Taxcuts are not the solution, taxcuts are the problem.

It is high time for the Democrats to come to that understanding.

Taxcuts do not create jobs or prosperity. Taxcuts rob the public trust of needed funds.

Giving more money to the wealthy only accomplishes one thing - it make them wealthier.

Taxcuts destroy the middle class foundation by forcing state and local governments to make cuts elsewhere to pay for them.

Democrats need to make a decision. They can choose to continue the taxcuts insanity or they can stop it in its tracks and demand that the wealthy are the first ones to pay more. There are no more goodies for them under the taxcut tree.

This has been a difficult position for the Democrats. They need no more proof than to look at the present deficits. More taxcuts are not the solution. They must change their thought processes about this. The Republicans must be challenged outright.

:-)

Ever since Ronald Reagan was deified, the mantra that government is the problem has been taken as the de facto truth. I wish more people would come out and say that increasing the taxes of people who can most afford it makes for a better society. Everyone needs to act with the greater good in mind, even if that means no tax cuts.

Did I miss the switch when taxcuts stopped being the reason d'etre of Republicans? Are you fckng kidding? Do you look up to tie your shoes?

Yeah, when you wanna invade countries but don't want to pay the bill, that's a problem but it isn't Dems that need a remedial class in governing.

The Republicans have never governed shit, ever, and just saying "No!" to everything for the last two years hasn't been any kind of useful primer for the new GOP members of the House and Senate.

Luckily, since painting themselves into corner with all the deficit reduction promises through the elections, there may be enough pressure on Republicans to tcb on a bi-partisan level and, with no particular incentive, other than embarrassment, Dems can begin to stop being such big fckng pussies.

Taxcuts are expected from Republicans. But, not from Democrats. You are wrong. Democrats do need a remedial class in governing.

But what does your post have to do with the OP?



K&R Kentuck. As usual, short and to the point.

as was done all during the "gimme, gimme more 2000's" (the second Bush dynasty) - there would be no, nada, zilch unemployment. Funniest thing, it's a big fat lie!

Democrats seem to forget that their big dog Mr. President of the World Bill Clinton raised taxes...and he wasn't run out of town - in fact, he got reelected. As NJ Gov Cristy says, the floor didn't open up, the world kept turning.

Why doesn't the leader of our Country, the leader of our Party see that in order to continue operating, taxes - especially on those who have profited so greatly the last 10 years - those individuals and corporations who's wealth has quadrupled - need to be assessed and collected pronto. Waiting for the Bush/Obama Tax Giveaway to the Wealthy to expire in two years ain't gonna' cut it - the Country needs the cash today.

Unless you're rich and have the money to hire your own staff from your tax check.

:kick:

You mention the wealthy, but most people here are totally down with tax cuts for the upper middle class, people making between $60,000 and $160,000 per year. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/62

"Thousands of dollars going to those making over $60,000 and nothing going to those making $20,000 or less. It's like tax cut deja vu, and it is almost inevitable for any plan that relies on tax credits.

Worse yet, it reinforces the Republican talking point which says, simply stated, taxes = bad. That's not a good message to promote when we have huge deficits to deal with. To me, this is symptomatic of "Me2" Democrats. Republicans say "vote for me, I will cut taxes" Me2 Democrats say "Me too! Me too! I will cut taxes too!"

That makes it very hard for a progressive with a plan or program that will build infrastructure or help the needy. It gets shot down because it will require a tax increase to fund it, and tax increases are always bad. Everybody says so, Republicans and Democrats. To argue against that makes you sound like a flat-earther, or something even more horrifying, a "tax and spender."

It's another way a progressive message is undercut by the DLC, but even people like Mike Gravel are doing it."

But politicians from both parties are now falling all over themselves to bribe the voters into voting for them. They basically say "a vote for me, means money in your pocket". And since Reagan and Mondale, almost everyone is afraid to not offer the "free money".

The problem in gaining the support we need is illustrated in your verbiage. You say that "tax cuts rob the public trust..." and that cutting taxes is "giving more money..." In both of those statements ownership of wealth in question starts as the property of government and is provided to the people at the whim of government the opposition and arguably the people as a whole sees this relationship in reversed. As such we much find a way to logically explain why wealth is the property of the people as a whole not just the individuals who "earned" it.

Alternatively we could provide a logic based argument that justifies taking wealth in greater quantities from those who can better afford to do without it. This differs greatly in language because it doesn't come with the assumption of original ownership of the wealth instead it comes with the assumption of the authority to confiscate wealth for the public good. I tend to think this is the much easier argument to win, but it is still an argument we have to be willing to make. So far we are notorious about assuming the opposition and the fence sitters see the logic in that position and the result is that we have done a poor job fully fleshing out the argument. Sometimes I think the politicians that supposedly represent us are afraid to make this argument publicly.

...and, therein, is the dilemma. They are afraid it will be called "class warfare".

Well, it is class warfare and they are kicking our asses.

We have no moral obligation to tear down the rest of the country to protect the wealth of the very few.

You are correct in that we have the authority to raise taxes for the "public good". I would not call it "confiscating". I would say that the wealth created by the American working people belongs to the American working people. We, the People, are the Government.

Tax cuts make corporations lazy. If they develop a business model around paying taxes and the burden is lifted, suddenly they are making much larger profits without doing or risking anything. If you want businesses to hire people, then the only path to greater profits needs to be developing new business and hiring people. If the path to greater profits is laying off people and making campaign contributions to get tax rates cut, then this is what they will do, and it is what they have done.

that these taxcuts have helped a lot of them build overseas plants so they could move jobs out of America, if the truth were known.

But the bottom line is "free trade" there. Whenever you put US workers on an even footing with $2 a day labor, we will lose, tax rates are largely not relevant to this decision. In fact, tax rates are only marginally relevant to where businesses locate, and then only at the extremes. There is a slight but measurable effect of tax rates on business relocation decisions, but relocating existing businesses from the northeast to the sunbelt does not grow the economy or create any jobs, it just rearranges the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Like the rest of us, businesses grow and innovate best when they need to and change least when life / profits are good. Lower taxes means more profits without change, growth, or risk. You get more of what you subsidize.

of unfunded wars...Did everyone in the MSM forget that already?


mark

Look at Wisconsin right now, lower taxes for rich buddies and then claim there is a 'crisis'. It is a manufactured crisis much like we are seeing now at the federal level to transfer wealth from the working class to the rich.

..in his debate with Governor Ronald Reagan in 1984. Walter Mondale, in a moment of honesty. said, "Governor Reagan won't say it but I will. Your taxes will go up..."

Walter Mondale went on to lose in a landslide to Reagan and the Democrats have been scared to death of the taxcuts issue since that time.

Even though we have seen the decline in wages for 30 years and the shrinking of the middle class and the transfer of wealth to the very top, Democrats have been silent.

That can no longer continue if we want to keep the Democratic Party. We cannot maintain by parroting the Republicans on the taxcuts issue.