December 22nd, 2011, 09:46 PM #1
House GOP Caves on Payroll Tax Cut
A day after House GOP members cause, as the Wall Street Journal called it, a fiasco, House leaders reverse their unpopular decision
WASHINGTON — Bowing under intense pressure from members of their own party to end the politically damaging impasse over a payroll tax holiday, House Republican leaders agreed Thursday to accept a temporary extension of the tax cut, beating a hasty retreat from a showdown that Republicans increasingly saw as a threat to their election opportunities next year.Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."
December 22nd, 2011, 10:24 PM #2
Where's Judge Roy Bean when you need him
December 22nd, 2011, 10:46 PM #3
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Joplin, MO
- Blog Entries
The GOP is in trouble when even the WSJ calls them out on their BS.Good job, friend-of-friends!
December 22nd, 2011, 11:08 PM #4
Sorry Bastards, indeed.
December 23rd, 2011, 03:55 AM #5
So they will be back at it in two more months... I don't know why the Prez didn't want it to go past the election. Makes no sense for me unless he plans to "brinkmanship" this issue every two months to the election.
IMO, all it does is cost money. Two months is not much use to anyone. They'd be better off adding one "phantom" dependent on everyone's tax return and do it that way as a lump sum."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
December 23rd, 2011, 06:29 AM #6
December 23rd, 2011, 08:46 AM #7Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."
December 23rd, 2011, 02:48 PM #8
Tax increases are off the table.
Obama missed his best chance to kick the can down the road past the election.
Seriously, what rational nation creates a two month tax cut? Huh? At the very least, business operation by "quarters"...
But then again, it really is only about politics, not economics.
Last edited by Chuckiechan; December 23rd, 2011 at 02:51 PM."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
December 23rd, 2011, 03:44 PM #9
Besides, Harry Reid is talking about bringing back the millionaire surtax, according to Greg Sargent.
Last edited by MTAtech; December 23rd, 2011 at 03:46 PM.Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."
December 23rd, 2011, 04:28 PM #10
Like the AMT tax was supposed to do?
The election is going to boil down to one question: "Do we shrink or grow the federal government".
The charts are meaningless to voters. It all comes down to comfort level."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
December 23rd, 2011, 09:50 PM #11
They didn't "cave" in. They begrudgingly(Boener) agreed to postpone and extend policy until after the Holidays. You call it GOP weakness in fractured ranks. I call it smarts without delivering a knee-jerk decision.
December 28th, 2011, 08:40 AM #12
December 28th, 2011, 08:44 AM #13
December 28th, 2011, 01:18 PM #14
I think Bohner caved. He should have seen it coming. As the polls show, tax cuts are a winner, especially payroll tax cuts. It adds to the "invisible insolvency" of the country where it is not seen, and not reported.
Eventually, everyone's 99 weeks of unemployment is going to run our. Then what? Start selling off states?
Meanwhile, Obama asks for another 1.2 trillion. The countries total income from taxes is ~ 2.2 trillion. What can possibly go wrong? We have "unfunded liabilities of 117 trillion, or ~ 1 million per taxpayer. Does this concern anyone but me?
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
Last edited by Chuckiechan; December 28th, 2011 at 01:23 PM."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
December 29th, 2011, 09:56 AM #15
We also know that it is a fools game to cut spending in an economic downturn. That just makes the economy worse.
Regarding government debt in general, the rate is at zero or negative interest rates. In addition, we mainly owe the national debt to ourselves.
December 29th, 2011, 01:12 PM #16
You can increase economic output.
And since "we" owe "it" to "ourselves", how do you propose we pay for it?
According to my "debt machine", the
unfunded liabilities are per household ~ $1M.
Assets per household are ~ $254K.
Share of national debt is ~ $134K per taxpayer.
This is what "we" owe... and it's an $ 880K (negative) spread per household. I think most people in this country in are denial about the future if we don't get spending under control.
Last edited by Chuckiechan; December 29th, 2011 at 01:20 PM."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
December 29th, 2011, 03:13 PM #17
U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000
Fed budget: $3,820,000,000,000
New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000
National debt: $14,271,000,000,000
Recent budget cuts: $ 38,500,000,000
Let's now remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget:
Annual family income: $21,700
Money the family spent: $38,200
New debt on the credit card: $16,500
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
Total budget cuts: $385
Got It ?????
OK now Lesson # 2:
Here's another way to look at the Debt Ceiling:
Let's say, You come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood. Your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.
What do you think you should do?
Raise the ceilings, or pump out the crap?
Your choice is coming Nov. 2012
December 29th, 2011, 06:50 PM #18
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Joplin, MO
- Blog Entries
There is no comparison to be made between the federal government and a family when it comes to finance. None.
A family doesn't have to budget for roads or defense. A family doesn't budget for regulating finance institutions or air quality.
But let's play your silly game. If a family is only making 21k, what would you tell them to do? Only cut? Drastically? How far before the kids are starving and doing poorly in school? The more obvious answer is that "dad" needs a better job. Maybe one that pays closer to 75k a year. And we go about that by raising taxes.Good job, friend-of-friends!
December 30th, 2011, 10:02 AM #19
In addition, a family has no concern about the macro effect. A government should. A family can cut expenses but the aggregate effect is a shrinking economy and GDP, which will then come around and bite on the income side.
When an economy is depressed, that's the time to spend money to boost the economy, jobs, etc. The fact that the government can borrow at negative real interest rates, makes it a no-brainer.
How do we pay it back, Chuck asks? With a larger economy, more people are working and their tax payments cover the borrowing.
December 30th, 2011, 12:18 PM #20
A family can't print money. Unless they want to go to jail."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By MTAtech in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 17Last Post: April 5th, 2011, 03:19 PM
By Chuckiechan in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 3Last Post: February 10th, 2011, 12:48 PM
By MTAtech in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 19Last Post: March 30th, 2009, 05:22 PM
By MTAtech in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 0Last Post: January 14th, 2007, 11:08 AM
By willy_ph in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 29Last Post: February 10th, 2003, 02:10 PM