Whose economic debt plan do you favor?

[wellendowed1911]

Ok I think the GOP is making a huge mistake by still believing that trickle down economics will rebuild this country. This is a quote today from John Boehner: “The top 1 percent of wage earners in the United States pay 40 percent of the income taxes. The top 10 percent of wage earners pay 90 percent of the income taxes,” Boehner said. “The people he’s talking about taxing are the very people that we expect to reinvest in our economy and to create jobs in our country.

I think Boehner's statement is one of the biggest GOP lies and I don't think people are buying it. If Boehner's theory is true then why did we lose so many jobs under George Bush when the policy was in effect for 8 years?
Why did we have such a booming economy when Clinton raised taxes on the rich in his 8 years in office?
I have no sympathy for the super rich I like the Democrats plan to tax them heavily. Hell Reagan had the raise taxes and so did George H.Bush to raise revenues- why are the GOP acting as if Obama's idea is so harsh?

[john_galt]

Okay, trickle down is not a policy it is a philosophy and the democrats ran the Congress since 2007 not Bush. The number Boehner quoted are true so I don't know why you are arguing with them. Almost 47% of the people in this country don't pay a federal income tax and many take home earned income credit. Income redistribution plain and simple.

Why did we lose so many jobs under Bush? How many did we lose? Like I said it is a philosophy and not a policy especially under a democratically controlled congress. Why have we lost even more jobs in the last two years with a liberal progressive Congress, Senate, and White House? When Clinton took office we already had a booming economy (the very short cyclical recession ended the month before the election in 1992). So Clinton didn't create a boom, he inherited a boom as some people say and he road it for eight years as it slowed down.
You said something very interesting in your last paragraph; "I have no sympathy for the super rich..." The democrats plan to raise taxes on people making over $250,000 a year. Is that "Super rich"? Hardly... They are what we call small business owners who file as individuals, large scale farmers, working Americans who found a high paying job, etc.
Reagan and GHR Bush both raised taxes based on the promises of the democratic party to cut spending which they later backtracked on.

[CuteOldGuy]

I don't think any jobs were lost under President Bush, but be that as it may, neither the Democrats or Republicans are addressing the core issue, which is spending. Right now they are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The economy is in crash mode, and these clowns are arguing over miniscule amounts of spending cuts. You can tax the rich more, but it won't solve the problem, because there aren't enough rich people even if the government confiscated all income over $250K. The Congress must get serious about the role of government in people's lives, and reduce spending to what may reasonably be collected, with an allowance to pay off the debt in a short period of time.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by john_galt

Okay, trickle down is not a policy it is a philosophy and the democrats ran the Congress since 2007 not Bush. The number Boehner quoted are true so I don't know why you are arguing with them. Almost 47% of the people in this country don't pay a federal income tax and many take home earned income credit. Income redistribution plain and simple.Everything is income redistribution. Quit using that tired old boogeyman. The REAL income redistribution is to the rich. They've enjoyed a windfall over the last 20 years, while the rest of Americans have had to suffer. Compare their increase in income to that of the middle class.

Why did we lose so many jobs under Bush? How many did we lose? Like I said it is a philosophy and not a policy especially under a democratically controlled congress. Why have we lost even more jobs in the last two years with a liberal progressive Congress, Senate, and White House? When Clinton took office we already had a booming economy (the very short cyclical recession ended the month before the election in 1992). So Clinton didn't create a boom, he inherited a boom as some people say and he road it for eight years as it slowed down.But Obama didn't inherit an anti-boom from Republicans? Bullshit!
You said something very interesting in your last paragraph; "I have no sympathy for the super rich..." The democrats plan to raise taxes on people making over $250,000 a year. Is that "Super rich"? Hardly... They are what we call small business owners who file as individuals, large scale farmers, working Americans who found a high paying job, etc.Farmers are specifically exempt. "Small business" can mean 500 employees. It's a bullshit political term designed to mislead. Lastly, go ahead and LIST all of the blue collar jobs that pay over $250K/yr. Those are your WORKING Americans.
Reagan and GHR Bush both raised taxes based on the promises of the democratic party to cut spending which they later backtracked on.did the mean old Democrats trick the Gipper eleven times in a row? Because that's how many times he raised taxes.

Have fun running in 2012 after the public realizes that the Republicans were trying to drastically LOWER the tax rate for the rich at the same time they were trying to gut Medicare. The dipshits voted on it and then scrapped it. Idiots! HAHAHAHAHA!

[Longermonger]

Short version: Republicans want to give taxpayer's money to big oil companies as incentives and cut their taxes from 35% to 25%. They also want to cut the top income tax rate from 35% to 25% for all of those CEOs and the investor class. If you give them the Senate and the White House they'll kill Medicare in January 2013. Combined, the rich will get MUCH richer and the poor will die.

[JS42]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

Combined, the rich will get MUCH richer and the poor will die.

Beautiful, absolutely beautiful. Longer, for someone who is as book smart as you, I'm surprised you buy into this over the top leftist scare tactics as much as you do. Or maybe I shouldn't be

"Watch out poor people, those wascally wittle wepulicans are out to get ya"...lmfao.

Thanks for providing me with a good hearty laugh to start off my day. That little gem of yours is sig line material my old friend!!

[lakecat]

Wellendowed, you said that you think the figures of the top 1% paying 40% of the income taxes and the top 10% of wage earners paying 90% of the income taxes are a big lie. What percentage do you accept that they're paying and what source are you using? I believe the numbers Boehner cited come from the IRS, but I could be wrong. Also, please tell me what you think the bottom 50% are paying as a percent of the total income taxes paid.

If those numbers are indeed correct, do you think they're paying their fair share then? If not, what would be an equitable percentage?

[CuteOldGuy]

Well, Longer is partially right again, except I don't recall big business and the rich faring too poorly under Democrat administrations. Did you forget that General Electric paid $ZERO dollars in income taxes? Oil companies are still getting their subsidies. Subsidies, for Christ's sake! This was going on while the Democrats had complete control. If you still think there is a dime's worth of difference between the two parties on substance, I have a bridge in Wyoming I'd like to sell you.

[catnipdipper]

Tell me more about that bridge........................ ..

[ironhorseman2010]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

Short version: Republicans want to give taxpayer's money to big oil companies as incentives and cut their taxes from 35% to 25%. They also want to cut the top income tax rate from 35% to 25% for all of those CEOs and the investor class. If you give them the Senate and the White House they'll kill Medicare in January 2013. Combined, the rich will get MUCH richer and the poor will die.

You do realize that the largest tax incentive ever offered to BP was in 2009, and BHO is the man who made the offer, right?

And you realize that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and every other entitlement program is already on life support, right? With a $14 Trillion debt, that is growing literally hundreds of millions of dollars every day, cuts have got to come from somewhere.

There where rich people in Communist Russia. There will always be some people who make more money that all the rest of the people. The question is....do you want to live in a society where you have the freedom to work hard, and perhaps become on of those rich snobs...or do you want the Government deciding who gets to be rich, and who gets to be a serf?

Poor people generally don't create jobs for other people. Poor people don't generally buy products that require companies to employ alot of people to make these products. How many more contractors & subcontractors find themselves working on million dollar homes versus $80K homes?

Class envy is a horrid thing.

[catnipdipper]

Oh I don't know..................I think there might be some Bankers and Wall Street speculators that could maybe pay a bit more. They did accept a bailout for their creativity and risks and now are back to the big bonuses.

Put a few bucks in a Republican pocket and you can get tax protection, defunding fiscal reform, and a governor to break some unions as too costly.

Class envy I don't think so but repression and subjugation of one or more classes by an broad income gap and potential..............oh yes.

[john_galt]

Wow, that is sure one black kettle you got there monger. You accuse me of using scare tactics and language and then you start typing...

FYI, I never said anything about "blue collar" being the only working Americans, you did and you were wrong again.

There is income distribution based on based on wants and needs that have to be fulfilled (you should be very much of aware of making money based on wants and needs) and income Re-distribution based on government action. Strike two monger.

The GOP (yeah, like they can be trusted) Paul Ryan wants to change Medicare to make it work for the participants better (kind of like the congressional plan) and able to pay it's own way. The other option is the slow death guaranteed by the democratic non-plan. You see under the slow plan the participants can be played like pawns in a game of chess.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by JS42

Beautiful, absolutely beautiful. Longer, for someone who is as book smart 'Smart' is a compliment. 'Book smart' is an insult. Correct is what I am. as you, I'm surprised you buy into this over the top leftist scare tactics as much as you do. Or maybe I shouldn't be I care very little what your emotional response is.

"Watch out poor people, those wascally wittle wepulicans are out to get ya"...lmfao. Need more examples? How is an 80 year old woman supposed to get by on Paul Ryan's $15K/yr? Do you think there is a long line of insurance companies lining up to insure her? If she runs out of insurance...she dies. Let's call it the Republican Dead Grandma Plan.

Thanks for providing me with a good hearty laugh to start off my day. That little gem of yours is sig line material my old friend!!You emotional response=me no care.

Hey, where are those investigators that Trump sent to Hawaii that were digging up all kinds of good stuff? Now that makes me laugh.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by john_galt

Wow, that is sure one black kettle you got there monger. You accuse me of using scare tactics and language and then you start typing...Don't confuse scare tactics with facts that are scary.

FYI, I never said anything about "blue collar" being the only working Americans, you did and you were wrong again.My point is that there aren't any blue collar jobs that pay $250K/yr. Now you have to defend highly paid white collar 'workers' as harder "working Americans" than blue collar workers in the middle class that have always been screwed by Republicans. And before you trot out specific examples, I'll remind you that were talking about white collar workers earning more than $250K/yr....so no middle management-working-80-hour-weeks sob story.

There is income distribution based on based on wants and needs that have to be fulfilled (you should be very much of aware of making money based on wants and needs) and income Re-distribution based on government action. Which one applies to you living off of the government tit for two decades?Strike two monger.

The GOP (yeah, like they can be trusted) Paul Ryan wants to change Medicare to make it work for the participants better (kind of like the congressional plan) and able to pay it's own way. You mean his dead Grandma Plan? The same one that gives tax cuts to rich individuals and big business?The other option is the slow death guaranteed by the democratic non-plan. Do you mean the non-plan that is LAW? Are you comparing it to Ryan's outline...or the bill they voted on and then scrapped?You see under the slow plan the participants can be played like pawns in a game of chess.

The Ryan plan was scrapped because it is a disaster. Go ahead and claim victory in the midst of your (self)defeat.

[JS42]

If you actually think the Republican party is going to let a whole class of people die in this day and age due to lack of insurance, you have no common sense, hence why you are just book smart.