Printable View
Quote:
The $858 billion package now goes to the House, where many Democrats are unhappy with a provision that allows estates as large as $10 million to pass to heirs tax-free. Democratic leaders, however, say they expect the bill to ultimately pass and become law.
Senate acts; Keeping tax rates intact up to HouseQuote:
The bill passed by the Senate, 81-19, would extend them for two years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Well this should shut up the Republicans about being concerned with the deficits.. the same deficits they were concerend with prior to the recent congressional elections..
Keeping tax rates the same infuriates Dems, for whatever reason.
Only in the eyes of fools.Quote:
Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro
Taxes vs. revenue is dynamic, not static. It is just a political lie to say that they would have an additional $858 billion without this. Taxing more would reduce some on the econiomic activity, and produce less revenue that the said $858 billion. It's even possible that tax revenues on other citizens due to employment changes would drop dramatically. That with the rich sheltering more money could easily yield even less than the said $$858 billion if these taxes were restored.
Now what I don't like is the reduction of SS insurance. If anything, we need to increase that slightly, maybe to 6.5% or so. Just a modest increase.
I think you forget.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
All money in the USA belongs to them. They get to determine how much we get to keep.
At least that is their approach.
The Repug/conservative fear-mongering about a deficit was/is a huge lie, like all their "principles"
While fear-mongering about the deficit, the Repugs did everything possible to ignore the unemployed, and impede the Dems from helping the unemployed. For the Regugs, the unemployed were to be exploited to extort enrichment of the super-wealthy.
and of course, the SS 2% cut to made repaid by govt, puts SS in the deficit/budget picture for the first time. Removing the 2% cut will be lied about again as a tax increase.
The downward death spiral of the lower 98% continues, which is the primary objective of Repugs and conservatives.
Nobody's given me an answer yet. Anyone know who sneaked in the 2% SS reduction?
It's not in the bill, and too many amendments to search.
HR 4853
I'm glad that they took out the "death tax" for the most part. I don't really agree with that one.
Just called my congressman's office. His aid had no answer for me, except I might be able to find it in one of the 11 related bills.
My guess is it came out of the compromise session. Obama probably wanted to extend the earned income tax credits and the counter-offer was probably the SS cuts for everyone...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I still don't like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy
Don't get me wrong, I will save far more than the "making work pay" that it's replacing. I just don't believe we need lower SS rates. Just calculated...
I will save between $1,400 to $1,600, over the $400 it's replacing. Maybe more, depending on promotions and overtime!
2% across the board SS reduction?
Just the employee side. Employers still pay 6.5%.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
I don't think the govt is ever justified in taking more than a third of your money, even if you're some 20-ish billionaire punk who created a worthless social networking software for other self-absorbed narcissists.
http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2010...5--300x450.jpg
Does that cut have an expiration date?
one yearQuote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
I gather the Tea Party is up in arms about this?
BTW, I don't ever want to hear again that Keynesianism is exclusive to one party...
Adding nearly another trillion to the deficit seems to please the GOP, for whatever reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Oh right, tax cuts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
It's very convenient how you can always raise taxes, but you can never unspend what you have already spent.
Irrefutable. Also, non-sequitur.
"please the GOP, for whatever reason"
come on, you know their obvious, stated game.
bigger deficits means cutting spending/shrink govt on poor, sick and young, non-whites, until it can be drowned in a bathtub, leaving MIC, BigFood, carbon extractor tax cuts/subsidies, etc untouched.
The 2% SS is the worst new cut, since it exposes SS to general deficit problem, moving it into the Repug firing range and towards destruction, aka, privatization.
Last time the GOP tried to destroy it, they got destroyed at the polls. Coincidence?
They don't call it the "third rail" for nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Last time the Repugs ran the govt, they screwed it up and got kicked out on their ass, now they get voted back in after prolonging and deepening their screwed economy.
Americans have a short memory. Repugs will kill SS, rape Medicare and Medicaid, defund health reform, get voted out. Americans are too stupid, esp the right wingers, and amnesiac to make the Repugs wander around out of power for very long.
Bullshit premise. Considering we're already deep in the red, any additional spending goes into the national credit card, which we will have to pay for at some point, but will include interest. It's very likely this $800+ billion will cost us well upwards of 1 trillion once you add up said interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Not once, ever, tax cuts have paid for themselves in the form of recouped revenue due to growth. Not once. This is not going to be the exception unfortunately. This is really no different than a $1 trillion 'stimulus package' on it's face.