Obama's Tax Agreement= Good or Bad?

[CuteOldGuy]

Sarge! If you were a provider, you would have just become my ATF! (Thank God you are not a provider.) But you are right on the FairTax. At this point, it is the only thing that may save our economy.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

"What really irked me was the GOP telling Obama and the DEMS that they will stop legislating and will not vote on anything if the Bush taxes wasn't addressed immediately"

Presently, the democrats have a supermajority in the House, and 60 votes in the senate (when independents like Sanders and Lieberman caucus with them). They could vote whatever they wanted, with or without the republicans. Its been that way for two years.

I know you were already corrected on this post, but I don't think it was done harshly enough. I'll assume that you didn't know that what you were posting was wrong. That'll keep you from being a liar, and knock it down to just making a simple mistake. But mistakes like that have consequences...and they have sources. I'm sure many readers read what you wrote and took it as fact. Additionally, you probably heard it on Fox and talk radio so many times you just accepted it as fact yourself. That's how it got in your head in the first places, isn't it? Lies spread like wildfire.

I'd like to point out that your erroneous post was your defense to what you quoted. Since your defense has been obliterated, the quote rings true. The GOP did hold up legislation, including the extension of jobless benefits to the unemployed, until they got what they wanted...namely, a lower tax rate for the richest Americans than they would have had if the Bush cuts were allowed to sunset.

That said, lets look at the flat tax/class warfare bullshit that always pops up by the third page of these threads. A TRUE flat tax is a flat DOLLAR AMOUNT. A phony flat tax is a PERCENTAGE amount. Flat taxers always omit SALES TAXES because those are already fixed percentages. They also omit the HUGE increase in earnings that the richest Americans have enjoyed over the last decades while the middle class and poor have either made modest headway or lost ground.

BTW, the recession officially ended in June 2009. It would be impossible for Obama to "raise taxes in a recession" starting January 2011 as a previous poster stated. (see above sentence about wildfire)

I was shocked to read how many of you caught on to how "Obama won big" on this deal. You guys even noticed the kick-the-can-down-the-road to 2012 win-win facet of it. There's also the win-win part of his triangulation strategy that lets the Democrats in Congress do the heavy lifting to get a better deal. Obama will look REAL good to swing voters when Pelosi votes against his deal. The neatest trick is that it takes away Republican leverage before they even get sworn in next year.

Speaking of next year...I wonder what the Senate rules regarding fillibusters are going to be...care to take a guess?

[lacrew_2000]

Don't watch Fox, sorry, no cable. Still believe the Dems can get stuff done when they want (Lieberman, Snow, Sanders, Collins, Brown). If they can't even get that crowd of alleged 'moderates' to agree to something, I think its a little disingenuous to claim that the republicans are holding things up - called 'hostage takers', pitch forks have been called for, etc. I was trying to point out that the GOP is NOT in control during the lame duck - both houses and oval office are controlled by Dems right now. No lyin', no kidding. (some people seem to be under the impression the new GOP house class has already been seated).

I'm confused by the 'kick the can down the road' strategy. First of all, Obama loses his moral high ground on the issue. If he truly believes the current rates are so damaging, how is he going to convince the voter that its was expedient to keep them, until election time? And can't the GOP just kick the can until sometime after an early Tuesday in November, 2012? They will control the house, and can schedule when things come up for a vote. And if this was such a winning issue for the Dems, why did Pelosi herself kick the can down the road until after the mid-terms? What was so damaging to Dems in 2010 that will be so helpful to them in 2012?

I'm also confused about the unemployment extension. As I understand it, it still caps people at 99 weeks. All it does it avoid continual votes in the next two years to extend the standard 26 weeks to 99 weeks....and these votes in a GOP controlled house would have been something the Dems wanted to play out.

And then Obama himself took away any benefit this agreement would have had with 'swing voters'. He literally said he was held hostage and had to make the deal...not exactly gonna make a swing voter think he's moved to the middle.

And I may be behind the news - I don't think its passed through congress yet, and there's been alot of pork thrown into it in the last 72 hours...making the whole thing smell bad.

And to top it off, Obama had to bring Bill Clinton to the WH press room, to field questions about this...besides being bizzare to see Clinton back in the press room, it made Obama look weak.

I don't think anything about this has helped him. The bottom line is that the performance of the economy is pegged to the president. He knows that the least talked about portion of the Bush tax cuts (cap gains) will cause the stock market to go crazy, if not extended. This will all be at his feet. It does not appear that Pelosi, Reid, or any of his allies in congress are interested one bit in helping him. He looked very alone last week.

[Sarge]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Sarge! If you were a provider, you would have just become my ATF! (Thank God you are not a provider.) But you are right on the FairTax. At this point, it is the only thing that may save our economy.

Thanks for the props

Except that FairTax will probably never happen. Too many false claims from people who have never even read the book that are getting more attention than the actual plan. Would also take too much power out of the politicians pockets and put it back in the hands of the people. And we all know that a politicians job is to get reelected, nothing more.

[sherm]

two words: "Term Limits" - make these bozo's from both sides of the aisles have to actually live in the real economy and deal with their stupid decisions. I'm tired of the political elite destroying our federated republic.

[john_galt]

LM, at the risk of raising your ire, you don't have somethings right. True, the democrats never had a true super majority in the Senate but they had a working majority and still do. That is if they can coax the ever gullible Snow and Collins then they have a super majority.

The fair tax was named in a book and the authors named it the fair tax and nothing you say will change that. So your opinion of what a fair tax is...is moot. The FAIR TAX, whether you like it or not, is about tax rates.

Back to the first point, since the democratic majority is in play then it is impossible for the GOP to hold up things no matter how much your MSNBC addled mind would like to believe it. Everything changes in January.

Personally I do wish the GOP had held out for more like making the current tax rates permanent. Oh, and getting rid of the inheritance tax that is rearing its ugly head again. Rather than extending unemployment I would rather they did something to create a job creating climate. Something that Obama has not done anything about. Obama has been too busy (lets be serious, whoever is behind Obama) to do anything except amass federal power.

[Longermonger]

A simple majority in the Senate is not enough under current rules. You saw what chasing the votes of Collins and Snow did during the Healthcare debate. Pointless. IIRC, Pelosi's House passed all kinds of bills (in the hundreds). They never made it past the Senate because everything needs 60 votes due to Republican fillibuster abuse.

I never mentioned the "Fair Tax". You're high.

If Senate Democrats could just call Snow and Collins to get a supermajority vote, there wouldn't BE a deal. They'd just pass whatever bills they want. The fact that they haven't done that should be your clue that it isn't as easy as you said it is.

[Cheaper2buyit]

its been to long since I gave my 2 cent so here take 5 cents.
it passed so we have it for 2 years lets just see if it makes jobs. ( yes I know it hasn't yet but the booggyman said it will.
Lets be happy that the unemployed who want & try to get jobs are able to get by on 400 aweek.
Lets see if both sides will work to the last day & get things done
maybe gays can fight for us & wear lipstick (ladies strapon)
lets see if we can get start treaty worked out.
Lets remember what each side said & see what we have in 2011.
And for Obama thanks for putting your pride a side & at least getting something done & after looking at the votes it seems like a lot of bitching for nothing

[Guest122610]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

I honestly was against a tax break for the wealthiest but could live with tax breaks for everyone.

What is your background that makes me care what you think about taxes? You seem to have a hard on to out white people. You are a sick person.

[john_galt]

Too many in Washington have forgotten (and a few here as well) that the rich and Republicans are Americans too. So when you say you "hate" some group or another you're talking about fellow Americans. Americans with the same rights to their property as you do. If you want to change the rules so you can take their property then the government can always take your property.

[Cheaper2buyit]

whaaat whaaat are you telling the truth they are people too. you say things on one hand & jack off on the other you want small gov but you want obama to make jobs you want a small budget with no money coming in.

[Guest052813-01]

Originally Posted by Cheaper2buyit

whaaat whaaat are you telling the truth they are people too. you say things on one hand & jack off on the other you want small gov but you want obama to make jobs you want a small budget with no money coming in.

Cheaper - no one is asking the Bamster to make jobs. In fact, the worst thing that can happen is to have the government create jobs - they are usually temporary, make-work jobs that do not sustain the workforce. What I would like to see happen is for the government to provide an environment that stimulates job growth in the private sector. This could be done with a combination of lower corporate/business tax rates and the lifting of regulations. Keeping the government out of business' way would do much to stimulate the economy - but that's my opinion.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by fritz3552

Keeping the government out of business' way would do much to stimulate the economy - but that's my opinion.

Amnesiac! That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

Keep government regulators out of Wall Street's way?
Keep government regulators out of BP's way?
Keep government regulators out of Massey Energy's way?

I wish I could find a way for you to live in the world that you desire without living in that hell myself.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by Cheaper2buyit

it passed so we have it for 2 years lets just see if it makes jobs. ( yes I know it hasn't yet but the booggyman said it will.

Pay attention when numbers and figures get thrown around in the future. It is likely that the ENTIRE package will create many jobs. It is likely that the tax cuts for the richest 2% will not create many jobs.

Enjoy the free* money that you're going to be getting in 2011 and spend it well.

*paid for by your grandkids

[Cheaper2buyit]

Fritz come-on who says obama should jobs everyone accept me & other drinkers.
monger if I get any free money it always goes to my keepastripperbabymomafund.org