|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
grassman 
Group: Members
Posts: 3858
Joined: Mar. 2006
|
 |
Posted on: Aug. 24 2011,7:25 pm |
|
   |
Editorial: Taxed enough?
Published 8:58am Wednesday, August 24, 2011
We doubt the local Republicans are thrilled with the Capitol Hill Republicans on this one.
The Republican Party fought tooth and nail against ending tax cuts for the wealthy earlier this summer when the debt-ceiling issue was at its zenith. They took a stand, would not compromise on the matter and largely prevailed.
However, this week, when it comes to tax cuts for the poor, the Republican Party is taking a different route. Apparently, Republicans in D.C. think it is OK for the poor to pay taxes.
The Associated Press reports that the Republicans on Capitol Hill in Washington want tax cuts for the poor to end as scheduled. The sunset of this cut would increase the amount the federal government takes from the paychecks of many wage earners.
The AP explained the tax cut this way: “This policy helps the 46 percent of all Americans who owe no federal income taxes but who pay a ‘payroll tax’ on practically every dime they earn.”
When asked about the payroll tax, some Republicans seem to dance about the issue, talking about how long-term solutions are needed. But when taxes on the rich were debated, they were adamant about the short-term impact raising taxes on the rich would have.
Are they concerned about the long term or short term? What is it?
Some Republicans on Capitol Hill, however, were more direct about their answers.
“It’s always a net positive to let taxpayers keep more of what they earn,” said Rep. Jeb Hensarling, “but not all tax relief is created equal for the purposes of helping to get the economy moving again.”
If you are from Albert Lea, make less than $106,800 and participated in one of the Tea Party protests in the area two years ago, we offer our condolences. You earned no breaks for yourself by speaking out against taxes.
President Obama wants the tax cut to continue for at least another year.
So we have a situation where the Democrats favor a tax cut and the Republicans do not. It sure is telling. Some Republicans flat out oppose too much taxes. But some Republicans, the ones in D.C., apparently, don’t mind if the poor pay taxes.
For all of you out there ready to kiss their a$$es, this is what you get. I told you but you just don't listen. Gnats in the wind. You don't matter one ioda. 
--------------
git er done!
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
Duck Hunter
Group: Members
Posts: 174
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 24 2011,7:51 pm |
|
 |
Kinda a stretch on your reasoning. The social security tax relief is not just for the poor. Everyone with taxable wages would go back to 6.2%.
This is something they need to keep for another year or three until the economy is out of the dumps, but you also need to fund social security sometime, it is in bad enough shape.
I think we need to revamp the whole thing, let those opt out who want to. Keep the promise to those who want to stay, but tweak the benefits for anyone not in the system or within 10 years. Link SS to life expectancy.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 24 2011,9:52 pm |
|
|
I thought the teabaggers were all about lower taxes, not just lower taxes for the rich.
You teabaggers all a bunch of useful idiots, talk radio, FOX noise, and the GOP tell you to jump, and you ask, "How high?". Some of you clowns even spent your hard earned money riding buses to DC to make sure the rich kept their tax breaks.
There's a sucker born every minute.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 25 2011,12:33 pm |
|
|
Nervous about what? You don't actually think a teabagger could beat Obama, do you? 
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
Duck Hunter
Group: Members
Posts: 174
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 25 2011,12:56 pm |
|
|
At this point anyone has a decent chance at beating Obama. The costume hiding his faults is off.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 25 2011,6:32 pm |
|
|
What's the argument?
Does the Tea Party NOT advocate for letting people keep more of the money they earned? 
Does the Tea Party NOT advocate for shrinking government?
What's inconsistent about their position?
Aren't MOST people in favor of keeping more of their own money, rather than give it to the government to waste?
Why would ANYONE be in FAVOR of giving more money and power to the government?
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Liberal
Group: Moderator
Posts: 11451
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 25 2011,7:24 pm |
|
|
There is no argument I think we all agree that you teabaggers are nut jobs. That's why the name teabaggers works so well, we couldn't have come up with a better name if you'd have let us name your party.
--------------
The people are masters of both Congress and courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 26 2011,4:15 pm |
|
|
Libbie-- QUOTE · Posted on Aug. 24 2011,9:52 pm
I thought the teabaggers were all about lower taxes, not just lower taxes for the rich.
I posted the things that the Tea Party is in FAVOR of--to which you responded QUOTE There is no argument I think we all agree that you teabaggers are nut jobs.
Here are the points again. How about ADDRESSING the issues, instead of doing the libbie dance of just calling names?
QUOTE Does the Tea Party NOT advocate for letting people keep more of the money they earned? Does the Tea Party NOT advocate for shrinking government? What's inconsistent about their position? Aren't MOST people in favor of keeping more of their own money, rather than give it to the government to waste? Why would ANYONE be in FAVOR of giving more money and power to the government?
Most RATIONAL people believe in these precepts. Why would liberals be OPPOSED to them--other than keeping people dependent on government--insuring their power base?
No problems=no need for more liberal big government--no need for Donks. CREATING--not SOLVING-- problems is the way that Dems keep their power base.
Maybe THAT'S why government is so inept! 
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
