He wasn't blaming Bush EVERYONE else was. Get it right homie. Even hardcore Republicans like Michael Steele and Romney admit that spending under Bush was out of control not to mention the removal of massive regulatory systems. Why is it so hard to recognize that he walked into a shitty situation and has made progress. Again must I show numbers or is he wrong no matter what. How about we place blame where it really lies. Both the President and congress can be doing A LOT better. Obama needs to take a no hold bars approach like George W. That's the only thing I respected about dude. He had the balls to say fuck it we're doing it my way period. It obviously didn't work out for all of us but he wasn't afraid to get shit done. That's one thing I'll agree with the right on is that Obama needs to lead and stop trying to compromise on every little fucking thing. There also needs to be a recognition that all the spending that people cry about is congress approved. Dude can't run up the deficit without congress saying here's the blank check.
When it comes to numbers regarding how trickle down doesn't work for anyone else except for the top 1%, these are they only numbers diehard republicans don't understand. The rich have said for going on 30 years..if you give me YOUR money you will be better off and eventually you'll be just like me. And republicans hand their money over without even a blink of the eye. Thing is everyone does. Especially the poor. The only ones who complain about it are the ones who know its a crock of shit. The only time the pubs complain is when the dems are trying to hand a little bit less over to the already fabulously wealthy.
That's why I said there needs to be a compromise. Purely just cutting won't help either there needs to bilateral approach to this. I get the fear is if the wealthy have to pay more they will cut workers in every market but what's the alternative cut from spending on needed welfare programs and raise taxes on the middle class and poor? If they don't have money to spend businesses will lose a lot more in revenue than if their taxes went up 3 percent.
You don't need to shadow him to know that he doesn't like confrontation and doesn't want to be blamed for bad ideas. So he allows other members in the party drive the conversation. Then when they do offer up a plan, it's so left field that you can't even go anywhere in negotiations.
It's a fight for the pie and they won't be happy until we go back to some type of fiefdom. They want it all and if you dare complain about it you're being jealous. But to their credit they do have a point about the incredible amount of people who don't want to work in this country. Everybody has a damn lottery fantasy. They want to hit it big and not work. Its not like a few either. The bs I saw over this recent powerball really made me see how many people are doing the bare minimum just waiting to hit those numbers. Its disgusting. What happened to wanting to work for a livable wage and living in a decent neighborhood. Since when do we all have to live like the damn Kardashians?
Isn't that only applicable when you don't have money? And for some reason or another I can't find the stats but the republican plan would raised taxes on the every middle class family by over 2500$. So your description more aptly explains what the repubs are doing as opposed to what the dems want to see done.
The fear isn't that the wealthy will have to pay more money, the rich will continue to be rich under any President. The problem is that just increasing taxes on the wealthy doesn't put a tiny dent into fixing our problem. We need cuts in spending and we need tax cuts to stimulate the economy. The issue with the fiscal cliff is that everyone's tax rates goes up several percentage points. I'm in the 15% tax bracket, but that will go to 18% on January 1st. That means I will be taxed somewhere between $2000-$3000 more dollars next year.
Ok so we're in agreement. I said we need a mixture of cuts and raising taxes. Which is most likely to happen Because the Republican congress will want to be re-elected in the future and blaming Bush... I mean Obama won't cut it if people are still out of work struggling.
No, the Republican plan would lower taxes to give people more money. Here's some of the tax implications if Obama let's the Bush cuts expire: - The 10 percent bracket would disappear. The 15 percent bracket would become the lowest tax rate. And the 25, 28, 33 and 35 percent rate brackets would rise to 28, 31, 36 and 39.6 percent. - The capital gains rate on assets held longer than a year would increase to 20 percent from 15 percent for middle- and upper-income taxpayers and rise to 10 percent from zero for those with lower incomes. - Dividends would be taxed as ordinary income rather than at the same rate as capital gains. - The per-child tax credit would revert to $500 from its current level of $1,000 and would cease to be refundable. - Expansions of the earned income tax credit, the dependent care credit and the adoption credit would expire.
Have y'all met John B here? He works leeches off the fine people of Ohio by doing nothing in Washington.
I think we need moderate spending cuts and tax cuts. We can't afford to raise taxes right now. You can only raise taxes during an economic boom. But I agree that the "blame Bush" argument is over. Obama has to stand on his own merits this time around.
This comes from the Congressional Budget Office (a non partisan source). http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83602.html
Where did he blame Bush? Like I showed you, his term looks very similar to Reagan's if you compare unemployment rates and Republicans had no problem with Reagan raising taxes 11 times during his administration. So what's the problem again?
CBO...fine ill accept that. I think the reason the Dems are threatening to let the cuts expire is because the repubs are still throwing huge tax cuts on the table for the wealthy. I know you'll find a way to spin this.. But it's a bit like when the republicans manufactured the debt ceiling crisis and basically said ..we will let all government fail if you don't give us what we want now. What did they want then? Raises for themselves and tax cuts for the rich.
Simply not true that President Obama does not want to cut spending... http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/14/news/economy/obama_budget_spending_cuts/index.htm
Obama's plan calls for $1.6 trillion in new taxes over the coming decade and $50 billion in stimulus spending on infrastructure projects. While the only new spending cuts in the plan would come from administration proposals curbing health-care programs and modest cuts from non-health programs like farm subsidies and cutting Postal Service costs and through higher fees on airline tickets. That is hardly the real spending cuts we need to get the country going again.
