Something seems to not add up. For years, we have heard that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich and not for the middle class, but Obama is now considering extending the Bush tax cuts for the middle class? How could that be if the tax cuts were only for the rich? Did the Democrats not know the middle class got tax cuts until now, or were they aware of that and clouding the facts?
Curggr sits back, has a drink and waits for the Bush, Palin, Fox News bashing.
1960’s: $40,000 avg income of middle-class family, $90,000 avg. income of CEO’s (arguably the most equal time in American society)
Insert Nixon (R), Ford (R), Carter (D), Reagan (R), H.W. Bush (R), Clinton (D), and Bush (R).
Present: $40,000 avg. income of middle-class family, $20,000,000 avg. income of CEO’s (most unequal time in America since the Rockerfeller and Carnegie). The average middle class family would have to make at least $90,000 to keep the same quality of life they had in 1960’s.
1960’s: $40,000 avg income of middle-class family, $90,000 avg. income of CEO’s (arguably the most equal time in American society)
Insert Nixon (R), Ford (R), Carter (D), Reagan (R), H.W. Bush (R), Clinton (D), and Bush (R).
Present: $40,000 avg. income of middle-class family, $20,000,000 avg. income of CEO’s (most unequal time in America since the Rockerfeller and Carnegie). The average middle class family would have to make at least $90,000 to keep the same quality of life they had in 1960’s.
Are you unwilling to admit since Nixon that the United States has turned into a banana republic favoring the wealthy.
Nixon (R), Ford (R), Carter (D), Reagan (R), H.W. Bush (R), Clinton (D) and Bush (R).
12 years of Democratic Presidents since Nixon
24 years of Republican Presidents since Nixon
Are you unwilling to admit that the 1960’s were the most equal time in America? From Civil Rights to median income gap between middle-class and wealthy.
David Cay Johnston had this to say about Obama’s plan, FWIW:
Well, when President Bush came into office, he had a tax cut proposal. It was the key thing in his campaign. He did not, however, pass it through normal legislative means. They did it through something called reconciliation. You’ll recall that’s how healthcare was passed earlier this year. And that meant there was a ten-year limit on these tax cuts. The Republicans at one point during the last decade controlled the House, the Senate and the White House, but they did not make these tax cuts permanent. And the issue now is that the Republicans’ position, at least so far, has been that they will not support anything the President is proposing, which means everyone’s taxes would go back up January 1st. That is, the Republicans’ position, if it stands, is higher taxes for everyone. The President’s position is higher taxes only for only those people in the top two or three percent.
Not being discussed in all of this are two crucial issues. One of them is how much those tax cuts cost us. Basically, all the income taxes that everyone in America paid in January and February of this year only went to cover interest on the money borrowed for the Bush tax cuts over the last decade. Just interest on those tax cuts.
The second issue not being discussed is that this top tax rate, the two that President Obama wants to have go back to the Clinton-era level, they cut in at a quarter-million dollars and about $400,000 of taxable income. In fact, we have a large number of people in this country now who are making multimillion-dollar annual incomes, and we’re not talking about a higher tax rate on them. We’re starting actually at a very low level. And the very highest-paid workers in the history of the world, hedge fund managers, at least twenty-five of whom made a billion dollars last year, pay a current tax rate of zero. The news media keeps saying 15 percent. They pay the 15 percent, when they cash out, which could be decades from now. None of that is on the table.
* * *
I haven’t seen any indication the President is in favor of this idea of a two-year extension, but he may change if he decides that’s in his interest. Clearly, he mentioned Boehner eight times because he’s trying to get someone who personifies the position of the Republicans on these issues. But keep in mind something very important: most small businesses—and I’m actually co-owner and chairman of a small business—do not pay federal corporate income taxes. Businesses are designed to draw down, and take out as compensation retirement benefits or acquiring assets, their profits. So, this really isn’t about small business in the sense of the people you encounter who are petty merchants, small manufacturers, have a little place with twenty-five or fifty people.
Are you unwilling to admit since Nixon that the United States has turned into a banana republic favoring the wealthy.
Nixon (R), Ford (R), Carter (D), Reagan (R), H.W. Bush (R), Clinton (D) and Bush (R).
12 years of Democratic Presidents since Nixon
24 years of Republican Presidents since Nixon
Are you unwilling to admit that the 1960’s were the most equal time in America? From Civil Rights to median income gap between middle-class and wealthy.
That’s not the topic of the thread. Care to address the topic?
the country is taking in less money that would pay for expensive programs that never get cut and then to make the dems agree to it, the repbs agreed to add more debt to the country at the same time. it’s 100x more broken than the bcs.
so, exactly how are things any different now than they were in the last 40 yrs? still going in debt, owing our biggest enemies the chinese even more than before. to make matters even worse after all the pork the dem congressmen spent after getting a dem president, calling it a stimulus package, it appears they are spending even more on their way out before they lose control.
your party (i don’t care which one it is) is a blanking joke and so are you for voting for any of those baby boomer clowns who are laying a burden of debt on gen x and gen y. the joke is sadly on those 45 and younger.
the country is taking in less money that would pay for expensive programs that never get cut and then to make the dems agree to it, the repbs agreed to add more debt to the country at the same time. it’s 100x more broken than the bcs.
so, exactly how are things any different now than they were in the last 40 yrs? still going in debt, owing our biggest enemies the chinese even more than before. to make matters even worse after all the pork the dem congressmen spent after getting a dem president, calling it a stimulus package, it appears they are spending even more on their way out before they lose control.
your party (i don’t care which one it is) is a blanking joke and so are you for voting for any of those baby boomer clowns who are laying a burden of debt on gen x and gen y. the joke is sadly on those 45 and younger.
I wouldn’t argue with that. Neither of the two major parties has shown any inclination to take it seriously. They have been arrogant and continued to serve themselves.
