the time a lurker, yes. But that's changed. It might change again, so don't freak out okay?

And you consider me stirring the sh*t because I'm not in agreement with you and for no other reason. So that statement is pretty much information null as well.

And I don't fall for cute advertising either. So the little logo doesn't help much either.

Despite your penchant for "just the facts" you seem to have jumped the shark a bit near the end in trying to read my pedigree to me.

- You accuse me of *not* caring about "the other 98%." See that depends on your point of view.
We're going to be talking about government spending next. We're going to be talking about
the deficit. Real cuts, for real people. Unemployment insurance needs to be there, but not
at the initial asking price. When the pressure came on, now some concessions are being offered.
I figure some more are under the surface. *That* is what negotiation is about and what
President Obama has sadly seemed to forget in his rush to appeal to those "across the aisle."

- Then you insinuate my concern for the hallmark of the social safety net is a "scare tactic" when
your entire post was meant as a big old scare tactic. "Ohhhhh, look how much taxes are going to go up."
No, a decent safety net is a prerequisite for a modern society. The whole payroll tax idea will
set a nasty precedent by causing social security to be funded by an increase in the deficit. I've
noticed that nobody is keen to respond to that when I mention it.

So in the end, you wrote much and said little. I do agree that you know little about me. And it get the impression that this is just the way you like it.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. You have yet to provide any facts......
that why you are suspect.

Pholus:"So in the end, you wrote much and said little."

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_P7sRm3N5I8k/SK6p8Qzh41I/AAAAAAAAAMc/RqTQD4zcNOQ/s400/irony+meter.gif :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #31
53. And some of yours we'll see again.
Your plot about "who got what" will be all over the deficit argument I imagine, just not in the way you intend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #53
60. Doesn't change anything for those who will have to find more money to pay taxes.....
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 01:40 PM by FrenchieCat
who are already hurting.

As for the deficit argument,
I find that only Dems who violently oppose tax cut for the rich
are using it.....even if they weren't using it before.

Deficits can't matter if the choice is to have a family find an additional $3,000
(without their wages going up)to pay for tomorrow's debt.

Again, you and I just have different priorities.....
mine are people who currently are struggling day in day out to provide for their families,
yours is the deficit.....in otherwords, you care about the money that we owe,
and I care about the families negatively affected in order to satisfy your priority.

Priority is an important word......as it puts into some sort of order what one considers
most important and what one considers less important. I care about the deficit,
but not at any cost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
32. It would have no effect on me, whatsoever.
I'm in a tax bracket, and work situation, where I (effectively) haven't paid federal taxes since Clinton.

That being said, I can see it having a severe effect on many others less fortunate than me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #32
35. Yep.........most folks that are being hit the hardest are in the 10% tax bracket!
It's gonna be a blood bath....

and the then GOP will get back into the office!

I'm starting to believe that Democrats don't really
read or know as much as they pretend they do.
It's starting to show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Keep the bottom bracket in place and make it up with a new top bracket
In any event the impact in real dollars is minimal. A few hundred bucks spread over a year. Nice to have but not worth shoveling trillions at those making 75-80k and up that will hardly notice the money and are unlikely to spend it.

I guess the "new logic" is Bush was right all along and we were just playing petty politics to get an advantage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #35
39. It's hard to make it to high office and stay connected to low roots.
Heck, it's hard to get to high office without *always* being connected, how many congresscritters have been homeless for 6 months or more?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #39
44. Unfortunately, it does look like folks in this country are more about retribution
than giving a fuck about others.

Harsh truth to have telegraphed right around Christmas....from both parties really.
And don't get me started on the Democratic rank and file. But then I suspect some
of them didn't bother to even see how this might affect who and how, not just moneywise,
but politically in a long run. Sad to say, but even those who claim to be informed
just aren't. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:57 AM
Response to Original message
47. According to your table
I'm looking at an 11% increase but earlier I read it would be 3%. Doesn't really matter, I can't afford either one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #47
58. The rate of increase may be 3%.....but when compared to what you were paying,
Edited on Fri Dec-10-10 01:18 PM by FrenchieCat
the equation translated into dollars changes.

i.e., If one is paying at the 10% rate on income on $30,000 of taxable income, that would mean they are paying $3,000 in tax, right?

Well, if the rate was to go up to 15%, they would now have to pay $4,500 in taxes.

So you see that paying the $4,500 in taxes is not 5% more than paying $3,000...it's 50% more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krawhitham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
48. How does this get Neg'ed
When it is just a collection of facts?

You can not handle the truth?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quaker bill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
49. Several tjhousand dollars
I estimate I would take home somewhere between 3 and 5 grand less a year. Personally, my daughter is in college and I need the cash. She will graduate in two years, so the deal seems pretty good to me personally. I would rather we tax the rich, but am not complaining too much. We need to win 2012 big, and tax them later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #49
61. What I'm surprised about is that folks seem to have an awful lot to say about this argument.....
however, when presented with the actual facts as to whom ends up getting hurt
if something isn't done, they are staying away from this thread....deliberately, me thinks.

How can folks have so much passion and conviction for their principles,
but yet not bother to deconstruct my op as to whom and how 98% of us will be
affected
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOTV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
52. Personally I'm glad to pay more taxes to leave less debt to our kids ...
... I realize some will be hurt by this more than I will though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #52
55. I'm with you. I'm on the cusp of maximum penalty/minimum benefit. But being pro-tax in principle
means I'll make do if there is a greater good at stake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. Democratic principle is more about caring for the lesser than thee,
than it is about being pro-tax in principle....

Your "greater good" standard of measure is debatable in how you are applying it,
and it is also relative to the extent that it is actually a contrarian position for you to take,
because you see, if your priorities are that you care more about the pocketbook effect of the 2%,
as opposed to caring more about the 98% who would pay more relative to their
earnings, the folks that would hurt the most would be the 98%,
not the wealthier folks who can take the hit, and still keep on keeping on.
So, when one examines your greater good line in its reality of actual consequences
in the future, considering the economic climate......your line literally falls apart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pholus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #59
79. Sometimes you talk waaaaaay too much.
By pro-tax I mean that every time someone complains about high taxes I feel obligated to mention that I like roads, infrastructure, safety regulations, education, a social safety net.

But you have an agenda so you're going to look for any rhetorical weakness you can.

Enjoy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #79
81. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
66. that precious measly 35 cent raise I just got last month will be wiped out.
Which, in effect, means that my salary - rock bottom for accounting - will remain the same for a 3rd year in a row.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #66
71. let's just say, it won't be pretty.......
but at least you've gotten a raise to offset the nightmare....
some folks aren't that lucky (as you know),
and others yet, without the UI, will get a fist in the face. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CitizenLeft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #71
82. oh yes, I'm very aware of how lucky I am
...which almost makes me feel guilty for even having a job. I feel horrible for those out of work, it's an awful soul-killing experience, and this bullshit about "sacrifice" just so the rich won't get their tax cut infuriates me. FUCK their tax cuts, if that's what it takes - don't let these people sink into despair just to make a freakin' point. This is actually life and death for some people. And anyone who thinks that I'm being over-dramatic can just bite me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #82
88. Don't feel guilty.....cause at least you understand clearly
why the president did what he did...and it wasn't to "give" the rich a tax cut.
I hate the way some folks have twisted that way, as they do no one any great service
when they do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
83. Between the tax hike and loss of deductions 5-8k


Between the income tax hike and 6 of the deductions we use are changing, I'd say we'll easily lose 4-8k...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
84. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
pettypace Donating Member (695 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
85. Obama '08
I know it's an unpopular sentiment, but the Bush tax cuts helped me.

Let me begin the chorus - Obama '12!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
86. Personally, I'd rather see my own taxes go up that little bit
But I think if the deal falls through it will only get worse for Dems next year, and other priorities will be sacrificed.

Also, I think extending unemployment benefits, and keeping tax relief in place for lower income earners, are both VERY important to continuing the economic recovery. The Greedy Old Party doesn't give a shit about the recovery though, or what happens to the unemployed.

How the Democratic Congress let it get to this point is simply beyond me. And why people are blaming Obama for the failures of the congressional leadership is also beyond me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
golfguru Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
87. +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
89. Thanks for this information n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC