Republicans Screw the Middle Class and Unemployed!

I love obama all all the people that love him. Fools..

good going deadheads.. Wheres your benefit concert now?.

 

Who are you to decide how much money someone can make or keep? Most millionaires are first generation millionaires, i.e. they earned their money, they didn’t inherit it.

If we don’t cut our spending in this country we’re all in a lot of trouble. The idea that everyone has a right to endless jobless benefits, food stamps, etc. is wrong for America. The time for the masses to get off the government tit and stand up for themselves is long past due.

Obama has racked up more debt than every President combined since Washington. The stimulus package he pushed through hasn’t done a thing to help the economy, in fact unemployment has actually gotten worse.

Cutting taxes does help the country as a whole; Kennedy and Reagan both proved that. Across the board tax cuts and cutting government spending is the fairest thing to do for all Americans. This class warfare crap about the rich VS the poor is nothing but tripe.

 

Part of the poor masses since income inequality is the largest it's been since 1928 and has continued to grow. Need a reminder of what happened in 1929? Also, Reagan's chief economic adviser, the creator of trickle down economics was even on the Colbert report the other night blasting the idea of extending the tax cuts for the top 2% given the current state of the nation.

Why don't you play the budget deficit solving program the NYT and other groups have running, amazing how cutting the military, raising the SS and medicare age by 2 years and putting taxes back to what they were in the 90's actually solves almost 3/4 of the problem over the next 30 years.

lol, just no. At least in terms of the first one. Do you ever actually check what you read considering how easy this is to check.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png
Apparently Obama has been in charge of the economy since 1940.

See above point of even Reagan's chief economic adviser being against tax cuts for the rich now. Tax cuts are not a panacea. They're supposed to be pragmatic. Borrowing another trillion dollars to fund tax cuts for the super wealthy is asinine given the fact in the past 30 years the ratio of what the top 5% own of the national wealth has grown incredibly.

 

You mean - as the Left continues to become the Right and the Right continues to become the ultra-Right

 

I sure do wish Obama would stand firm against the irrational Republicans, which is all of them.

 

About 44% of the members of Congress are millionaires. So, the down vote is understandable.

.

 

Geesh, Of course you would believe that, since the liberal media feeds you puppets these lies. Ask the Dems why they let it get to this point to begin with. I seem to remember them being in full control of both the house and senate for the last two years. Then youll find the real answer.

 

I believe either John Stewart or Steven Colbert made this very same observation.

Extremism, in it's many forms, can be truly frightening.

As one swings further to the edge of the spectrum, there is often a religious boundary that has no place in politics, but that's a topic for another thread...

___________________________________

"This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it"
– John Adams

"Lighthouses are more useful than churches."
– Benjamin Franklin

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man."
– Thomas Jefferson

 

I think it is good a president is open to various perspectives on issues, and try to work out the differences but what is it with his insistence that this is another case where the difference in ideas is just a natural difference in subjectivity. I was upset that he said "The republicans have a different view" in a manner indicative of that. The truth is it is not a simple difference in ideas of how to run the country. The republican excuse for tax cuts for the extremely wealthy is Job creation and more spending in the economy. All the evidence points to the Republicans representing the interest of those very wealthy, especially considering many of them are just that. It is not a simple subjective difference that they will refuse to allow middle class tax cuts without those very few benefiting as well, whom would not only just benefit, but benefit greatly and much more significantly than the middle class considering their already significantly self benefiting position in wealthiness.

My question is do the extremely wealthy even spend good amounts of money on things from businesses that are responsible for significant job creation? To me it seems their spending would benefit the equally as greedy and moral less Financials, and smaller companies responsible for things such as Sail boats or super nice sports cars.

I support Obama but I think it would ONLY be appropriate that he take a firmer stance against the amazingly unjust view of the right. Using words such as morally incorrect, unjust, unacceptable, AND EVIL. It would make no difference because the Republicans do not compromise, they only demand. But maybe if the President presents this truth to the people, more would realize just how disgusting of tactics the republicans use to protect the wealthy's ability to benefit the most, in a majorly unequal proportion, than the rest of the country. And thus not vote in these people into having this kind of power.

 

Why are they cutting the social security tax for one year. Aside from the fact the tax should be remaining the same while increasing the income cap on what can be taxed for SS, the fuck is the point in lowering the tax for only one year.

 

Explain how you borrow a trillion dollars to fund a tax cut?

Did you mean, "We planned on spending a trillion dollars, but since we're not going to get it from the rich folks, we'll borrow it instead!"

Now that's asinine.

 

You can't just cut $1.5 trillion from the national budget in one year without having the country implode. If you want to cut taxes when you already have a massive budget deficit you have to borrow the money to fund it. It's economics 101.

Also saying "comedy central I'll leave it at that" and "I don't trust wikipedia" are massive cop outs, it doesn't change the fact they're right no matter how much you don't like it.

As for 1929, it's simple, when wealth is concentrated and the economy goes bad, those who hold the wealth aren't going to start spending it for the good of the world, they're going to hoard it. Ask the banks about it, they're still sitting on hundreds of billions given to them. It's not healthy for a nation for the top 1% to hold almost 50% of a nation's wealth, it creates a ridiculous inequality that's going to fuel both economic, political and social turmoil.

Also a consumption tax is regressive and just a great burden on the poor the top want to keep more of their wealth. Rich people do spend more, but it doesn't matter how rich you are, you can only buy so much stuff. Consumer spending drives the economy and the extreme vast majority consumers are not rich. Someone who makes $40,000 a year needs to spend almost all of their disposable income on buying goods, someone who makes $4 million a year spends only a fraction of their income on purchasing goods. A tax on consumption only hurts the poor.

 

Do the rich, who spend more, really spend it in industries that create the most jobs though? I can't imagine them not spending their money in Niche markets and exquisite producers, where there really isn't all that much job creation.

 

Exactly. A rich person might buy a giant yacht, or antique vases, but those don't drive the economy. Normal consumer spending does as the service sector is by far the largest sector of the economy, and that consumer spending is also what drives industrial production. It doesn't matter if a rich person might buy a $4,000 TV or $9 million house compared to what your average person would buy because there's not enough rich people buying these things to make any kind of impact on the overall status of the health of consumer spending or industrial production.

 

Not to mention sales tax revenue... so by screwing the middle class they create some challenges for themselves.

 

This isn't just to you, it is to anyone who says the same thing...

What is it you expect Obama to do about the tax cuts issue... right now... as things really are...

As I see things, he has one of two choices at the moment.

1) Let all the tax cuts expire
2) renew them all

You know how I know those are the choices? Because those are the choices the republican's have left him to choose from.

During a cnn interview yesterday, when the dem mentioned extending them for the middle and low incomers, the republican said, "that's not going to happen" as if it was a closed case, which they consider that part to be...

They (the republicans) can sit back and watch as Obama's "supporters" tear him apart for not doing anything... or for caving in..

So, what is his other option?

 

You people (americans), put up with Bush lying to your faces and sending your kids off to die in a country half way around the world AND voted him in for a second term, all the while whining about what a horrible president he was.

When Obama got voted in, you all then made it really clear that you would not accept him pulling out, because then he wouldn't be supporting the troops... So if he pulled out, he would be called a coward, if he stayed in, he gets called a warmonger...

What other choice was there for him to make?

How about don't ask, don't tell...

How does he make everyone happy on this? Some americans are rabidly against the 'homosexual' agenda and don't want it to get a foothold in the military. They will NEVER accept it being repealed... Some americans won't be happy until it is repealed and all are equal...

Either way, half of the people are going to whine and cry that he didn't do what he wanted...

So, what other choice does he have that you all seem to see?

 

'Merkin appall-a-ticks... Repugnicans and their wealthy cronies ought to be thrown down a deep well and have truckloads of nickels dumped on them. The Repugnican who vowed, "that's not going to happen" did so at the peril of his party in 2012 as he has, together with his party's obstructing extending unemployment for the long term jobless, furnished ammunition for Democrap candidates as well a bit of wind in the sail of the Obama re-election campaign. It will be another choice: the lesser of two evils.

 

The real centers of power couldn't be happier... all this attention on their puppets.

 

I'm hearing Sanders and Feingold might filibuster the compromise bill in the senate since so many Democrats in congress are pissed at Obama right now over this.

Anywho, I'm beginning to think Obama has developed stockholm syndrome with the Republicans.