Obama: don't give in to those fuckers

[elucidator]

…Tea Party leader Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) told radio host Sean Hannity yesterday that Republicans may “scuttle” the tax deal if the Bush tax cuts extension is tied to unemployment aid. Calling jobless aid “massive spending,” Bachmann said “tying” the tax cuts “to massive spending is something that would be very difficult for members to swallow.”…

From ThnkProgress

Offered without comment, none being necessary.

[Chefguy]

@John_Mace

Nope. Also part of the deal was that the unemployment benefits don’t have to be paid for out of the unused TARP funds. I agree that the Republicans probably would have not let the benefits expire, but we don’t know that for sure. It’s just speculation.

This is a good deal for them, since their goal is re-election and not public welfare. A two year extension puts the expiration in 2012, which (gasp!) is the presidential election year and another congressional election cycle. The right is hoping that they can either unseat the dems from the White House or take over the Senate (or both), thus being able to give away $500 billion unfunded dollars a year to their rich buddies in perpetuity while running up the debt another trillion dollars in the intervening two years. How is this going to be paid for? I thought these ass clowns were in favor of reducing the debt. In the meantime, Medicare and Social Security head further towards bankruptcy, cheap cash continues to be available for speculators, and the bubble cycle continues.

[BrainGlutton]

@Clothahump

There is no such thing as a “tax cut for the rich”. That’s a liberal talking point squawked by liberal parrots right and left.

If the tax rates of the upper brackets are cut, that is a “tax cut for the rich.”

[elucidator]

A spokesman for liberal parrots said he was glad no liberal parrots were involved…

[Chefguy]

@Clothahump

I personally favor abolishing the income tax completely. Repeal the 16th Amendment and replace the income tax with the Fair Tax. As a very distant second place and second-rate alternative, go to a flat rate tax; no deductions, no exemption, you pay 15% of your income and that’s it.

Can you explain to me the logic (?) behind “soaking the rich”? The only foundation I can see for it is class envy. Someone through initiative and effort invites a new widget or a better mousetrap and starts making money doing it. Their reward? Jealous people steal that money through taxation and redistribute it to “the poor”. Why should people be penalized for being successful?

Well, I can sure see how a “fair tax” would be favored by the wealthy. It would make them rich beyond their wildest dreams. Sales taxes are regressive and burden the lower income groups far more onerously than an income tax does. There are countries in Europe that use this sort of value added tax (VAT) on goods, and the rates are often in the >20% range (in Denmark, it’s 25%). They might as well be paying an income tax.

I don’t want to ‘soak the rich’. I want them to pay their fair share. I want the tax loopholes closed and tax shelters abolished. When a multimillionaire pays less in taxes than his secretary, something is very wrong with our system.

[Bosstone]

If a society allows one to accumulate vast wealth, shouldn’t one have a vested interest in making sure that society stays healthy and stable? Otherwise you’re killing the goose for its golden eggs.

[Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew]

@Squink

If he caves, we’ll all regret it. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of our lives.

Too much debt will cripple the nation, and the future of all Americans will be grimmer. Sure, you may think that potentiality doesn’t amount to a hill of beans, relative to the present troubles of 2.5 million.

Why do I have this sudden urge to sing “La Marseillaise”?

[kaylasdad99]

@Clothahump

One of these days, you might realize that an ad hominem attack is nothing more than an open admission that what originally said was correct. Thank you once again for proving me correct.

What if some people counter what you said with factual arguments that prove you incorrect, and other people just fling ad hominems? Are you correct wrt the ad homs and incorrect wrt the actual arguers?

Your section of the multiverse sounds like it might be a nice place to take a short vacation, but it’s probably really confusing for anybody who immigrates there. Does the gravity fluctuate from day to day, the way Kurt Vonnegut described in Slapstick?

[kaylasdad99]

@Clothahump

There is no such thing as a “tax cut for the rich”. That’s a liberal talking point squawked by liberal parrots right and left.

@BrainGlutton

If the tax rates of the upper brackets are cut, that is a “tax cut for the rich.”

You appear to be neglecting the factor that in Clothahump-world, the term “American” by definition excludes the term “rich.” So there are no “rich Americans,” and there can be no “tax cuts for rich Americans.”

It’s right there in the Constitution, just like not having titles of nobility.

[Sinaptics]

@kaylasdad99

You appear to be neglecting the factor that in Clothahump-world, the term “American” by definition excludes the term “rich.” So there are no “rich Americans,” and there can be no “tax cuts for rich Americans.”

It’s right there in the Constitution, just like not having titles of nobility.

I thought it was because the rich don’t pay taxes…it’s more like a kickback.

[What_the]

@Clothahump

There is no such thing as a “tax cut for the rich”. That’s a liberal talking point squawked by liberal parrots right and left.

Of course there can be.

Perhaps what you meant was that neither cutting taxes of the rich nor stopping an increase in taxes on the rich is giving the rich anything. Obviously it’s their own money to keep. Society has no claim on it whatsoever.

Rhetoric like that is worthy of the political death penalty.

[joebuck20]

@elucidator

From ThnkProgress

Offered without comment, none being necessary.

Fuck me. :smack:

[gonzomax]

Option number 3 is letting the Bush tax cuts die. Then when the Repubs try to reinstate them, or make them bigger, they have to do it over a presidential veto. That would require 66 percent to over ride. I doubt the Repubs can scare that up.

[What_the]

Obama’s taking questions and telling lies…excuse me, talking tough. Here are some highlights…

• “No your wrong. Hold on… it’s not politics of the moment it’s what I can get done right now”… huh?

• Republicans wanted to end tax cuts for the middle class.

• Tax cuts for the rich are the Republican Holy Grail

• asked about the situation in July 2010 vs. now he responded about how bad things were before he got there

• tens of millions of people would be directly damaged if he hadn’t caved

• Republicans oppose child tax credits and college tax credits

Feeling better now?

[Squink]

@Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew

Why do I have this sudden urge to sing “La Marseillaise”?

Have you been watching too many old movies?
Here you go: La Marseillaise

[Dallas_Jones]

I nailed how it would go down yesterday in post #35.

And in today’s press conference Obama said that this capitulation on the tax cuts was needed in order to get the unemployment benefits through the immediate crisis and that this would buy time for serious discussion of the whole tax issue over the coming year.

Depending upon your point of view, that has to have you laughing your ass off in disappointment or joy. Because there is now no way in hell these tax cuts are going to be discussed again any time soon. The issue will drop right off the radar as the legislature moves on to other things.

Anyone care to bet on the likelyhood of the tax extension being seriously discussed right before the 2012 election? I didn’t think so.

[elucidator]

Oh, I dunno. How about a special expansion of the VA program for returning heroes? To be paid for exclusively from taxes on the wealthy? Who are, as we all know, amongst the very tippy-tip-top most patriotic Americans. Why, many of them are Republicans, who hold the very patent on the subject of patriotism, and supporting Our Heroes! Not like us unpatriotic lefties, they would be eager to offer their treasure!

[NDP]

@Dallas_Jones

Depending upon your point of view, that has to have you laughing your ass off in disappointment or joy. Because there is now no way in hell these tax cuts are going to be discussed again any time soon. The issue will drop right off the radar as the legislature moves on to other things.

Anyone care to bet on the likelyhood of the tax extension being seriously discussed right before the 2012 election? I didn’t think so.

Oh, it will be discussed in 2012. The Republicans need it as a club to beat up on the Democrats.

[ratatoskK]

Well now he gave in, and it was totally unnecessary. This casts his other decisions – like not ending the two wars we’re in – in a very dubious light. (They were already, but this clinches it.) I wrote to my congressperson and senators and to Obama today to express how aghast I am at this.

[Clothahump]

@BrainGlutton

If the tax rates of the upper brackets are cut, that is a “tax cut for the rich.”

But if all tax brackets are cut, then it is not just a tax cut for the rich, is it?