America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

thanks to the Republicans. What ever happened to straight up and down votes the R's demand? Tax cuts need to be paid for now? They go from saying they don't want to extend the tax cuts to let's do it for a year after the D's had to go down to 2 months to make a deal? It's obvious that the tax cuts they want are only for the rich. What do the house Republicans go too far before their supporters say enough?

Now for the funny responses.

That's funny!

RHETORICAL OUTRAGE!!!


merry christmas Fuzzy.

Those darn R's! they spoil all the fun.

The US House Republicans are being douchebags and trying to ruin the US Senate's vacation.

If you think back a few months, you'll recall that I warned that this 2% tax hike was coming so everybody had better have their finances in order.

(The next tax hit will be the expiration of the entire Bush tax cuts.)

They all need to just get it over with and let this tax cut expire, let the doc fix expire, and not extend unemployment another year. The government can't afford any of it.

The Bush cuts are aimed at the top earners so the Republicans will fight for that saying the opposite stuff they are saying now. These are for working people so they play games and demand they are 'paid' for, something that goes against everything they stand for tax policy wise.

It's funny stuff, especially when people who work and would be actually effected by this tax cut support the R's here. Maybe not funny, sad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcWVL4B-4pI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

You know what I find funny.


Most here can actually have a conversation with RICKMAVEN. But you are a lost cause.

How long is a country living on a credit card going to extend unemployment?

Ds are throwing a fit. Again. Because they refuse to negotiate. Then they use a compliant media to blame Rs. I blame both.

The actual numbers on the Bush tax cuts (not the rhetoric) showed that they had a wide effect on the non-rich through the lower tax bracket adjustments. That is why Obama wants to keep those and cherrypick off the upper end. When the inevitable impasse happens, all those tax cuts will simply expire.

It was not less money to the government. It was backfilled by China.

Awww, /cry

Dude. The bill was negotiated and agreed to by all involved. 89/100 senators voted for it. Now the house republicans are running away after having been given what they wanted, 2 months, pipeline, not paid for by tax increases for the rich, etc.

I'm not expecting HD to show the numbers for his claim as they don't exist.

http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9

Total income was $2.74 trillion less during the eight Bush years than if incomes had stayed at 2000 levels.

That much additional income would have more than made up for the lack of demand that keeps us mired in the Great Recession. That would mean no need for a stimulus, although it would not have affected the last administration's interfering with market capitalism by bailing out irresponsible Wall Streeters instead of letting the market determine their fortunes.

In only two years was total income up, but even when those years are combined they exceed the declines in only one of the other six years.

Even if we limit the analysis by starting in 2003, when the dividend and capital gains tax cuts began, through the peak year of 2007, the result is still less income than at the 2000 level. Total income was down $951 billion during those four years.

Average incomes fell. Average taxpayer income was down $3,512, or 5.7 percent, in 2008 compared with 2000, President Bush's own benchmark year for his promises of prosperity through tax cuts.

Had incomes stayed at 2000 levels, the average taxpayer would have earned almost $21,000 more over those eight years. That's almost $50 per week.

The changes in average and total incomes are detailed on the next page in Table 1, the first of four tables analyzing the whole data.

Now that we have looked at the whole eight-year period, what does the new data show about 2008, the worst recession ear since the 1930s, show when compared to the peak year of 2007, when the average taxpayer made $63,096, which was 2.5 percent more than in 2000.

In only two of the eight Bush years, 2006 and 2007, were average incomes higher than in 2000, but the gains were highly concentrated at the top. Of the total increase in income in 2007 over that in 2005, nearly 30 percent went to taxpayers who made $1 million or more,

000000000000000

Much more at link, with numbers!

YES!!! Strict party line vote today. Dude, if you want to comment about something with the degree of certainty you obviously have, try finding out wtf happened before you say crap. Wow. All you guys see is fuzz said something, gotta disagree and just shoot out talking points.

Read the thread. He obviously knows nothing about what happened and still opines, and I did answer his question.

Yardobeef, Fuzzy here is a kept man.

He has all day to read the HuffPo and all the other sites he subscribes to. Others like myself actually work for what they have and have to wait rill AFTER Oprah time before we have sufficient time to read through info. I could listen to a.m. radio and use that info to really get Fuzzy the excitement he craves when he comes here to get into another argument with the guys here.

I guess maybe I have yet to set the bar low enough for him.

Fuzzy. I will pray for you.

You find it sad that people won't vote to raid the treasury in their favor. You made the point.

In all fairness, you started this by shooting out a talking point.

lol, so it's better to start arguing against something you aren't even aware of. Got it.

Again with the kept man bs when you got nowhere else to go. So silly.

It is hard to discuss taxation and tax cuts with someone who does not pay taxes!

The 81.5 billion goes to less than 3% of all households in the US.

The 463 goes to 97%+.

The number of people reporting incomes of $200,000 or more but legally paying no federal income taxes skyrocketed in the second Bush term. A decade ago it was fewer than 1,500 taxpayers; in 2000 it was about 2,300. This high-income, tax-free group jumped to more than 11,000 in 2007 and then doubled in 2008 to more than 22,000.

In 2008 nearly 1 in every 200 high-income taxpayers paid no federal income tax, up from about 1 in 1,500 in 1998.

The share of high incomes that were untaxed increased more than sevenfold to one dollar of every $166.

The Statistics of Income data on tax-free, high incomes severely understate economic reality because they exclude deferral accounts, including those of hedge fund managers with billion-dollar incomes who can legally report no current income and borrow against their untaxed gains to live tax free.

Thank you for acknowledging that I produced the numbers that you claimed I couldn't and that you were wrong.

You never can figure out my position and just try to paint me into one of your labels. I've never taken the anti-tax position.

My position has always been that the 2% social security cut would have to be allowed to expire and the Bush tax cuts would have to be allowed to expire and that people should be prepared for the direct reduction in their paychecks, regardless of being lower, middle, or upper class. The bankruptcy of the nation will necessitate this.

Your jealousy and desire the punish the rich while voting yourself a bigger gain from the US Treasury is not productive for the nation and is just the same old self-serving occupooper mentality. We've been over it all before.

No what's pointless is borrowing money when spending isn't addresses.

You can't wave your outrage at redistribution of wealth till the cows come home to occupy the couch.

Your problem is people here never agree with the majority of your premises. And you're to partisanly deaf to have a conversation.

You called a Frenchie an ****...Oh, I'm wounded! I was just pointing out a basic fact.