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

Give me a break, a tax break — or else

cutterone

Well-known member
Here we set with this Wall St and mortgage crisis and we are ear marking tax breaks for wind generators, kids wooden arrows, rum producers, NASCAR, Hollywood film producers, and Katrina new job incentives! How in the he!! did these idiots get elected? Every pole shows the NO opinion of the public and they are playing games. :mad: :mad:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
cutterone said:
Here we set with this Wall St and mortgage crisis and we are ear marking tax breaks for wind generators, kids wooden arrows, rum producers, NASCAR, Hollywood film producers, and Katrina new job incentives! How in the he!! did these idiots get elected? Every pole shows the NO opinion of the public and they are playing games. :mad: :mad:

I here you! Pork on a bill to bail out previous pork. I hope every single one of them lose election time.

If the Terrorist are smart they will never try to attack Washington D.C. because they have to many Alie's there! :mad:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
"No Earmarks McBusch" just voted for over $100 BILLION in "earmarks"- and special interest funding :shock: :wink:

Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck says McCains vote just spelled the "end to John McCain and his campaign".....


'Sweetened' bailout plan stuffed with pork
Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 10/2/2008 12:50:00 PM

A finance journalist says the revised bailout bill passed by the Senate on Wednesday night contains a lot of "sweeteners" that are simply designed to garner enough votes to get the bill through the House.

Aaron Task, editor of TheStreet.com, has been watching with a critical eye the proposed economic bailout legislation as it bounces between the two chambers of Congress. He argues that many Americans -- even though they understand they will likely suffer if the plan fails -- view it as a bailout for the "fat cats" on Wall Street.

Task writes on his website that the just-passed Senate version of the bailout package, which is expected to be voted on by the House on Friday, contains "loads of pork" and "little accountability."

In addition to proposing $100 billion in tax relief, aid to rural schools, and an increase in the FDIC insurance cap to $250,000, the bill includes such earmarks as: $223 million for Alaskan fishermen, $192 million for rum producers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, $128 million for auto racing -- and $6 million for producers of children's wooden arrows.

"Those 'earmarks,'" Task writes, "may not be palatable to many House members, especially those concerned about fiscal spending and/or getting reelected." With the earmarks, the proposed plan has ballooned to $800 billion.

The House rejected an earlier version of the Wall Street bailout on Monday. According to ABC News, congressional leaders are "cautiously optimistic" it will not happen a second time -- something those lawmakers describe as "unthinkable." House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer says he plans to support the new package, despite personal misgivings, but is concerned that some Democrats who supported the earlier version may switch sides this time around.

"If I believe we don't have the votes on Friday, perhaps I'll wait until Saturday," he tells ABC News, "and if we don't have them on Saturday, perhaps we'll wait until Sunday."
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
The red llama voted for it too. No surprise there, he never saw a government handout that he didn't like.

He hasn't went around making his live or die stance on "No Earmarks"... :wink: :lol: :p
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
The red llama voted for it too. No surprise there, he never saw a government handout that he didn't like.

He hasn't went around making his live or die stance on "No Earmarks"... :wink: :lol: :p

How many earmarks has McCain requested through the years?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
The red llama voted for it too. No surprise there, he never saw a government handout that he didn't like.

He hasn't went around making his live or die stance on "No Earmarks"... :wink: :lol: :p

How many earmarks has McCain requested through the years?

Thousands- for every lobbyiest that waved money in his face...His policy of the day has been centered on what group he's pandering to- and what groups lobbyists are waving the biggest amount of money.....

http://www.mccainslobbyists.com/
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
See how many earmarks McCain has asked for this year and compare that to Obama and get back to us on that comparison.

Also, see how many earmarks McCain ever got for companies where his wife worked ( and then received substancial wages ).

And you can't tell me that Obama isn't bending to lobbyists. Every flipping member of Congress is sucking on the lobbyist teat.

And speaking of lobbyists, how many does McCain have in the family compared to Biden?
 

Bullhauler

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
See how many earmarks McCain has asked for this year and compare that to Obama and get back to us on that comparison.

Also, see how many earmarks McCain ever got for companies where his wife worked ( and then received substancial wages ).

And you can't tell me that Obama isn't bending to lobbyists. Every flipping member of Congress is sucking on the lobbyist teat.

And speaking of lobbyists, how many does McCain have in the family compared to Biden?


Earmarks this year? He hasn't spent two days in the senate this year.
 

cutterone

Well-known member
Politicians just don’t get it! Tax breaks sound so good rolling out of their mouths trying to make it sound as if they just saved everyone’s butts when in fact they do very little for six pack Joe. Giving me a $100 tax break for the year amounts to $8.33 per month or about two gallons of gas! The first problem is that they assume that we make enough profit to have to pay much tax. What would really help this country is that for every taxpayer they would reduce government spending by $100.
 

MoGal

Well-known member
Well, they did add a carbon tax to the 700 billion bailout bill................ and nobody is talking about it...... and who is this carbon tax /greenhouse gas tax paid to??? I'm sure the United Nations has their hand stuck out for it, after all the UN said if we could pass a 700B bailout then 72 Billion for the UN was a drop in the bucket.
Eventually there will be a greenhouse gas tax on agriculture if people don't jump on this and raise stink.

http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/?p=950



Why is the mainstream media ignoring what might be the most earth-shattering provisions in Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s Bailout Package Version 2.0?



If you look at page 180 of the 451-page monster bailout bill that easily passed the Senate yesterday (PDF here), you will see that it includes at Section 116 language about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide.” It also provides, at Section 117, for a “carbon audit of the tax code.”



What could a provision about the tax treatment of “industrial source carbon dioxide” and another provision about doing a “carbon audit” of the tax code possibly have to do with restoring confidence in Wall Street’s troubled credit markets?



The answer: NOTHING.



This appears to be an attempt by global warming fanatics to lay the foundation for an economy-killing carbon tax just like the “cap-and-tax” system that is now destroying European industry.



If you think the Mother of All Bailouts is bad, just wait till you see the carbon tax. Get ready to reduce your standard of living drastically.



It really shouldn’t be a surprise that these non-germane provisions are included in legislation that is supposed to save all of us from economic Armageddon.



After all, Henry Paulson is a confirmed environmentalist and global warming true-believer who abused his power at Goldman Sachs. While Paulson headed Goldman Sachs he simultaneously headed the Nature Conservancy and his wife was a former Conservancy board member. (See “In Goldman Sachs We Trust: How the Left’s Favorite Bank Influences Public Policy,” by Fred Lucas, Foundation Watch, October 2008.)



Henry Paulson presided over Goldman Sachs’s donation of 680,000 acres of land it owned in Tierra del Fuego, Chile to the New York-based Wildlife Conservation Society.



One of the trustees of the Wildlife Conservation Society was H. Merritt Paulson, the son of Henry Paulson.



As green critic Paul Driessen observed, at no time did anyone “assess the vast area’s potential value for timber, oil or metals, so that locals and [Goldman Sachs] shareholders would at least know the true cost of the giveaway.”



And the media tells Americans to trust Henry Paulson to do the right thing when doling out taxpayer dollars to his former colleagues on Wall Street?



The media needs to start asking hard questions.







Update: An expert offers a better explanation of one of the carbon-related provisions that is in the Bailout 2.0 bill. According to this wizard of Wall Street, one provision provides preferential tax treatment for publicly-traded partnerships when they trade so-called carbon offsets. It was reportedly already passed in another bill: What’s so urgent about that tax provision that it absolutely had to go into another bill that aims to deal with a financial emergency? So, you can see it’s a little more complex than explained above.



However, it’s still bad because it gives legitimacy to these strange indulgences known as carbon offsets and provides a tax incentive for trading them. I am also informed by this source that Henry Paulson did not push to insert these two carbon-related provisions, but he certainly didn’t object to them, and his track record strongly suggests he would support them.



When he ran Goldman Sachs, Paulson released a statement specifically endorsing carbon trading. As the Washington Post reported (June 1, 2006) reported:



Last year under Paulson’s direction, Goldman Sachs issued an eight-page position paper on environmental policy, saying it accepts a scientific consensus, led by United Nations climate experts, that global warming poses one of the greatest threats this century.



Like Bush, the Goldman Sachs statement endorsed a market for businesses to buy and sell rights to emit greenhouse gases, saying it will spur technology advances by companies “that lead to a less carbon-intensive economy.” But, it added, “Voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem,” a position contrary to the Bush administration’s view.

(Hat tip to Paul Chesser, of Center for Climate Strategies Watch, as posted at AmSpecBlog)
 
Top