Quantcast

Is continuing the Bush tax cuts hurting the economy?

Mopeder 2012/06/13 10:38:49
Related Topics: Tax Cuts, Economy, Bush, Tax
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • bob h. SW 2012/06/13 14:36:31
    bob h.
    +2
    All it takes is a rowboat and an AK. Prosperity is just a yacht away.
  • Guru_T_... bob h. 2012/07/02 15:21:25
  • Bear Tasine 2012/06/13 17:22:25
    Bear
    This government of ours even tried to put a tax on how hot or cold a take-away was..but thats the Conservatives for you...all a set of money grabbing ass holes(pardon the language)..its to be expected though...99.99999% of them are multi millionaires
  • SW 2012/06/13 13:09:44
    Yes
    SW
    +3
    Gee how have they been working out so far?
  • shadow76 SW 2012/06/13 13:15:29
    shadow76
    +1
    It is Owebummer's wasteful spending that is killing us!
  • SW shadow76 2012/06/13 13:39:53
    SW
    +3
    WERE SPENDING LESS THAN WE DID SINCE EISENHOWER! That's right! The lowest spending growth in like 70 years under Obama! And so far his "wasteful spending" has resulted in more job growth in 2 years than Bush's way more spending did in 8! Look something up for yourself instead of getting your opinions from radio talk show nutjobs and Fox News hacks.
  • momma-o... SW 2012/06/13 13:58:03
    momma-on-the-hit-list
    Your so funny, This is from those stupid people at Forbes.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/p...
    Today, Argentina ranks 53rd in the world in per capita GDP according to the International Monetary Fund, 57th in the CIA World Factbook, at a level less than one third that of the U.S. But its national debt at 51% of GDP is actually less than that of the United States under the Obama Administration, where we are rocketing towards 70% of GDP by the end of this year, and 200% in 25 years, according to CBO.

    Friday’s jobs report shows Obama’s Juan Peron trend. While a measly 69,000 jobs were created in May, the report adjusted downward the jobs created in March and April by 49,000, leaving actually only 20,000 new jobs on net. The number of jobs created has declined every month this year.

    While Obama and his propagandists claim 27 consecutive months of job growth, employment growth is the norm and not the exception for the American economy. In the 62 years from the end of World War II in 1945 until 2008, jobs grew in 86% of the months, or 640 out of 744. But Obama and his propagandists think you are too stupid to know the country you live in. They know at least their MSNBC base will believe them.
    Reagan’s recovery produced job growth in 81 out of its first 82 months, with 20 million new jo...
    Your so funny, This is from those stupid people at Forbes.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/p...
    Today, Argentina ranks 53rd in the world in per capita GDP according to the International Monetary Fund, 57th in the CIA World Factbook, at a level less than one third that of the U.S. But its national debt at 51% of GDP is actually less than that of the United States under the Obama Administration, where we are rocketing towards 70% of GDP by the end of this year, and 200% in 25 years, according to CBO.

    Friday’s jobs report shows Obama’s Juan Peron trend. While a measly 69,000 jobs were created in May, the report adjusted downward the jobs created in March and April by 49,000, leaving actually only 20,000 new jobs on net. The number of jobs created has declined every month this year.

    While Obama and his propagandists claim 27 consecutive months of job growth, employment growth is the norm and not the exception for the American economy. In the 62 years from the end of World War II in 1945 until 2008, jobs grew in 86% of the months, or 640 out of 744. But Obama and his propagandists think you are too stupid to know the country you live in. They know at least their MSNBC base will believe them.
    Reagan’s recovery produced job growth in 81 out of its first 82 months, with 20 million new jobs created in those first 7 years alone, increasing the civilian work force at the time by 20%. That grew into 50 million new jobs over the entire Reagan 25-year boom from 1982 to 2007. Compare that to the disgrace of Obamanomics. While Obama likes to claim 4.3 million new jobs created, total jobs by May, 2012 were still over half a million less than in January, 2009 when he entered office. Even George Bush oversaw 52 consecutive months of job growth, including 8 million new jobs created after his 2003 capital gains and dividends tax rate cuts became effective (which Obama is dedicated to reversing).
    (more)
  • bob h. momma-o... 2012/06/13 14:52:39
    bob h.
    +5
    And Bush job growth is: Patriot Act, Homeland security, TSA, ICE, Blackwater (@$200,000 per man) and other non-productive pass times resulting in bankruptcy. As did Reagan's insane reign. Obama's job creation was GM, Chrysler, etc, etc, But of course Repos don't know productive from Government waste.
  • GOD bob h. 2012/06/13 15:23:42
  • Guru_T_... bob h. 2012/07/02 15:22:41
  • SW momma-o... 2012/07/16 12:23:10
    SW
    Hahah OMG an Obama hate-bot with links! So basically when Obama took office we were LOSING 750 THOUSAND JOBS A MONTH. Roll that little number into your equations.

    Now Obama haters are complaining "waaah w'ere only GAINING 60k jobs a month... oh noes such bad leadership waaah!" Where were you whiny bitches when we were free-falling under Republicans.. did you just forget?

    it's sad just the lack of memory. Most right wing propaganda sources like to pretend the Bush years just didn't happen "poof." Even in their charts Bush is all of a sudden gone missing!
  • GOD shadow76 2012/06/13 15:21:55
  • mal 2012/06/13 13:04:43
    No
    mal
    +3
    How's "la la land" mopeder.
  • Mopeder mal 2012/06/13 13:47:37
    Mopeder
    +1
    Just great. I imagine "D' Nile" is going great for you.
  • mal Mopeder 2012/07/02 12:05:12
    mal
    History proves the failure of socialism,communism,facism. Look it up some day.
  • SW mal 2012/07/16 12:27:57
    SW
    You wouldn't know "history" if it came up and bit you. Or what any of those "ism" words you like to throw around mean. Democratic Socialism's succeeding just fine in Sweeden, Denmark, Germany, Japan, England,France, Norway... We owe China HOW much money? ...And how's good old Capitalism doing in post communist Russia? Wanna move there any time soon and enjoy all the capitalism? Come for the gangsters, stay for the meth!
  • bob h. mal 2012/07/02 02:15:57
    bob h.
    Got a flash for you Swifty, the total of just the wealth of the Forbes 400 is over $1.5 Trillion. That's more than Obama has spent on the whole US. And that's the declared money.
  • mal bob h. 2012/07/02 12:11:18
  • SW mal 2012/07/16 12:29:27
    SW
    Ah the Heritage Foundation... authors of Obama-care which they now detract. Not a trustworthy source of anything... fail.
  • Tully 2012/06/13 12:54:32
    No
    Tully
    +5
    Cutting taxes always helps the economy
  • Schultz... Tully 2012/06/13 13:04:46
    Schultz.Jim
    +1
    Really? Because these tax cuts have been in place for more than a decade. If they help the economy so much why is the economy still tanking? Why are millions of workers still unemployed?

    You wanna keep the tax cuts? Hire some workers for full-time employment at a living wage. Including benefits.
    Don't wanna hire anyone? Time to start paying back your decades of tax breaks. With interest.
  • Tasine Schultz... 2012/06/13 13:28:47
    Tasine
    Wanna guess where you would be if the tax cuts were NOT in place? Maybe the Democrats will find a way to demonstrate to you what increasing the taxes will do for you.
  • SW Tasine 2012/06/13 13:47:33
    SW
    +3
    The Democrats DID demonstrate it. Before the tax cuts were in place we had record job and GDP growth in the 90s so I "guess" that's where we'd be just based on basic logic and history. Raising the higher tax rates on the wealthy forces them to invest which actually DOES create jobs (while tax cuts "trickle down" into off-shore bank accounts). So more people have money in their pockets and they spend more and there are more opportunities for businesses.
    Democrats in charge=more jobs, steady growth, better pretty much everything
    Republicans in charge=Stock market crashes, bank bailouts, and a few people getting richer while the rest of us can suck it. Pubs were in charge for EVERY stock market crash since and including the Great Depression.
  • Schultz... Tasine 2012/06/17 06:10:58
    Schultz.Jim
    I'm not a huge fan of Democrats either. Both parties are beholden to mega lobbyists, doing the bidding of UnAmerican, multinational conglomerates.

    But considering the "no taxes, less government" folks have created huge increases in the national debt and instituted numerous new government agencies with nearly unlimited powers, subverted Constitutional Checks & Balances, initiated a "First Strike Defense" policy, executed extreme rendition on American citizens and countless other acts of treason and crimes against humanity - all the while preaching their high degree of morality due to their being Christians - which will likely not come to light for decades if ever I'll take my chances not voting Rethuglican tyvm.

    It's time to end the charade that is representational government and get down to participatory democracy. 1 man/woman, 1 vote. Corporations are not people.

    Oh, by the way, for any political party's raising of the taxes to affect me I'd need to have a paying job. One that pays above minimum wage. A living wage would be great. Give me that I and I will have no qualms about paying taxes to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
    [In case you...
    I'm not a huge fan of Democrats either. Both parties are beholden to mega lobbyists, doing the bidding of UnAmerican, multinational conglomerates.

    But considering the "no taxes, less government" folks have created huge increases in the national debt and instituted numerous new government agencies with nearly unlimited powers, subverted Constitutional Checks & Balances, initiated a "First Strike Defense" policy, executed extreme rendition on American citizens and countless other acts of treason and crimes against humanity - all the while preaching their high degree of morality due to their being Christians - which will likely not come to light for decades if ever I'll take my chances not voting Rethuglican tyvm.

    It's time to end the charade that is representational government and get down to participatory democracy. 1 man/woman, 1 vote. Corporations are not people.

    Oh, by the way, for any political party's raising of the taxes to affect me I'd need to have a paying job. One that pays above minimum wage. A living wage would be great. Give me that I and I will have no qualms about paying taxes to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
    [In case you strict constructionist don't recognize that it's from the Constitution of America and sets out the guidelines of what America is about and what patriotism actually means.]
    (more)
  • momma-o... Schultz... 2012/06/13 14:00:11
    momma-on-the-hit-list
    Perhaps you should read a clearer understanding of the numbers above from Forbes.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/p...
  • Schultz... momma-o... 2012/06/17 06:14:47
    Schultz.Jim
    +1
    I think the numbers above pretty well speak for themselves. you go ahead and spin them whatever way lets you sleep at night knowing you're advocating for a larger % of people living in destitution.
  • momma-o... Schultz... 2012/06/18 14:53:34
    momma-on-the-hit-list
    http://www.devvy.com/notax.html Unless you wake to the illusion you will be continually swayed, they are hoping for it.
    In the chart below, an R next to the amount indicates a Republican President; a D is for a Democrat in the Oval Office. The Democrats had control of Congress from 1954, until the illusion billed as the "Republican Revolution" in 1994. Both houses of Congress were Republican controlled until after the 2000 "election", but this ended when in May 2001 James Jeffords 'fessed up to his real political agenda.

    Current Congressionally created debt:

    01/23/2012
    12/31/2011
    06/30/2011
    12/31/2010
    06/30/2010
    12/31/2009
    08/30/2009
    04/16/2009
    10/30/2008
    11/01/2007
    09/29/2006
    09/30/2005
    09/30/2004
    09/30/2003
    09/30/2002
    09/28/2001
    08/08/2001
    04/30/2001
    02/28/2001
    01/31/2001
    12/29/2000
    09/29/2000
    09/30/1999
    09/30/1998
    09/30/1997
    09/30/1996
    09/29/1995
    09/30/1994
    09/30/1993
    09/30/1992
    09/30/1991
    09/28/1990
    09/29/1989
    09/30/1988
    09/30/1987
    $15,236,245,309,869.69 (D)
    $15,222,940,045,451.09 (D)
    $14,343,087,640,008.40 (D)
    $14,025,215,218,708.52 (D)
    $13,203,473,753,968.10 (D)
    $12,311,349,677,512.03 (D)
    $11,909,829,003,511.75 (D)
    $11,183,899,252,728.00 (D)
    $10,530,893,033,778.21 (R)
    $9,080,228,573,291.65 (R)
    $8,506,973,899,215.23 (R)
    $7,932,709,661,723.50 (R)
    $7,379,052,696,330.32 (R)
    $6,783,231,062,743.62 (R)
    $6,228,235,965,597...






















    http://www.devvy.com/notax.html Unless you wake to the illusion you will be continually swayed, they are hoping for it.
    In the chart below, an R next to the amount indicates a Republican President; a D is for a Democrat in the Oval Office. The Democrats had control of Congress from 1954, until the illusion billed as the "Republican Revolution" in 1994. Both houses of Congress were Republican controlled until after the 2000 "election", but this ended when in May 2001 James Jeffords 'fessed up to his real political agenda.

    Current Congressionally created debt:

    01/23/2012
    12/31/2011
    06/30/2011
    12/31/2010
    06/30/2010
    12/31/2009
    08/30/2009
    04/16/2009
    10/30/2008
    11/01/2007
    09/29/2006
    09/30/2005
    09/30/2004
    09/30/2003
    09/30/2002
    09/28/2001
    08/08/2001
    04/30/2001
    02/28/2001
    01/31/2001
    12/29/2000
    09/29/2000
    09/30/1999
    09/30/1998
    09/30/1997
    09/30/1996
    09/29/1995
    09/30/1994
    09/30/1993
    09/30/1992
    09/30/1991
    09/28/1990
    09/29/1989
    09/30/1988
    09/30/1987
    $15,236,245,309,869.69 (D)
    $15,222,940,045,451.09 (D)
    $14,343,087,640,008.40 (D)
    $14,025,215,218,708.52 (D)
    $13,203,473,753,968.10 (D)
    $12,311,349,677,512.03 (D)
    $11,909,829,003,511.75 (D)
    $11,183,899,252,728.00 (D)
    $10,530,893,033,778.21 (R)
    $9,080,228,573,291.65 (R)
    $8,506,973,899,215.23 (R)
    $7,932,709,661,723.50 (R)
    $7,379,052,696,330.32 (R)
    $6,783,231,062,743.62 (R)
    $6,228,235,965,597.16 (R)
    $5,807,463,412,200.06 (R)
    $5,720,324,946,092.23 (R)
    $5,661,347,798,002.65 (R)
    $5,735,859,380,573.98 (R)
    $5,716,070,587,057.36 (R)
    $5,662,216,013,697.37 (D)
    $5,674,178,209,886.86 (D)
    $5,656,270,901,615.43 (D)
    $5,526,193,008,897.62 (D)
    $5,413,146,011,397.34 (D)
    $5,224,810,939,135.73 (D)
    $4,973,982,900,709.39 (D)
    $4,692,749,910,013.32 (D)
    $4,411,488,883,139.38 (D)
    $4,064,620,655,521.66 (R)
    $3,665,303,351,697.03 (R)
    $3,233,313,451,777.25 (R)
    $2,857,430,960,187.32 (R)
    $2,602,337,712,041.16 (R)
    $2,350,276,890,953.00 (R)
    The statistics above were obtained from the Bureau of The Public Debt's web site:
    http://www.treasurydirect.gov...
    As you can see, it doesn't matter which party is in office, there is no surplus and the debt cannot be paid down, it can only grow exponentially as long as Congress and the President have the central bank at their fingertips.
    (more)
  • Tully Schultz... 2012/06/13 20:19:39
    Tully
    +1
    Income tax is theft, pure and simple. You work hard to earn a living, just to have the govt STEAL it from you.

    I agree that workers need to be hired at a higher rate of pay and good benefits, but taking money away from people that earn it is not the way to go.
  • Schultz... Tully 2012/06/17 06:34:45
    Schultz.Jim
    It's not stealing.

    It pays for the infrastructure we ALL depend on [roads, bridges, safe clean drinking water, breathable air, national defense, the social safety net that the sick, elderly and poor - which both Dem and Rep acknowledge Capitalism requires in order to even come close to pretending to work - need to survive.

    As long as they [the poor] exist there is no reasonable 'Yes' answer to Is it ok for there to be billionaires? If a billionaire spent $1,000,000 a year [or $2,737.85 a day or $114.07 a minute] it would take them a thousand years to spend it all. And that ASSUMES that they do not continue to earn money from interest or other means.

    As to higher rates of pay and benefits go it's not really the answer. End the wage system. End the class war. As long as it is acceptable that "there are haves and have nots in this world" we will never move on to whatever the future holds in store for us.
  • Tully Schultz... 2012/06/18 13:20:41
    Tully
    +1
    Say you are a single man earning $1000 a week and you live in Florida (no state income tax).
    20% of what you earn is stolen from you. If it was a consumption tax, that'd be different. Tax what is spent, not what is earned.
    Gross pay $1,000.00
    Federal income tax $163.32
    Social Security $42.00
    Medicare $14.50
    Net pay (take home) $780.18
    You would work your ass off just to have over 20% or YOUR MONEY STOLEN!

    I have no problem helping people out. My kids (w/ me) volunteer at local charities and church food drives, weekly. We also donate about 15% of our income to the same charities (not churches).
  • momma-o... Schultz... 2012/06/18 14:56:11
    momma-on-the-hit-list
    http://www.devvy.com/notax.html I thought everyone knew that this never has funded any gov function?
    Let's say that for 2002, Congress and the President decide they want $1.7 trillion dollars to fund this bloated pig called our government. We know that 100% of all personal "income" taxes extorted by the IRS goes to the "Federal" Reserve Banking System and does not fund a single function of the government. So, let's take the people's blood and sweat off the table.
  • momma-o... Tully 2012/06/18 14:54:22
    momma-on-the-hit-list
    I can't understand this late in the game that there are still people who don't even know that???
  • bob h. Schultz... 2012/07/02 02:28:25
    bob h.
    The rich spend a fortune hiring propagandists to conceal those simple facts. Rich good, people who just work bad.
  • SW Tully 2012/06/13 13:11:49
    SW
    +3
    Yeah how have they been "helping" exactly? I mean unless you're a Koch Brother. Before Bush tax cuts: Record job growth. Record GDP growth. After Bush Tax cuts: Record job loss. Worst GDP growth since the Great Depression. Yep them tax cuts sure helped the economy!
  • bob h. SW 2012/06/13 15:00:24
    bob h.
    +2
    Yep; our most prosperous periods were 91% tax over $250,000, and high union membership. The rich had no choice but to create/business just to get a couple of deductions. Now, they just defraud business and build car elevators in LaJolla.
  • Cleaver62 bob h. 2012/06/13 19:16:58 (edited)
    Cleaver62
    +1
    I couldn't have said it myself. The American public are being Republiconed... lower taxes of the rich will raise revenue. Right. Less is more. Black is white. Look at the debt that has grown under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II because of low taxes. How do people think we got where we are today? It has been 30 years of Reaganomics and low taxes that has sent businesses and money overseas. Obama didn't create the debt, Republicons did.
  • Tully SW 2012/06/13 20:22:35
    Tully
    +1
    Well I have 4 kids. Because of the Bush Tax Cuts, I'm able to deduct $1000 for each child for my taxes. Half of my pay comes from independent contract work, so I have to pay taxes every year. These cuts work. I can keep more of my money to put back into the economy.
  • bob h. Tully 2012/07/02 02:23:33
    bob h.
    So the 1% take a paltry Trill or two out of circulation, No prob, the mint just replaces it, no prob for the rich, their ##s are still the same. But inflation shoots up to fill the vacuum, and who pays for it? The rich will not put so much as a hot dog wagon on the road as long as they can make their money in the market or manipulating investments or banks.
  • Mr.Steve 2012/06/13 12:47:49
  • ruthannhausman 2012/06/13 12:34:33
    No
    ruthannhausman
    +6
    The simple answer is no. Negative. Period. No sense explaining it yet again because those of you who are too dense to understand what is going on with the economy and the fairy tale about "taxing the rich" are never going to listen or even try to comprehend the truth. Take every single penny off of every single millionaire in the United States today, right now, and you won't pay so much as a decent fraction of the national debt. And then, of course, with the rich guys being poor guys, you dumbass poor folks are going to have to support them, so cough up your extra taxes. Duh. I think our schools need to employ (1) better teachers and (2) teach better economics courses.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/06/18 05:53:13

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals