GOP Wins Bush Tax Cut Fight
As I write this, President Obama is on the air announcing a deal on the Bush tax cuts: They all stay alive for 2 more years, while unemployment gets extended for another 13 months. The latter was bound to happen anyway; the former was what all the fuss has been about.
Extending the Bush tax cuts is good policy and, for the Republicans, good politics. Why did the president give in? Presumably, because he can read a poll as well as anyone.
It should be noted at this point that the Bush tax cuts would have been permanent from the beginning if not for Democratic obstinacy when they were first passed. Now, businesses and families will have some clarity on the tax environment over the next couple of years. With taxes not set to rise at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 2011, businesses and families can plan. They’ll have more of their own money at their disposal, thanks to this deal. That’s a win for families on policy, and the Republicans were on the side that won.
From a communications point of view, the Republicans clearly won the debate and have set themselves and their presidential candidate up to win the debate again in two years. Though President Obama agreed to the deal, he gets little credit for anything called the “Bush tax cuts,” which was among the things he campaigned against in 2008. In 2012, the Bush tax cuts will be part of the economic debate again. Assuming that the economy is stronger by then, which is not a safe assumption at all, he will benefit from that, but the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will again endanger the economy. If he stands in the way of extending them in 2012, he will lose that debate. If he jumps to extend them, then his own left-wing base will howl and scream, as it’s doing today. The Bush tax cuts, and their impermanence, have put President Obama between the proverbial rock and hard place.
The GOP held strong and won here. Elections do have consequences. It’s tough to see them making such a strong stand, and winning it, if the 2010 mid-term “shellacking” hadn’t happened.
What? A 2 year extension is NOT a victory.
And 13 more months of unemployment benefits?!?
This is a bad joke. And the GOP is a bunch of wimps. Looks like they’ve learned nothing. They just won’t fight.
The GOP haven’t even taken their seats yet.
Let us not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
With the current lame-duck Congress, this was the best we could get, so let’s take it and be happy with half a loaf.
As was pointed out, the newly elected Representatives don’t take their seats till 3 January, when the 112th Congress begins… and since the tax cuts expire on 1 January, it was necessary to get this bill passed now, rather than waiting for the new folks to show up.
This is a defensive draw at best. It does not move the ball down the field. Actually, the net spending increase and reinforced expectation that government will pay unemployment benefits forever make it a bit of a loss.
Hear! Hear!
I bet you’re one of the knuckleheads who refused to support John McCain because he wasn’t a “real conservative.” How did that work out for ya?
They said if I voted for McCain, the tax cuts would be extended — and they were right.
Pretty good it looks like. Look whose coming to town this Janurary. It’s better than Santa Clause. As for the Republicans who, yet again, have agreed to all-time record spending, it would have been better, I think, to call the Dems on their call to allow to expire the Bush tax cuts. These are Republicans who don’t get it and would rather increase government than face reality; and John McCain is one of them.
In two years it will be. This whole argument will happen again during the 2012 presidential campaign.
Which party do you think will win that one> Hint: its logo doesn’t look like a barely-passing grade.
In 2 years we should have elected a Republican President. At that time, make those tax cuts permanent.
The Bush Tax Cuts will expire just in time for 2012 as the 23 Obama Senate Democrats flee from President Obama, Obama will be in a pickle with the looking tax increases since unemployment will remain high, & President Obama remains radioactive due to his own inability to lead & his own Marxism. Given the unpredictability in ObamaCare & other horrible legilations/regulation, unemployment will not get better in the next 2 years. Look for more job stagnation. Obama will do his Bush bashing impression for the umpteenth time.
The Republicans need to play hard ball with Obama for the 2 years & until he finds himself no longer POTUS in November 2012.
Oh, Obama blinked.
POTUS is IMPOTUS.
A 2 year extension is perfect. Just in time for the next election. Well done the Rs!
agree
good start
keep the momentum
this things was always a time bomb for the democrats left behind by the one and only “turdblossom” karl rove
will become a major campaign issue and the reps will win it again
Apparently, Obama did not consult the Democrat Caucus in both Houses of Congress before his press conference; this leaves them in a lurch. Under the bus they go, Pelosi, Reid & the other chump Democrats.
Obama is crumbling to pieces like a broken egg shell. Weakness begets weakness.
Apparently, Obama did not consult the Democrat Caucus in both Houses of Congress before his press conference; this leaves them in a lurch. Under the bus they go, Pelosi, Reid & the other chump Democrats
And why should he have? He knows exactly where they stand and how many voters are behind them, (or not).
As Mr. Preston noted, he can read a poll as well as anyone.
As far as the Reid/Pelosi Congressional soviet is concerned, this is a classic case of self-marginalization.
Redistricting is going to be so much effin’ FUN, watching these moonbats turn cannibal on each other…”Battle of the Congressional Moonbat Half-wits”.
Obama is crumbling to pieces like a broken egg shell. Weakness begets weakness.
Well, I wouldn’t count him out just yet, but it is amusing to see the disciple of Alinsky get hoist on his own petard isn’t it?
We need a pool to see how many of the rest of his “palace guard” sneak off to steal the lifeboats in the next six months.
Surely Obambi cannot unilaterally commit to extending Bush’s tax cuts Congress and the Senate must concur that would be a Dictatorship. If he has made this announcement without getting assurances from the Democrat MAJORITIES in both Houses then he is possibly setting himself up for a fall. Not that any Deem’o’ crat sycophant would dream of doing that to him of course.
Put the bus in reverse and make a couple of passes over those useless speed bumps.
I don’t miss Bush,but I’m sure Vicente Fox and the Mexican corrupcionista millionaires do.Bush’s little game of pimping out the US to Mexico,while invading Iraq to hide his contemptible lack of patriotism,is something Obama can’t even begin to imitate.
deguello:
Watch Michael Moore much?
wtf are you talking about?
Did you go off your meds again?!
He must figure he can drive the deficit up over 100% of GDP by the election in 2012 and pin it on inadequate taxes.
Those tax cuts were stupid then and are even more stupid now — they accomplished nothing except to raise the deficit.
A stalled economy won’t help the deficit either. First things first.
In the meantime, cut govt. waste, unnecessary programs and cease growing the Federal government. These measures would do a lot to improve things.
BC:
It’s MY MONEY. I earned it. So did everyone else who posts here with the exception of possibly yourself. So if the tax cuts were stupid, just how much money should the federal government allow me to keep in order to spend itself into economic prosperity? Giving free money to the central government is like giving free booze to an alcoholic. More does NOT equal better, you progressive troll.
Did I mention it’s MY MONEY?
The tax cuts didn’t raise the deficit, THE OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING IS WHAT IS RAISING THE DEFICIT. CUT THE SPENDING, CUT THE AMOUNT OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND THEIR WAGES AND BENEFITS AND SOON WE WOULD NOT HAVE A DEFICIT.
Those tax cuts were stupid then and are even more stupid now — they accomplished nothing except to raise the deficit.
Gently, dear – it’s the stupid, stupid spending that’s running us into the poorhouse.
Imagine an economy where anyone can borrow as much money as he/she wants but never has to pay it off. just as long as the interest is paid. This is how Republicans have been treating the deficit now for decades. This sort of “thinking” is behind the imaginary economy that built up over the past decade based on “financial instrument” like derivatives that bogusly magnify actual physical assets and worth to an absurd, La-La Land degree.
And what has your sainted secular savior Obama done to cut the deficit, BC?
Zero.
Zip.
Zilch.
Nada.
In fact, he’s added more to the total national debt than all previous presidents combined.
Of course, if you had two functioning brain cells, you’d already know that, BC.
BC can’t hear you. He’s too busy watching that funny little movie playing over and over and over again on that screen inside his pointy little ‘progressive’ head. It’s a complete alternate reality show starring his heroes Che, Mao, Uncle Joe, Chavez, Castro, Lenin and Pol Pot.
He’s doing this, poop-for-brains. And it was Bush who ran the train off the tracks just before Obama took over, so this this right wing bit of blaming Obama for the deficit is about as honest as, oh say Bush declaring victory.
BC obviously thinks that every penny he earns really belongs to the Government and they just graciously allow him to keep some of it. Such moronic thinking is prevalent in idiotic moonbat minds or what passes for minds in their case.
I’m hip with that. Raise the tax rates (not just marginal tax rates) to 110% on Billy Gates, Wally Buffett, and BC.
In 1976, the top 1% accounted for 9% of the nation’s income; now the top 1% account for 24% and the primary reason was that the Bush tax cuts so favored the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.
Too bad Obama doesn’t have the political will to just say “I’m not signing anything. Get that off of my desk!” Alas, he has no true convictions. He really has no political savvy. This would have been the ultimate opportunity for him. A great Presidential moment. Bush would have seen it. Remember when Bush said, “I’ve got some political capital and I plan on spending it!” He said it with a grin and a wink. Obama just doesn’t have the sand for that.
It’s time for the Feds to raise the rates on those making more than $250,000.00 per annum. The U.S. could put many people to work fixing our crumbling infrastructure. Even rich people use roads and bridges.
It would also be a great time to use the extra money to build sustainable green communities in the urban areas instead of promoting more unnecessary land use. Green use, urban growth with public transportation for those who enjoy that kind of lifestyle (which is almost everyone when compared to commuting) would be the best use of this extra money.
And before folks here pop a vein in their forehead, I use the term “extra money” (I’m sure you noticed) because for rich people, additional revenue is just that. They already have all of the necessities and more. The rich have benefitted greatly from the way our system is set up. It’s set up against the middle class and the lower class in favor of them. Now is the time for a little payback.
Our system is broken in favor of the top 2% and God knows how much of the entire wealth of the nation they will need to control before people wake up. I imagine somewhere around 50 or 60 percent. We will get there; as sure as the sun rises we will all bow to the Corporate Overlords soon enough.
Better figure out how best you can serve the rich. That’s all you will be able to do. Serve the people with money. Serve them well.
Duh–spending tax money like a run-away train raised the deficit, not slowing down the rate at which the gov’t steals from the rich to give to the poor/non-working leeches. Which puts responsibility for the deficit straight into Congress’s lap, where it’s been all along.
The top 5% of working people already pay something like 40-50% of income taxes and the top 50% of working people pay 97% of income taxes. Just how much is the top half supposed to give up for the bottom half? The Lefty base are a bunch of lunatics that need to be marginalized and sent to an insane asylum. One stipulation for earning the right to vote ought to be that you are a net contributor to our income tax system. That way we ALL have a stake in reducing the size of government and not just those that have to pull the cart that seems to be picking up more and more people. Screw te Left. They go on and on about “greed” yet fail to recognize the real greed that is theirs and the federal government’s. It isn’t “greed” to want to keep your own money. It IS greed to insist that someone that has earned money give up that money to someone that has no claim on it whatsoever.
And I’m SICK of hearing the Lefty argument that extending the Bush tax cuts to those greedy millionaires and billionaires “costs” the federal government $700 billion over 10 years. That presumes that the money is the government’s to begin with and not property of those that earned it. If the government can’t fund its bloat then it ought to go on a darn diet. We can’t afford Liberal/Progressive/Socialist government anymore.
The Life Boat
A large group of citizens finds it necessary to abandon ship and take to a life boat on the open sea. Some row, some fish, some get on with other necessary jobs, some rest up. Then a few announce they just can’t hack it. They were not responsible for the problem, they aren’t strong, a rescue is sure to come along soon etc. They refuse to work. A majority of the occupants decide the unwilling must cling to the sides because they are getting in the way of the productive. For a while there is enough to feed the hangers-on and take care of their needs but after a big storm, the productive find they must work twice as hard to keep the ship afloat and keep going. Some of the workers are weakening from pulling the extra weight and sharing the now reduced food. The productive start arguing about the hangers-on. “Cast them off.” say some. “Make them work.” say others. One of the hangers-on starts organizing the unwilling. “We have as much right to seats in the boat as they do.” he says. “It isn’t our fault we can’t row or fish or mend sails.” The hangers-on hatch a plan to rock the boat, tip the productive overboard and take their seats. When the productive catch wind of this plan, they are furious and an argument breaks out over the merits of forcing the plotters to drop off or requiring them to push the boat to augment the rowers’ efforts and thus earn the right to stay. Preoccupied as they are with such matters, the survivors fail to notice the ominous storm clouds gathering on the horizon.
Any guesses how the story ends?
Any guesses how the story ends?
Well, yeah. But you’ve got it set up bass-ackwards.
Y’see, on the thwarts of the lifeboat you’ve got people who sit on the port side and then you’ve got people who sit on the starboard side. The coxswain is usually elected by everyone involved with the lifeboat from one of the lucky subset who sit on the port or starboard thwarts. The coxswain’s job is to sit in the stern, grab the tiller, and look lost while trying to convince the thwart-sitters that he is paying attention to them.
The lifeboat is being propelled through the water by people who are hanging on to the man-ropes outside the hull. (These folks are really only trying not to drown, and lifeboat propulsion is entirely a side-effect of the sum of their individual efforts at self-preservation).
One might be forgiven for thinking that the thwarts are meant to be utilized by oarsmen,(what with the oarlocks being located on the gunwales and all), but the process of deciding who is going to stand for coxswain and then agitating on whether he should steer the rudder to port or starboard is such incredibly important work that the original purpose of the seats have been forgotten entirely, (and every once in a while fights break out among the thwart-sitters, and they whack each other with the oars and break them anyway).
How does it end?
One day a ship will happen by and rescue the people sitting in the lifeboat, but not the “human outboard lifeboat motors”, who will be left behind still in the water where they belong.
This will be perfectly alright with these folks though, since with all the human ballast no longer weighing it down, the boat will be that much easier to propel through the water.
And there will be all those empty thwarts in the boat open up for people to sit in…
I could care less about these tax rates- 3% either way will not make a dent in whats wrong with the economy. The problem is the home building industry. Until we get that rolling agin all these other programs will not turn it around. When construction shut down most companies laid off their middle aged workers and kept their younger ones as a base to grow their companies when things turn around. Unless that sector comes back and those laid off workers get rehired what will you do with those workers? Re train them for what-tech jobs, nursing…..?
“If only we could get the goddamn price of tulip bulbs back to realistic levels, this economy would turn around!”
Baron von Schnickelfritz, 1637
Those tax cuts are so paid for.
Well, I’m glad that the tax cuts are extended but disappointed about unemployment extended for 13 months. That’s 7 months too long if you ask me.
Businesses that have been holding out on hiring due to the threat of higher taxes will start hiring again. Yes, some people will need a bit more time as they job hunt. However, studies in this country as well as others show that most people wait until their unemployment checks are about to get cut off before they seriously seek employment.
13 months… yeah, that’s too long.
Repeal Obamacare and we’ll really see the job market improve.
This is just smoke and mirrors. The real hope rests in the hands of the American people. Do they or do they not have the will-power to do what’s right for their country and not just what they perceive as right for themselves. Time will tell, but each day grows the welfare/entitlement state that progressives crave in order to maintain their base. That and a few million illegal aliens.
I keep thinking “speed-bump.”
the GOP caved, but who is surprised.
People getting to keep a pittance more of what they earn? What a moribund concept.
If a human being’s very labor/sweat/creativity is taxed as a commodity then what have we become? We should only tax ‘things’ not ‘people’.
We truly are an enslaved populace.
There’s much discussion about how tax rate increases hurt small businesses, which generate most of the job growth in the US, but no one ever describes how deep and wide these effects are.
Briefly: Two-thirds of ALL small business profits are taxed at the highest tax rate, regardless of what tax tier the business owner’s “income” falls into. This tax applies to a vast number of small businesses, including many sole proprietorships and small firms with a handful of people. In short, if you own a small business and clear $60K in profit, $40K will be taxed at the highest available rate. Under Bush, that rate was 35%; the proposed hike would’ve pumped it up to 39.6%, effectively a 5% increase.
In this example (if my math is right), that 5% increase translates into a federal income tax bill that’s jumped by nearly $2000. A small sum, but it represents $2000 in growth or purchasing power that will instead disappear into the black maw of Uncle Sam who will spend it on … who knows what.
What happens when small businesses stop growing? A 5% hike on the bulk of small business profits would have at minimum slowed “recovery” even more than the current snail’s pace. Picture two more years of 10% unemployment rates, or worse.
Historically, tax increases do not result in reduced deficits, they prompt even more government spending. Every time the EU has raised the VAT tax, guess what, spending increased to consume then exceed the revenue generated by the higher tax. The only solution to deficits is to stop spending.
Hey, BC,
My energy bills were higher than usual this month. I want you to pay for them because with all of your free time to post on blogs I’m assuming you have more money than me and I’d like a little of what’s in your pocket (no, not THAT pocket, you perv). My food bills are also higher and I’d like to take some of your food out of your fridge and pantry to pay for my three illegitimate baybays who iz going hongray because I trade my food-stamp-card for drugs and it ain’t they fault that muh baybays be hongray. Also, you need to work harder and longer to pay for my family that just crossed the borders illegally. We Irish/Italians/Greeks need amnesty NOW to escape our socialist ponzi-scheme nightmare!
Thanks, Pal!
Sincerely,
Your fellow Lefty Parasite
I work for a tax prep service. When these women, with too many kids come in and file their taxes and get their “earned income credit”, they walk out with checks anywhere from one thousand dollars to ten thousand dollars (depends on the number of illegitimate kids) and then those who pay taxes walk out with a huge tax bill. It is out of balance. But the ‘earned income credit’ stayed. This is because the demonic-rats need those voters. I say if you don’t work and contribute you DON’T VOTE! If you can’t pass an IQ test you DON’T VOTE. The muslim terrorist in the white house saw the advantages of keeping the earned income credit. It is one more bribe for the mentally derranged vote.
Delia,
You summed it all up so beautifully.
Kudos!
What win? An expensive draw at best.
When the top 1% of American earners took in 23.5% of the nation’s pre-tax income in 2007, up from 9% in 1976, I don’t see this as a victory for the average American.
Are you aware that your bogus statistic doesn’t count over a trillion dollars in government payments, like SS, SSI, food stamps and welfare; or that there is a massive underground economy that isn’t counted; or that because of 1976′s onerous tax brackets, wealthy people had most of their wealth in ‘non income-producing investments’ like municipal bonds so there is no way to compare 1976 to 2007; or that there is hundreds of billions of dollars in income transfer payments in the health care system and other government systems; or that there are dozens of other reasons, large and small that make your discredited statistic meaningless.
Those numbers were developed as a propaganda device by marxists.
Repeating the lie doesn’t make it true.
But totally aside from that, when people who have no jobs can afford to get fat, and have ipods and drive new cars, it’s abundantly clear that there isn’t a distribution of wealth problem in this country.
Spew your propaganda somewhere else.
You are simply trying to obfuscate a very serious issue. I don’t know any reputable individual who isn’t concerned about the ominous trend in income distribution in this country.
Your “data” is a pack of lies. And the “serious people” you talk about are liberals.
The undisputable facts are that people in the United States are rich beyond the imagination of any other people in history. Obesity is a bigger problem than poverty.
Income distribution isn’t a problem, it is a weapon used by people who want to rule.
There hasn’t been a country ever, EVER, that didn’t have wide disparities in income, including every Communist and socialist country, ever.
How old are you? Grow up.
You people remind me of Spaulding in Caddyshack . . . “I want a cheeseburger and a hamburger and I want fries and a milkshake and . . . “
Hey! Looky there…it’s our cowardly liar that thinks anyone who thanks troops for their service is a ‘chickenhawk!’ The guy that, instead of thanks for his service would rather everyone stand in awe of his awards.
How you doing today, boy? Told any more whoppers lately?
Oh now, Mini Me, just because you got your dick knocked in the dirt doesn’t mean you should hold your breath until you turn blue. And thank you for your service. We needed that mail delivered.
Sorry, Sensei, we’re not the ones expecting Obama to pay our mortgage, and gas, and so on.
You’re worse than a broken clock, Sensei… you’re not even right twice a day.
And we’re not the ones worried about flavored dip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlNQ5gZVytk
I think he’d make a helluva a ticket:
Palin the Fake Hunter/Flavored Dip Redneck 2012
This is a horrible loss to the American people. It means two more years of recession and uncertainty for business. Republicans should vote no on this and when the new congress is sworn in the Rupublicans should ask Obama for his birth certificate, and kick this progressive sabateur out.
Archived articles surface refer to Kenyan born Obama By Linda Bentley | October 21, 2009 article from the archives of the East African Standard referred to then Senator Barack Obama as “Kenyan-born,”
Kenyan official says Obama born here Nov. 5, 2008 A Kenyan lawmaker told the nation’s parliament last month that Barack Obama was born in Africa and is therefore “not even a native American.” Kenyan MP James Orengo posited, “how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the president of America?”
Kenyan officials affirm Obama son of this soil Nov. 5, 2008On the floor of the Kenyan National Assembly the day after Barack Obama was elected U.S. president, members of the African country’s parliament celebrated “a Kenyan ruling the USA,” calling Obama “a son of the soil of this country.” “Could we allow … a Motion for Adjournment so that we could also continue the celebrations of having a Kenyan ruling the USA?” asked the MP for the Ikolomani Constituency, Dr. Boni Khalwale.
NPR archive describes Obama as Kenyan born Archives for the tax-supported organization reveal that a 2008 report described then-Sen. Barack Obama as “Kenyan-born” and a “son of Africa.”
Obama in 1980 said he was born in Mombasa Kenya
http://www.thepostemail.com ^ | Dec. 3, 2009 | John Charlton Obama in 1980 said he was born in Mombasa, Kenya a chance meeting in the vicinity of Kalakaua Blvd., one evening in early August of 1980. And when I started telling him where I had been in the Corps for foreign countries, I told him I was just in Mombassa he interrupted me and said I WAS BORN THERE.
See Michelle call Barack a Kenyan A video has been posted online in which Michelle Obama, at a 2007 fundraiser, describes her husband as “Kenyan.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TRqvDvZn9I
A given person is a natural born Citizen of the United States if and only if:
1. The person was born in the United States,
2. Both parents of the person were Citizens of the United States when that person was born, and
3. The person has been a Citizen of the United States, since birth.
The intent of the United States constitutional requirement that the President of the United States be a natural born Citizen of the United States:
Intent. The intent of the United States constitutional requirement that the President of the United States be a natural born Citizen of the United States is: (1) to reduce the likelihood that a President of the United States would have a former, or present, attachment to a foreign country (because such an attachment could influence one to make decisions that would not promote the interests of the United States); and (2) to increase the likelihood that the interests of any President of the United States will coincide with those of the United States.
This country cannot afford $4 trillion more in debt. Tax rates should stay at the Bush levels for another year or two until the economy recovers, and then everyone’s taxes should return to levels of the Clinton years, the last time we had a relatively healthy economy.
Unfortunately, with Republicans, who care more about Wall Street than Main Street and care not a whit about leaving our children in hock to China, set to control Congress for years and years, what is most likely is that the Bush tax cuts will continue to be extended on a temporary basis in 2012 as well. \
I’d like to ask people posting here: what do you propose to cut to make revenue neutral the $4trillion lost over the next ten years if the tax cuts are made permanent? Show me numbers, o unpatriotic “conservatives.”
4 trillion “lost.”
Okay, first point: it’s not lost. It’s ours. We keep it.
Second point: that $4 trillion wouldn’t even make a DENT in the $42 trillion SPENDING that the government has planned over the next 10 years.
Obama is a millionaire spendthrift griping that he won’t be able to make his limousine payments if he isn’t allowed to steal some kid’s milk money.
Third point: If we gave them that $4 trillion dollars, all they’d do is increase spending over the next 10 years from $42 trillion to $46.
Fourth: there are hundreds of constitutionally illegitimate government programs that could be dropped entirely. We could balance the budget within a year and pay off the national debt within a decade— but smelly hippies throw a screaming fit if we touch ANY of their bread-and-circus programs.
The kids didn’t have any milk money. Bush spent it all.
No matter what passes, we should definitely borrow more money? What a bunch of pudknockers.
While I’m glad to keep more of my money I do not consider this as much of a win. This type of thing seems to fall into the category of “America’s death throes”, as did the Republican wins in November.
With the environmental kook / Obama driven decision this week to stop further exploration for oil in the Gulf of Mexico and oil once again approaching $90 a barrel, the extension of the “Bush” tax cuts might be too-little-too-late. Gasoline over $3.00 a gallon will be a severe drain on any possible economic recovery. And the environmentalists want gas to be $7 + a gallon.
I’m waiting for someone to tell me that Obama is moving to the so-called center. I don’t believe it. He certainly caved quicker that Clinton on the balanced budget, but like Clinton’s “triangulation” strategy, I wonder what Obama’s end game is with this play.