On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:34:25 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 09/06/2011 7:59 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:46:02 -0600,
wrote:

the real problem is that the right believes supply side mythology so
insists you can cut taxes and balance the budget

Actually yes. Study the elasticity in pricing, taxes too have
elasticity. Too low or too high and the benefits to society diminish.
Trouble now is that it is too high. Look at any nation having trouble,
some toxic mix of debt and taxes is the issue. Look at any economy
doing well, debt and taxes are much much less.


HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!

he doesnt even know what the tax rate is in the US!

That is the growing economies of the world have less debt and less taxes.

more reader's digest bull****

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:36:49 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:37:30 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 01:09:25 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:18:04 -0400, wf3h wrote:

Obama has been in office over 2 years and he had a filibuster proof
senate along with the house for several months.

well no. the budget is the function of the house and it was not
filibuster proof

There is no filibuster in the house, the majority rules and there are
time limits on all debates.
The dems had the majority in the house.

well lets see...the GOP has had the house for 5 months

how they doing? they balance the budget?


but, then, you simply say it's the black guy's fault

In this case it was. If Obama wanted the Bush tax cuts to expire, all
he had to do was to veto the extension bill.

and let the middle class take it on the chin...as is usual when the
GOP is involved.


There was not a veto proof support for the extension

These are now the Obama tax cuts.

uh no.

he proposed ONLY a tax cut for the middle class

the GOP, intent on destroying the middle class, said no

they're the bush tax cuts

your spin is nonsense

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:16:15 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:54:28 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:36:49 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:37:30 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 01:09:25 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:18:04 -0400, wf3h wrote:

Obama has been in office over 2 years and he had a filibuster proof
senate along with the house for several months.

well no. the budget is the function of the house and it was not
filibuster proof

There is no filibuster in the house, the majority rules and there are
time limits on all debates.
The dems had the majority in the house.

well lets see...the GOP has had the house for 5 months

how they doing? they balance the budget?

Exactly the same as the democrats. There are really not that much
different.

but, then, you simply say it's the black guy's fault

In this case it was. If Obama wanted the Bush tax cuts to expire, all
he had to do was to veto the extension bill.

and let the middle class take it on the chin...as is usual when the
GOP is involved.

Make up your mind. Were the Bush and now Obama tax cuts a good thing
or a bad thing. You are arguing with yourself now.

There's no need to make up one's mind. Tax cuts are generally not a
good idea right now. However, the $10T Bush tax breaks (mostly to the
rich) were much, much worse.

There was not a veto proof support for the extension

These are now the Obama tax cuts.

uh no.

he proposed ONLY a tax cut for the middle class

The tax cuts on the 250k and over people are only 18% of the total
deal, virtually insignificant. Obama's 14% drop in the FICA tax costs
over twice what that would have given us back.

Yet Obama extended the whole tax cut plus the double down.

The total cost of the Obama tax cut is almost a half trillion a year.
($370B for the income tax cut and $120B for the payroll tax cut.)
We are borrowing every nickel of that.

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:16:15 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:54:28 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:36:49 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:37:30 -0400, wf3h wrote:

There is no filibuster in the house, the majority rules and there are
time limits on all debates.
The dems had the majority in the house.

well lets see...the GOP has had the house for 5 months

how they doing? they balance the budget?

Exactly the same as the democrats. There are really not that much
different.


so obama's not the problem

gee. and yet the right wing continues to assert he is.


and let the middle class take it on the chin...as is usual when the
GOP is involved.

Make up your mind. Were the Bush and now Obama tax cuts a good thing
or a bad thing. You are arguing with yourself now

HAHAHAH you kind of forgot

obama proposed a tax cut ONLY for those making less than 250K

oh. the right wing hides that


There was not a veto proof support for the extension

These are now the Obama tax cuts.

uh no.

he proposed ONLY a tax cut for the middle class

The tax cuts on the 250k and over people are only 18% of the total
deal, virtually insignificant. Obama's 14% drop in the FICA tax costs
over twice what that would have given us back.

ummm...if they're insignifican

why does ALL GOP policy focus on cutting their taxes?

if the amount is so small, why does the GOP refuse to cut taxes unless
they're rincluded??

On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:53:16 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:16:15 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:54:28 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:36:49 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:37:30 -0400, wf3h wrote:

There is no filibuster in the house, the majority rules and there are
time limits on all debates.
The dems had the majority in the house.

well lets see...the GOP has had the house for 5 months

how they doing? they balance the budget?

Exactly the same as the democrats. There are really not that much
different.


so obama's not the problem

gee. and yet the right wing continues to assert he is.

He is not part of the solution either,

And your solution is to do what? Eviscerate the middle class and the
poor, and leave the rich alone.


and let the middle class take it on the chin...as is usual when the
GOP is involved.

Make up your mind. Were the Bush and now Obama tax cuts a good thing
or a bad thing. You are arguing with yourself now

HAHAHAH you kind of forgot

obama proposed a tax cut ONLY for those making less than 250K


The $250k and above tax may be nice symbolism but it is insignificant.

It's not insignificant. It's a great start.



There was not a veto proof support for the extension

These are now the Obama tax cuts.

uh no.

he proposed ONLY a tax cut for the middle class

The tax cuts on the 250k and over people are only 18% of the total
deal, virtually insignificant. Obama's 14% drop in the FICA tax costs
over twice what that would have given us back.

ummm...if they're insignifican

why does ALL GOP policy focus on cutting their taxes?

if the amount is so small, why does the GOP refuse to cut taxes unless
they're rincluded??

They are idiots too.


We really needed Obama to veto the whole renewal bill

And the result would have been even more pain for people least able to
handle it.

On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:53:16 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:16:15 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 21:54:28 -0400, wf
well lets see...the GOP has had the house for 5 months

how they doing? they balance the budget?

Exactly the same as the democrats. There are really not that much
different.


so obama's not the problem

gee. and yet the right wing continues to assert he is.

He is not part of the solution either,


sure is. healthcare for the middle class...financial regulation...as
much as the GOP will let him get

obama proposed a tax cut ONLY for those making less than 250K


The $250k and above tax may be nice symbolism but it is insignificant.

gee. then why does the GOP say only THEY can drive the economy and
only THEY deserve a tax cut?