• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

95%

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
WASHINGTON -- Damn the tea bags. A top adviser to President Barack Obama takes a dim view of last week's anti-tax "tea parties," promoted by organizers in the spirit of the Boston Tea Party.

"The thing that bewilders me is this president just cut taxes for 95 percent of the American people. So I think the tea bags should be directed elsewhere because he certainly understands the burden that people face," David Axelrod said Sunday.


I keep hearing/reading this over and over, when and where did obama cut taxes for 95% of the American people??
When does it go into effect??
How long till it expires??
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Some people that have believed that line so many times now, will be questioning some of these things this week, when he asks for cuts in services.

"Huh, you mean we can't have all the same services, and pay less tax too?"

He's a give and take kind of guy. He gives you lots and then slips in some take, when you're not looking!

"Change you can believe in", but not until you find out what change entails!
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
they always talk of it in a past sense, like it already happened.
when did it happen??
how long is it in effect??
How much was the cut??
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
How about we ALL tell how much money this "tax cut" is saving us? I will start! As a self employed contractor i have seen a ZERO dollar tax cut and will get a huge tax increase when the Bush tax cuts expire next year! I work hard and pay for ALL MY HEALTH INSURANCE. And I don't cry about it! Obama may have cut some taxes but 95%? I'd like to know what the actual number is! :roll: I talked to my brother about this tax cut yesterday. He works for a company as a crane operator. His "tax cut" is a whopping $13.00 a week! Hope he doesn't blow it all too fast! :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
they always talk of it in a past sense, like it already happened.
when did it happen??
It was part of the Jobs/Stimulus Act...

how long is it in effect??
I think it ended up just this year only- altho they have said they will push to make it a permanent cut for everyone making under $250,000 a year...

How much was the cut??
Depends on how much you make up to $250,000....$400 per individual- $500 per couple....My daughter who is going to college and works part time was told by her employer that she would not need to have any withheld anymore--but since she files a joint return wanted to keep a certain amount being taken out so she was assured she didn't owe next year.....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Will someone (liberal) explain to me how your income taxes can be cut when you're not paying income taxes?

---------------

I don’t think it’s appropriate to lie to the American people. And I think that one of the things I want to change about the culture of Washington is, not just the “big lie,” but also the “soft lie.” The fudging, the manipulation, the spin.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Will someone (liberal) explain to me how your income taxes can be cut when you're not paying income taxes?

---------------

I don’t think it’s appropriate to lie to the American people. And I think that one of the things I want to change about the culture of Washington is, not just the “big lie,” but also the “soft lie.” The fudging, the manipulation, the spin.

Be nice to see that change- but I doubt it... Thats politics and has been for 200+ years...
95% of the US population will be cut or not pay any taxes would be the best way to put it...

An interesting article about how Obama pushed the Repubs into a corner- or actually they painted themselves into one..


06.01.2009

Obama's Tax Cut Gambit: Shrewder Than You Think

Another thought occurred to me reading this morning's stories about Obama's trip to the Hill yesterday. One of the presumed rationales for leaning so heavily on tax cuts is political, the theory being that it helps you attract GOP votes. (Set aside the substantive rationale, which is powerful on its own, and Obama's denial of this motive.) In response to which, people like Paul Krugman argue that:

Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they’ll demand 100%. Then they’ll start the thing about how you can’t cut taxes on people who don’t pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they’ll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid--which would undermine that part of the plan, too.

I think that's mostly right as a prediction of the GOP response. But, unlike Krugman, I think that response could be a good thing for Obama and the Democrats, in that it exposes the GOP's true priorities in a way that's politically damaging to them.

By agreeing to channel up to 40 percent of the stimulus through tax cuts, Obama is essentially calling the GOP's bluff. He's saying, "You guys are making a principled argument that tax cuts can be a more efficient way to stimulate the economy. I'm accepting that argument in large part. So rather than spend a lot of money helping low- and middle-income people, I'm going to get that money to them via tax cuts."

At which point he's kind of backed them into a corner. If the GOP accepts, then great. If they turn around and say, "Well, when we said tax cuts, we actually meant tax cuts for wealthy people, not for low- and middle-income people," then it becomes blindingly obvious that they weren't making a principled argument at all. They were trying to shake Obama down on behalf of their rich cronies.

And, indeed, it looks like the GOP, while momentarily torn, can't resist the taking the bait. According to today's Post, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl is responding by pushing for permanent cuts in corporate and capital gains taxes--neither of which is likely to have much short-term stimulative effect. (See here for an explanation of the faulty capital gains logic.) Something tells me Obama won't have trouble winning a debate between tax cuts for working people and tax cuts for big business and wealthy investors.

In a sense, this is an early application of the "theory of change" Obama hinted at during the Democratic primaries, which American Prospect editor Mark Schmitt brilliantly sized up. Back then Schmitt wrote:

As Michael Tomasky describes it in his review of The Audacity of Hope, "The chapters boil down to a pattern: here's what the right believes about subject X, and here's what the left believes; and while I basically side with the left, I think the right has a point or two that we should consider, and the left can sometimes get a little carried away." What I find fascinating about his language about unity and cross-partisanship is that it is not premised on finding Republicans who agree with him, but on taking in good faith the language and positions of actual conservatism -- people who don't agree with him. ...

The reason the conservative power structure has been so dangerous, and is especially dangerous in opposition, is that it can operate almost entirely on bad faith. It thrives on protest, complaint, fear: higher taxes, you won't be able to choose your doctor, liberals coddle terrorists, etc. One way to deal with that kind of bad-faith opposition is to draw the person in, treat them as if they were operating in good faith, and draw them into a conversation about how they actually would solve the problem. If they have nothing, it shows.

Exactly.

--Noam Scheiber

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2009/01/06/how-obama-s-tax-cut-gambit-is-shrewder-than-you-think.aspx
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
So to paraphrase your article Oldtimer........ The republican idea is to cut taxes for buisness and wealthy folks who create most of the jobs in this country. Weathy folks eat out, buy cars, homes, boats, go on vacations, fly a lot, hire staff and pretty much spend a bunch more money than regular folks. The Obama plan is to give a tiny amount to a lot of people who will end up buying a chinese made trinket in Wally world! And then crow about how much he's done for America! And the sad part is that the same folks who voted him in think that this a great idea? :shock: And in reality it is more politics as usual when he promised change! I'll bet liberals are enraged that he isnt keeping his promises! :shock: Or maybe not! :wink: To admit that would be to admit they screwed up when they voted! :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT, "95% of the US population will be cut or not pay any taxes would be the best way to put it..."

That would be the HONEST way to put it, but that's not how Obama puts it, is it? And even after he talks about "soft lies" and "spin". I guess that makes him a "soft liar", doesn't it? Why do you put up with that from your president?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
OT, "95% of the US population will be cut or not pay any taxes would be the best way to put it..."

That would be the HONEST way to put it, but that's not how Obama puts it, is it? And even after he talks about "soft lies" and "spin". I guess that makes him a "soft liar", doesn't it? Why do you put up with that from your president?



When you put it in relation- it seems pretty innocent after the blatant lies, deception, and censorship years of GW...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
What's your definition of Torture?

What those memos call torture could be called training? Don't the SEALs go through much worse?

Here's some of what was called torture. Any other lies?

Ten techniques are approved, listed as: attention grasp, walling (in which the suspect could be pushed into a wall), a facial hold, a facial slap, cramped confinement, wall standing, sleep deprivation, insects placed in a confinement box (the suspect had a fear of insects) and the waterboard. In the latter, "the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual's feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner........produces the perception of 'suffocation and incipient panic'."
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Imagine this, ot trying to question a prisoner. Can you imagine the questions and how they would jump all over the place. ot needs to fill his prescription for Aricept.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
OT, "95% of the US population will be cut or not pay any taxes would be the best way to put it..."

That would be the HONEST way to put it, but that's not how Obama puts it, is it? And even after he talks about "soft lies" and "spin". I guess that makes him a "soft liar", doesn't it? Why do you put up with that from your president?



When you put it in relation- it seems pretty innocent after the blatant lies, deception, and censorship years of GW...

actually if you pay taxes wouldn't it be a tax rebate, not a tax cut??
you're not paying less, just getting back some of which you were overcharged!!

If you don't pay any taxes and you get money back, wouldn't that be welfare/socialism??
You're getting other people's money from the government--
redistribution of wealth!!
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Well said
if you pay taxes wouldn't it be a tax rebate, not a tax cut??
you're not paying less, just getting back some of which you were overcharged!!

If you don't pay any taxes and you get money back, wouldn't that be welfare/socialism??
You're getting other people's money from the government--
redistribution of wealth!!

The libs should print this off for future reference
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
OT, "95% of the US population will be cut or not pay any taxes would be the best way to put it..."

That would be the HONEST way to put it, but that's not how Obama puts it, is it? And even after he talks about "soft lies" and "spin". I guess that makes him a "soft liar", doesn't it? Why do you put up with that from your president?



When you put it in relation- it seems pretty innocent after the blatant lies, deception, and censorship years of GW...

actually if you pay taxes wouldn't it be a tax rebate, not a tax cut??
you're not paying less, just getting back some of which you were overcharged!!

If you don't pay any taxes and you get money back, wouldn't that be welfare/socialism??
You're getting other people's money from the government--
redistribution of wealth!!

LC, You've got to stop calling things as they actually are. When you use logic and reason, you're only setting yourself up as a target for the liberals.
 
Top