Monday May 28, 2012

Obama-GOP tax bill clears Senate hurdle with ease

World ( 30 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Back to top

Order by Time Order by Popularity

30 Comments

Login to comment

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    We’re telling the American people to keep money that’s rightfully theirs, so they can spend it and invest it as they please

    If that is the case then why have ANY tax. Why is some money "rightfully theirs" and some money not?

    President Barack Obama has drawn strong criticism from liberals unhappy that he agreed to changes in the estate tax and income tax that will benefit the wealthy

    Perhaps Japan Today could start running translations from the American language for us non-Americans. In English, the ideas that wealthy people should pay tax, and that governments' role is not to help the wealthy pay as little tax as possible are not "liberal" ideas.

    In my view, if both parties agree that the debt is a serious problem, we shouldn’t be writing checks that we don’t have the money to cover

    Unless we want to. Like for the military, like for the financial bailouts, like for pork. And people actually take this clown seriously.

  • 0

    goodDonkey

    In a jab at Democrats, he added, “This is an important shift, and the White House should be applauded for agreeing to it.”

    The Democrats had already agreed to extend the tax cuts to the middle class. So it is not an important shift. It was just a case of being forced to give tax cuts to the rich.

  • 0

    lostrune2

    Heh, tax cut -> stimulus bill. Like the tax rebates in the stimulus bill a year ago, except the tax cut you get upfront, instead of a rebate check you get afterwards.

    Issue is, this $800 billion tax cut/stimulus bill is unpaid for. The government doesn't have enough revenue coming in to cover this. Here's how the main parts break down:

    The Congressional Budget Office said last week that the tax deal would add $893 billion to the deficit over the next five years, with the bulk of increase from loss of revenue -- $756 billion.

    According to the non-partisan CBO, the 13-month extension of unemployment benefits adds less than $57 billion to the deficit. The highest-priced item is the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, which will add more than $400 billion to the deficit, followed by the payroll tax holiday at about $225 billion.

  • 0

    lostrune2

    So to mitigate this is to cut spending. But they haven't cut anything yet significant from the Big 3 (Social Security, Medicare, Military) - that's where the cuts would make the difference. This is not like the climax to the ol' movie "Dave" (1993) with Sigourney Weaver, anyone remember that, haha.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    Good to see Obama swallow his pride and do the right thing.

  • 0

    RomeoRamenII

    Liberals had better invest heavily in tissue. Their going to need a lot of it.

    RR

  • 0

    skipthesong

    It was just a case of being forced to give tax cuts to the rich." How is it a cut? are their taxes going to go down or stay where they are? Also, I don't like the idea of those only over 250k should see an increase... it makes no sense. They ought to look for other avenues of getting money (and that doesn't include estate taxes - those are disgusting) and cutting the costs of running government. Its way too fat with a lot of fat people.

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    Issue is, this $800 billion tax cut/stimulus bill is unpaid for.

    Of course it is unpaid for. There would be no point in doing it if it was paid for, it could only be paid for by increasing taxes on everybody except the rich. Which they would do if they could get away with it no doubt.

    Only two things can be done with money. It can be spent or saved, rich people obviously save theirs. If it is saved it must be lent to somebody - no bank can pay interest on deposits and not have an equivalent loan, they would automatically be in the red. Once the private sector borrowing hits the saturation point and they can't borrow anymore, then only the government can borrow the money. And then they stand around screaming "oh my God, we are in debt!!!" Of course you are you fools.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    Pride had been messing with Obama's head, but it looks like he is beginning to realize there is a reason he and his party took the historic shellacking they did last month. Good to see this.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    Latest breaking news is that a judge has just declared Obama Care to be unconstitutional, as any American with a brain in their head already knew.

    Another busted lip for Obama...

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    So the big question is whether or not the Republicans will stop acting like two year olds and filibustering everything until they get their way, since they got it. Maybe now they can honor the heroes of 9/11 instead of spitting in their faces and denying them health care.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    Actually, smithinjapan, the big question is how is Obama going to explain to his far left base that he caved like cheap, empty suit on tax cuts "for the wealthy."

    Republican filibuster, I can assure you (as an American citizen) is actually pretty low on voters' list of concerns.

    Obama (Axelrod, his brains) played so many people, played them for utter fools. But then, such people like to be lied to...

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    TimRussert: "Republican filibuster, I can assure you (as an American citizen) is actually pretty low on voters' list of concerns."

    Not at all -- people who suffered the effects of 9/11 (ie. rescue workers and respondents who suffered respiratory illnesses and what not), as well as their relatives and others are outraged, as are gays on the DADT issue. But go ahead and do explain how the Republicans reached the decision to reject the former health care -- I'm curious about your view on it.

    "Obama (Axelrod, his brains) played so many people, played them for utter fools. But then, such people like to be lied to..."

    Not surprising you've misunderstood the notion of 'playing someone like a fool'. Obama wasn't lying to people all along and is now reveling in his betrayal, or anything like that; he gave in to the mewling Republicans because the government is so utterly dead-locked by their baby-like antics that NOTHING was being done. The party of 'no' said flat out that NOTHING will pass until the cuts for the wealthy get passed, and that's fact.

    Obama does indeed have a lot of explaining to do. Fortunately those blind enough to believe in the GOP don't need to have anything explained to them about all the delays, filibusters, and rejections of things that matter while they cater to the 'rich', because said people will lap up anything the GOP has to say with no questions asked.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    That is a lengthy admission that you got played, smithinjapan. But I will accept it.

  • 0

    manfromamerica

    The Left is imploding.

  • 0

    SolidariTea

    Both Obama and Clinton endorse the Bush tax cuts.

    Too funny !!!!

  • 0

    RoninGaijin

    What I think is crazy is that most of the radical republicans i know don't even have much money. yet they blindly support the party on things like tax breaks for the rich.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    yet they blindly support the party on things like tax breaks for the rich." You call someone with 250k a year rich? and why are you saying breaks? that would mean that their taxes are going down when in fact they won't they'll stay the same as they did the previous year.

  • 0

    cleo

    You call someone with 250k a year rich?

    When some three-quarters of the working population earn less than $75,000 and median household income is less than $50,000?

    Yes.

  • 0

    Molenir

    What I think is crazy is that most of the radical republicans i know don't even have much money. yet they blindly support the party on things like tax breaks for the rich.

    Wait, you call not raising taxes on someone, giving them a tax break? Heh, so funny. Especially when you consider, its their income, not their wealth. Well, unless you're talking the Death Tax, which Dems are desperate to raise, so they can claim more then half of the money belonging to people who die.

  • 0

    Taka313

    The President punted on 1st down. What a disgrace.

    Taka

  • 0

    arrestpaul

    smithinjapan - So the big question is whether or not the Republicans will stop acting like two year olds and filibustering everything until they get their way

    Concidering how many Democrats publically attacked Obama for working with the Republicans on this issue, the big question is who will the Progressive Democrat Caucus run against Obama in the Demcocrat primary.

  • 0

    arrestpaul

    GJDailleult - Ah but maybe I am wrong. So have a nice crash. By the way, if you would like to buy some nice South Florida real estate, right next to a beautiful national park, give me a call.

    You're usually wrong. How much "South Florida real estate" did you buy?

  • 0

    SolidariTea

    When some three-quarters of the working population earn less than $75,000 and median household income is less than $50,000?

    Don't forget the swelling ranks of federal employees - their median income is 112,000.Full insurance. Sweet pensions. Early retirement.

    But Dems don't want you to know about yet another voting bloc they have bought off...

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    You're usually wrong. How much "South Florida real estate" did you buy?

    Appears somebody was doing their job and I got deleted. Broke my own personal rule - "Whiskey bottles, and brand new cars, oak tree you're in my way" - about internet posting after drinking. But whatever I wrote, it doesn't mean I was wrong.

    I have no South Florida real estate, but would happily collect a fee for putting people in touch with people who have some to sell. The US government has only one purpose and objective, and that is to prop up and protect the financial elite. It will end in disaster, so get prepared and protect yourself.

  • 0

    TimRussert

    The Democrats proposed today a $1.1 Trillion spending bill that includes spending for their unconstitutional Obamacare bill. This is insane. These people have lost it, and are determined to bankrupt us.

  • 0

    manfromamerica

    These people have lost it, and are determined to bankrupt us.

    It's necessary to pave the way for global government and communism.

  • 0

    lostrune2

    Mitt Romney and some Tea Partyers have already said they're against this.

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    You really think electing the other party will change anything? Twenty of the last thirty years have had Republican presidents.

  • 0

    6bncapitalists

    Twenty of the last thirty years have had Republican presidents.

    Too superficial a grasp of US politics there. Presidents don't exclusively decide budget matters. ACORN and Fannie Mae and Freddie were Democrat creations. Less conspiracy theory and more realism would help you.

Back to top

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

Facebook
Twitter

More in World

View all

View all