Extending the Bush Tax Cuts

Alba I am telling you...........everyone thinks that they are Bill Gates and that they have his money, or soon will have. It is an unreal spectacle Bud.

So........when these folks made much less, they paid much less in taxes. Or none. It has stated over and over again. What did Mike H say? 1% of the people pay 50% of the taxes??? (Dont have the exact # in front of me) Is it really veiled rascism that only poor black folks pay no taxes, when in realty, struggling white businessmen, perhaps pay no taxes either? Help me out here.

That 1% owns 60% of the national wealth so of course will pay more in taxes.To those that much is given much is required.Roofing contractors in general are people who have worked really hard to better themselves.We're talking here about corporate "fat cats".Just a simple search shows that while the shareholders wealth has been decimated and millions of employees have been laid off the corporate executives still earn multi million dollar a year salaries and bonuses.How many corporates have replaced a high paying CEO with a much cheaper chinese or indian one? The answer is none .they've replaced millions of working men with their chinese counterparts though claiming that they are "too expensive". For this country to pay down the national debt it needs to cut the military expenses.I was watching the house hunters international the other night.There was this military couple looking for a house in Okinawa japan .They had a housing allowance of $58000 a year paid for by us.A lady that i know she just retired from the military after 20 years of service at the age of 43 . She gets pension for life she got college money also.A buddy of mine former cop retired at 45 after 20 years .He gets $2000 a month for life.

2gen, Obama the winner??! He sure must have a poker face. Take a look at his big grin in every previous signing ceremony. At the last one, his expression looked like the dog just got run over by the limo. He (and the Dems) could have easily had the extension of tax 'cuts' for everyone but the top 2% if they would have done the bill before the election. Even Bohner admitted he'd reluctantly vote for it. I call that a fumble, not a win. With your definition of win, I hope Obama 'wins' next election.

If congress was serious about getting rich people's money, they would hold a hearing where all they would call is the money managers of the top 50 richest congresspeople and ask each of them one question. "If we wanted to get at Congressman X's money, what should we do?"

The truth is there always was and always will be ways for the rich to avoid paying some taxes. When I first started in the business, far more rich (and not-so-rich) people owned rental property. Not that they all wanted to be slumlords, it was that tax policy distorted the returns of owning rental property by allowing them to deduct depreciation and rental property interest off their income.

"Those who own their own small businesses have usually reached their peak earnings many years after having started their business, and often operating with very low income, or even operating at a loss, when their businesses first got started

"Many people earning an annual income of $125,000 a year do so only after years of earning a lot less than that before eventually working their way up to that level. For politicians to step in at that point and confiscate what they have invested years of working to achieve is a little much"

So........when these folks made much less, they paid much less in taxes. Or none. It has been stated over and over again. What did Mike H say? 1% of the people pay 50% of the taxes??? (Don't have the exact # in front of me) Is it really veiled rascism that only poor black folks pay no taxes, when in realty, struggling white businessmen, perhaps pay no taxes either? Help me out here.

Great article lanny. It does hurt to read some truth. However the GOP has developed a plan that increases spending, maintains imports and raises the deficit. Absolutely NO enforcement/ collection on the tax cheats. No reduction of military waste....let alone any welfare reduction. Frosting on Poop Cake is all.

Jefferson had his time. It is sad if Republicans quote him. They don't own him and certainly don't deserve any part of his legacy. Fake platitudes really don't charm me.

We Americans need to figure some way of holding these Buffoons' feet to the fire. $858 bil of debt later, shows that collectively, we don't know what feet are or what fire is.

And the Buffoons sure as hell know we don't

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, For you guys that hate the government so much i can show you a country that has no government.It's called Somalia.

---"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." ---"I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." (Back then!) ---"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." ---"I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive." ---"Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread." ---"Liberty is the great parent of science and of virtue; and a nation will be great in both in proportion as it is free." ---"I have never been able to conceive how any rational being could propose happiness to himself from the exercise of power over others." ---"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." ---"I’m a great believer in luck, and I find the harder I work the more I have of it." ---"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." ---"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." ---"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." ---"If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest." ---"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just." ---Jefferson died on July 4, 1826 - 50 yrs after the Declaration of Independence. ---Jefferson might not be too popular with today's government...

Lanny

Rhetoric Rides Again by Thomas Sowell

Recently by Thomas Sowell: The 'Gridlock' Bogeyman

Let's face it, politics is largely the art of deception, and political rhetoric is largely the art of misstating issues. A classic example is the current debate over whether to give money to the unemployed by extending how long unemployment benefits will be provided, or instead to give "tax cuts to the rich."

First of all, nobody's taxes – whether rich or poor – are going to be cut in this lame duck session of Congress. The only real issue is whether our current tax rates will go up in January, whether for everybody or nobody or somewhere in between.

The most we can hope for is that tax rates will not go up. So the next time you hear some politician or media talking head say "tax cuts for the rich," that will just tell you whether they are serious about facts or just addicted to talking points.

Not only are the so-called "tax cuts" not really tax cuts, most of the people called "rich" are not really rich. Rich means having a lot of wealth. But income taxes don't touch wealth. No wonder some billionaires are saying it's OK to raise income taxes. They would still be billionaires if taxes took 100 percent of their current income.

What those who are arguing against "tax cuts for the rich" are promoting is raising the tax rates on families making $250,000 a year and up. A husband and wife making $125,000 a year each are not rich. If they have a kid going to one of the many colleges charging $30,000 a year (in after-tax money) for tuition alone, they are not likely to feel anywhere close to being rich.

Many people earning an annual income of $125,000 a year do so only after years of earning a lot less than that before eventually working their way up to that level. For politicians to step in at that point and confiscate what they have invested years of working to achieve is a little much.

It also takes a lot of brass to talk about taxing "millionaires and billionaires" when most of the people whose taxes the liberals want to raise are neither. Why is so much deception necessary, if your case is good?

Those who own their own small businesses have usually reached their peak earnings many years after having started their business, and often operating with very low income, or even operating at a loss, when their businesses first got started.

Again, having politicians step in with an extra tax at that point, when later incomes compensate earlier sacrifices, is sheer brass – especially when real millionaires and billionaires have their wealth safely stowed in tax shelters.

Another fashionable political and media deception is making a parallel between giving money to the unemployed versus giving money to "the rich."

When you refrain from raising someone's taxes, you are not "giving" them anything. Even if you were actually cutting their tax rate – which is out of the question today – you would still not be "giving" them anything, but only allowing them to keep more of what they have earned.

Is the government doing any of us a big favor by not taking even more of what we have worked for? Is it not an insult to our intelligence to say that the government is "giving" us something by not taxing it away?

With unemployment compensation, however, you are in fact giving someone something. "Extending unemployment benefits" always sounds good politically – especially if you do not ask the basic question: "For how long should they be extended?" A year? Two years? No limit?

Studies have shown what common sense should have told us without studies: The longer the unemployment benefits are available, the longer people stay unemployed.

If I were fired tomorrow, should I be able to live off the government until such time as I find another job that is exactly the same, making the same or higher pay? What if I am offered another job that uses some of the same skills but doesn't pay quite as much? Should I be allowed to keep on living off the government?

With the government making it more expensive for employers to hire workers, and at the same time subsidizing unemployed workers longer and longer, you can have as much unemployment as you are willing to pay for, for as long as you are willing to pay for it.

Lanny

Chuck, the states and local goob's 'll prolly go broke before the Great Sugar Daddy, Uncle Sam. After all he is the only one who can print IOU's. If China throws any money back at us, what'll it be? Crumbs? 10 cents on the dollar? I'd like to see the Dem/ Rep Party hold out for Yen. Yeah right.

An IOU, FYI, is what used to be the US Dollar.

I have a great idea. Sell China New York and California to satisfy the debt. Even Steven. B) :) :) B) Deep Down In Florida Where The Sun Shines Damn Near Every Day

2G--- as a daily reader of the NY Times, I can tell you that they are definitely parroting the Presidential line, that this was some sort of "win". Paul Krugman, the Nobel Economist who writes a regular column is so desperate for any kind of government spending will tkae this as a "win" also.

(Did I ever mention that Econmists are idiots?)

This is indeed a HUGE win for the Big Government Reaganites, HUGE Government Republicans, and tax crazy Democrats who are chomping at the bit for the future higher taxes. Or the collapse of the country whatever comes 1st. This might be a big win for the Chinese too, as long they are willing to keep accepting IOU's on the debt. or maybe we can keep stringing them along. Stealing from them is defintely a job for Wall St. Maybe that is whe we coddle and finance the Banksters? They are in reality fleecing the Chinese and not us.

So yes the Tea Party and the NY Times do make strange bedfellows. Not near as strange as the alliance between Obama (Bush Lite) and the Republicans, They are after all, one and the same economically speaking

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". Albert Einstein

The winner here was President Obama. He got twice as much as what he was asking for without the millionaire/billionaire tax cut. The Republicans wanted that wealth tax cut sooooo bad, they gave him whatever he wanted. I bet nobody knew that.

Twill, you might want to look for a book called "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis-among other things- it details quite humorously exactly WHOSE money hedge fund managers are playing with-and how they very nearly crashed the entire worlds economy.

you will probably enjoy it a lot- I found it to be about a giggle every other page stephen

Mike, up untill now I would have to say that you have been reading something into my posts that just isn't there but now I would have to say- it's all about YOU isn't it?--- you,you,you? as I may have mentioned- I am neither bright enough ,nor subtle enough to make any veiled comments. I write pretty much exactly what I think so If you are seeing something you think is a veiled referall- think through your thought processes And- you might not want to post" facts and figures" on an open forum expecting that the reader will just emotionally conclude you are getting a raw deal-- the reader might apply a little logic to what he reads-and form a different opinion than you expected. stephen

Whose money are they playing with? Theirs that was taxed? Mine that was taxed? Yours that was taxed? Government money delivered to them gift wrapped and with a bow?

My understanding of current Wall ST and the Banksters in general is that WE Taxpayers are funding them at near 0% interest and they making money off of that....LOTS of Money.

How true or how deep that runs, I do not know. I did just order a book recommended from a great Independent and a great American by the name of Ralph Nader that explains more of these shenanagins.