Is continuing the Bush tax cuts hurting the economy?
Mopeder
2012/06/13 10:38:49
|
|
|||||
|
92 votes
|
|
72% | |||
|
36 votes
|
|
28% | |||
Top Opinion
-
Tea in the Harbor 2012/06/13 16:36:38Yes





















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...
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).
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!
http://blogs.forbes.com/danie...
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.
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.
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...
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.]
http://www.forbes.com/sites/p...
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...
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.