On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 07:50:56 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:



When they try to contain costs the teacher's union revolts over the
loss of Viagra coverage!


i lived in texas.

texas has no teacher's unions

and it has one of the worst school systems in the US. as does
mississippi...

more right wing bull****

On 8/9/10 5:08 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 08:00:19 -0400, "Harry @ news.east.earthlink.net"
wrote:


In effect, a large part of our political class is showing its
priorities: given the choice between asking the richest 2 percent or so
of Americans to go back to paying the tax rates they paid during the
Clinton-era boom, or allowing the nation's foundations to crumble -
literally in the case of roads, figuratively in the case of education -
they're choosing the latter.


not only that, but we're borrowing to finance the gifts for the rich


Once again, 49% federal tax rates for all income over $250,000, and
*every* dollar coming in in any way, except for long-term capital gains
on investments made in the United States, should be considered income.

On 8/9/10 5:12 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 07:50:56 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:



When they try to contain costs the teacher's union revolts over the
loss of Viagra coverage!


i lived in texas.

texas has no teacher's unions

and it has one of the worst school systems in the US. as does
mississippi...

more right wing bull****


South Carolina is the new Mississippi.

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:12:51 -0400, "Harry @ news.east.earthlink.net"
wrote:

On 8/9/10 5:08 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 08:00:19 -0400, "Harry @ news.east.earthlink.net"
wrote:


In effect, a large part of our political class is showing its
priorities: given the choice between asking the richest 2 percent or so
of Americans to go back to paying the tax rates they paid during the
Clinton-era boom, or allowing the nation's foundations to crumble -
literally in the case of roads, figuratively in the case of education -
they're choosing the latter.


not only that, but we're borrowing to finance the gifts for the rich


Once again, 49% federal tax rates for all income over $250,000, and
*every* dollar coming in in any way, except for long-term capital gains
on investments made in the United States, should be considered income.

another article the other day pointed out that the richest 1% have
seen their effective tax rates drop by 50% in the last 10 years.

this country is getting more like mexico every day

bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 06:28:57 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:


$70 billion a year isn't even a drop in Obama's bucket. But, some
folks are just too stupid to realize that. Remember, the Democrats
control Congress and the White House. Changing the tax structure is on
them. If it doesn't get done, it's 'cause the Dems don't want to do
it.

really? ever h ear of a filibuster? this congress has had a record
number of them as the GOP tries to bring gvot to a halt

I guess liberals are just plain stupid (JPS), if you know what I mean.

seems you right whiners dont know how govt works...


Looks like. But he's as good a name-caller as you.
The tax cut expiration issue should be interesting.
The R's will try to block any tax increase for the "rich."
The D's have at least a couple ways to go.

1. Two bills from the house, one keeping the "rich" tax cuts,
the other keeping the "non-rich" tax cuts.
The Senate D's will vote against the rich and for the non-rich.
The Senate R's can vote against the non-rich and stop it, at their peril.

2. Reconciliation. Since taxes are budgetary, reconciliation is a
possibility. That's how the R's passed the "Bush tax cuts."
As an indication of how poor the state of journalism is, I couldn't
find anything to confirm this could be done.
Might be a procedural technicality I'm not aware of that would prohibit it.
But if not, the D's can do what they please.
If Obama was smart, he'd break his $250k promise and let all the tax
cuts expire except leave the 10% bracket alone.
Wouldn't keep the wingers from whining, but those who think would see
he's doing something real about the deficit on the revenue side at
least. He'd then do some heavy work on spending and cost control.
But Obama really ain't too smart as a strategist.
Not taking positive steps to get industrial jobs back shows that.
Only way to get unemployment down.
I expect the usual cluster****, but who knows.
The only thing for sure is the R's will get the blame if the non-rich
taxes go up.

Jim - Mark my words.

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:52:47 -0500, Jim wrote:


But Obama really ain't too smart as a strategist.

now let's see...who got healthcare passed...

uh...FDR?

nope...

hillary and bill? nope

what WAS that president's name...??

Not taking positive steps to get industrial jobs back shows that.

of course if he did this he'd be a socialist...

Only way to get unemployment down.
I expect the usual cluster****, but who knows.
The only thing for sure is the R's will get the blame if the non-rich
taxes go up.


we can only hope. so far the middle class tends to blame the dems for
'tax increases'

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:30:44 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:52:47 -0500, Jim wrote:

If Obama was smart, he'd break his $250k promise and let all the tax
cuts expire except leave the 10% bracket alone.

If they do nothing the tax cut simply expires and all the rates go
back.
That is the problem. He needs legislation to change anything in the
tax code and there will be a huge fight over that.
"Fight" translates into a lot of deals being made and that simple
"leave the 10% bracket alone" ends up being a 2000 page bill with
goodies in it for a lot of people.
Personally I think both parties would rather have the issue for the
election more than actually settling on a bill. Nothing will happen
before the election.
Once it gets into a lame duck session, who knows what will happen.
That could all change again once the new congress is seated too.

the GOP prefers strongly regressive taxes...have the middle class pay
'em...and have the middle class bail out the rich when they get in
trouble...

then tell us how lucky we are the rich look out for us

wrote:
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:52:47 -0500, Jim wrote:

If Obama was smart, he'd break his $250k promise and let all the tax
cuts expire except leave the 10% bracket alone.

If they do nothing the tax cut simply expires and all the rates go
back.
That is the problem. He needs legislation to change anything in the
tax code and there will be a huge fight over that.
"Fight" translates into a lot of deals being made and that simple
"leave the 10% bracket alone" ends up being a 2000 page bill with
goodies in it for a lot of people.

Duh. I covered all that.
Possible bills, reconciliation and possible outcomes.
Fighting is what they do.
Writing thousands of pages of legislation is what they do.
You add nothing new here.
Except the usual "can't do" scribbling.
Of course their plentiful staff will write thousands of pages of
legislation, and they will fight.
That's what they do.
And they always say "can do."
What your obsession with how many pages legislation is, I have no idea.
But it sure sounds like the typical R whining about any bill the D's write.
My ****ing credit card agreement is ten pages right there if you put it
in a readable font size.
My new Ryobi orbital sander manual is 20 pages.
They probably have hundreds and hundreds of pages of tax legislation
already written, just by making revisions on the old bills.
This is federal tax law. You don't put it on god damned napkin.

Jim - Sometimes I just get ****ed off. My apologies for any offense.
Too late to change anything because I already hit the "send" key.

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:52:47 -0500, Jim wrote:

Wouldn't keep the wingers from whining, but those who think would see
he's doing something real about the deficit on the revenue side at
least. He'd then do some heavy work on spending and cost control.

Good strategy for another Great Depression: Reduce government
spending and increase taxes. The last guy who tried it during a
major down turn is not remembered too favorably:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hoover

"Jim" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:52:47 -0500, Jim wrote:

If Obama was smart, he'd break his $250k promise and let all the tax
cuts expire except leave the 10% bracket alone.

If they do nothing the tax cut simply expires and all the rates go
back.
That is the problem. He needs legislation to change anything in the
tax code and there will be a huge fight over that.
"Fight" translates into a lot of deals being made and that simple
"leave the 10% bracket alone" ends up being a 2000 page bill with
goodies in it for a lot of people.

Duh. I covered all that.
Possible bills, reconciliation and possible outcomes.
Fighting is what they do.
Writing thousands of pages of legislation is what they do.
You add nothing new here.
Except the usual "can't do" scribbling.
Of course their plentiful staff will write thousands of pages of
legislation, and they will fight.
That's what they do.
And they always say "can do."
What your obsession with how many pages legislation is, I have no idea.
But it sure sounds like the typical R whining about any bill the D's
write.
My ****ing credit card agreement is ten pages right there if you put it
in a readable font size.
My new Ryobi orbital sander manual is 20 pages.
They probably have hundreds and hundreds of pages of tax legislation
already written, just by making revisions on the old bills.
This is federal tax law. You don't put it on god damned napkin.

Jim - Sometimes I just get ****ed off. My apologies for any offense.
Too late to change anything because I already hit the "send" key.

"My new Ryobi orbital sander manual is 20 pages."

And probably half of them are government mandated safety related. 8)