jump to last post 1-11 of 11 discussions (35 posts)

Bush's tax cuts should be eliminated!!

  1. brimancandy profile image83
    brimancandyposted 5 years ago

    I was on facebook earlier today, and a friend of mine posted a Youtube video about just how much money is being used to support the Bush tax cuts for the rich. 100 Billion dollars of the average tax payer's money! Which amounts to over $83,000.00 a year for a single individual making over $1,000,000.00 in income. While they want to raise taxes on people making less than that.

    There was a lot of talk on how the Billions go back into the economy as lots of brand new BMW's, $20,000 handbags, and 400 imported cigars each one lit with $100.00. Plus 22,000 jars of Grey Poupon mustard in a single year for one individual.

    The flipside of that, is to take that same 100 billion and continue benefits for the unemployed. That is equal to monthly checks for 3 million unemployed workers for a year!! 3 million people as compared to the Bush tax cuts which only help a small handfull of people who are already making millions, who are already getting other tax breaks, and government perks for being rich.

    I say end the tax breaks for the rich, and the corporate bailouts and give that money back to the people who need it.
    Especially at a time when our new voted into office leadership is not only talking about extending the Bush tax cuts, but also ending unemployment extensions, and raising the retirement age!

    What do they want our employees to do drop dead so they can never receive retirement funds? I say lower the retirement age to 60, get these old farts out of the picture so people who are trying to support a family can have a decent job! let them collect social security, they are not going to hire those older workers anyways, so whats the point?

    It seems that Corporate america is getting what they want more and more over the needs of hundreds of millions of average citizens, and that is not what this country is supposed to be about. Don't let capital hill vote on these issues. let the majority of the people pass these laws! Maybe we'll throw some of the wasted money out, and get rid of all the pork and BS that the people at the top are shoving down our throats.

    Anyone agree?

    1. lady_love158 profile image62
      lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No I don't agree. Tax cuts don't "cost" anything! Taxes after all are a forced confiscation of YOUR property. It's your wealth! What the government needs to do is stop spending, especially on things they don't have constitutional authority to spend on, like education, or unemployment for that matter!

      1. brimancandy profile image83
        brimancandyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        So according to you, where is money for education going to come from?

        And, if tax cuts don't cost anything, why would a member of our goverment stand at the capital building presenting charts showing that the bush tax cuts cost us 100 Billion dollars? If they don't cost anything, it seems like that would be a wasted speach.

        I can think of way less important things that the government is wasting our money on than education and unemployement. Like bailing out the banks, and GM, and spending money on promotional ads, and giving all those grants to people who are trying to find a reason why flies fuck. And, spending countless amount of tax payers money to find a way to get further into outer space. Yeah that's real useful.

        1. lady_love158 profile image62
          lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Education is local financed mostly through property taxes. The federal government is not supposed to be spending money on education, at least not according to our constitution. And you're right there's a whole host of other things they shouldn't be spending money on, like health care.

          You need to reassess, how a tax cut is a "cost", food is a cost, clothes are a cost, a cut in your paycheck isn't a "cost"!

        2. couturepopcafe profile image61
          couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          brimancandy - what he meant by that was they didn't take in the amount of $100 billion.  The tax cuts don't 'cost' anything.  The government just didn't steal as much as they wanted to.  Ladylove is correct.  Primary and high school education is locally funded with some subsidy from the feds except in the cases of neighborhoods which are somewhat more affluent.  They send the kids around begging for money (ok selling stuff) to support extracurricular activities.

          And you're exactly right to be enraged about where the government spends money, like the fly research.  So why do you want to pay for that with your tax dollars?  But make no mistake, a person who earns $250,00. a year is not rich by a long shot.  It's a really good living but why should they be penalized?  Where is the line drawn and who decides how much is too much wealth?  The problem with this kind of thinking is that once we let congress draw a line, deciding who gets a tax break and who doesn't, it won't be long before they move the line using the previous policy as precedent.  The next line could be people making $40,000. because someone who makes $18,000. thinks it's unfair.

          1. brimancandy profile image83
            brimancandyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            But, there is a difference between the tax cuts for someone making over 1 million dollars a year and the average person.  The middle class currently pay a higher percentage in taxes than people making over a million dollars a year, as there are more tax loopholes for the rich, to get out of paying those taxes, that are not available to everyone else.

            Also, I heard fine what the senator said. He said they are spending 100 billion on the bush tax cuts. Otherwise, why would he say lets take this money and give it to 3 million people instead? Why would there be a comparison? have you seen the video?

            I know a lot about wasted tax dollars. Our state lottery money and property tax dollars have been going to bail out the auto industry in Michigan for years, not only that, but we also offered money to Electrolux, and they still moved out of the country. Lottery money that was supposed to be used on the schools, went to pay for the People mover in Detroit.

            1. 0
              GladYaMetMe!posted 5 years ago in reply to this


        3. 61
          kovanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          How much taxes do you pay?
          The education comes from our property taxes. High pay of teachers comes from government. It is for political reason. But teachers do not give us quality education, just job training still insufficient for jobs.
          You must be s/c.... you like to have fun for others money. It is stealing.
          Federal taxes should be completely eliminated.

      2. kirstenblog profile image78
        kirstenblogposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I'm feelin that christian love here roll

    2. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I agree 100%. I'm with Pelosi...let the tax cuts stay for the middle class. The top 2% can give back what they had given to them free of charge.
      Ever since 2000, the policies of this United States has been geared towards the wealthy.

      And we KNOW how HARD you have tried, with your media and your smears and your LIES to get back inpower....which you did!

      But it's not over yet.

      I say the Dems do what they can for the next 2 months.....do what they wanted to do all along!
      The HELL with the Repubs, because you know once they get in power, they will say the same to you.

      That is what they did for 8 years prior...why should now be any different?

      People are hurting in America...people who worked and did what they were supposed to do.

      It was business, banks and corporations who broke the faith. Sold out USA for the green in their pockets. And GOP administration helped them do it.
      Dems yes too--but Bushco was the last straw.

      Dems at this moment want to help the rest of us. Do it, before the Stooges get back in!

  2. EPman profile image61
    EPmanposted 5 years ago

    In reference to the Bush tax cuts...

    It's very funny how Democrats -- the supporters of billion dollar expenditures -- now tout high spending numbers as a reason to not issue tax cuts.

    Put money back in the pockets of citizens and private enterprise? -- Too expensive.

    Bail out your reckless friends on Wall Street? -- Where do I sign?

    Pff, Washington. Le sigh...

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Can one of you Repubs tell me how many jobs were created duting 2000-2008 with the Bush tax cuts?

      How did those tax give-aways help America? Was it "good" policy, or just a favor to their wink wink friends?

      They were put in place by Bush as a favor to his wealthy constituents...."You are out base, and we will support you." There was no need for it, and it sure did no good for anybody. Like Bill Clinton said, "I don't need a tax-cut, but Bush gave me one anyway".

      Meanwhile, SOMEONE had to make up for all that lost revenue...since we were in 2 wars you know. And they took it from the middle class.
      Robbing Robin Hood to pay the Queen.

      TARP was Bush. Already law when Obama came in. Stimulus and GM was Obama.

      And NOW we have Repubs who scream about deficits, but refuse to do end the biggest deficit-buster of all time, which are the Bush tax cuts!

      Oh well--we'll just take it from the unemployed, the poor and the disabled. And we'll not spend on infrastructure or job creation. As long as ka-trillionaires get to keep more. Praise Jesus!

      1. couturepopcafe profile image61
        couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        LMC - you say stimulus and GM was Obama.  Stimulus to banks and big corps.  In another forum, you bashed the big corps takeover.  Now you are saying giving stimulus money to them is helping the country.  The tax cuts are allowing people to keep more of their money and you say this is bad for the country because the revenue the government doesn't get from us will have to be made up by cutting benefits to the poor and the helpless.  I'm jus reiterating what you have stated here so everyone clearly understands your contradiction.

        1. lovemychris profile image80
          lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          There is no contradiction. The stimulus was not to banks--that was TARP! TARP was to banks. TARP TARP.
          The stimulus to GM was a LOAN that gvt made.....which allowed the business to survive.
          And they made sure that the PEOPLE who work there have a bigger stake in it, not just the CEO.
          Also, where I live, there are quite a few places where I see stimulus money going to work....putting people to work. On the highways and in our transportation center in Hyannis.
          This was not banks or big business, it was local. Putting local people to work. Making improvements to a local area. And it made me proud to see those stimulus signs: "Putting America back to Work". And it IS.
          Sorry you don't see it that way.

          And no one has answered my question:

          What jobs were created from 2000-2008 with the Bush tax cuts? Cause I know about 100 million of them werere lost, so....I'm Waiting.
          Because according to Pelosi, more jobs were created in the first 8 months of 2010 than all of the 8 years of Buschco put together.

          If you think a person that "makes" a quarter of a million dollars can't pay taxes at the same rate as someone earning $65,000.....there is something wrong with your thinking. IMO

          Those Bush tax-cuts were nothing more than a give-away to his wealthy base, and we ALL paid for it!
          It is the biggest DEFICIT exploder, other than those 2 wars. Which, of course W didn't BOTHER to put on the books. Obama did.

          If you CARE about the deficit of the United States, you CANNOT be in favor of keeping the tax breaks for the ultra wealthy.

          And at the same time---you won't provide money for people who's jobs went overseas by these same people who got all the tax breaks!

          It was a give-away from Bush and Cheney, not meant to be permanent tax policy. It is unfair on the face of it.

          So: WHAT JOBS WERE CREATED WITH BUSH"S TAX CUTS? They had 8 years. What???

          1. EPman profile image61
            EPmanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You are ignorant of fundamentals.

            You portray Bush's policies as a representation of constitutionalism, free-markets, and philosophies of limited government. You continue to bring up his failures as a way to defend your Keynesian economics. This is misguided, incompetent, and wrong.

            Any Tea Party-er who thinks Bush was an effective President is a walking contradiction. Bush was far from an adherer to the Constitution and limited government philosophies.

            To think that it was Tax cuts -- letting the citizens keep THEIR money -- that caused the loss of jobs from 2000-2008 just shows how deep in the crapper your way of thinking really is. This is not a revenue problem in Washington, it is a spending problem. You simply cannot dish out trillions of dollars each year and then cry poverty when the people aren't taxed enough -- but that's exactly what the government is now doing.

            Oh, em, Gee, maybe job losses under the Bush presidency were due to the unfathomable military budget, the bursting of the housing bubble (the result of the Federal Reserve's meddling, but that's a different story), and the bogus stimulus packages? -- just to name a few.

            To say "Hey, free-market economics doesn't work! Just look at Bush's presidency!" is downright humorous. Even funnier, with all of Bush's instances of truly bad policy you pick out his TAX CUTS as the reason for job loss under his presidency. LULZ.

            Bush perpetuated and intensified central-economic planning. If anything, I should be using his failures as president to argue against YOUR political logic.

            Obama continues the same trend. It's unfortunate.

            Thanks for the laugh. Ta-ta.

            1. lovemychris profile image80
              lovemychrisposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Your welcome. And thanks for the snide dismissal of my thoughts. Typical.
              Where did I say the tax cuts caused the job loss? I'm asking WHAT JOBS were created with the tax cuts? That's what these Repubs are spouting as a way to keep their big bonus.
              Give the rich more money--they will create jobs. Yeah---Jobs OVERSEAS! That's the result of Bush tax cuts. As well as tax policies that REWARD them for doing so. Which Obama tried to get rid of, but guess who stopped him? Your pals...the outsourcers.

              What jobs did they create here in America? That's what the GM stimulus did...kept the jobs HERE in America...what did tax-cuts create here?

              Nothing, that's what, except for lots of money stashed in Swiss bank accounts...and now we're supposed to believe that keepint that huge deficit buster will benefit America?
              It benefits millionaire's...the Republican base.

              Poor people and middle class work too you know--and they have to make UP for the money Bush gave to millionaires by paying more in their taxes.
              All this Social Security has to be paid you know...the wars, the prescription drug benefit, the aging population which is going to boom real soon.

              It has been 30 years of policy geared towards the wealthy, while middle and lower classes have stagnated, or fallen down.

              THAT'S why we voted for Obama. And that's why we don't want yours back.

              It has been no joke living in America for a working person these past 30 years. It has been a dream come true for the Uber Rich.

              Not good policy. IMO

  3. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    1. There are a lot more things the federal government spends money on that were NOT in in the original constitution than were. Somehow, I can't imagine Jefferson, Franklin and Adams sitting around conceiving NASA, can you?
    As for education, nationally, our country is falling way behind other industrialized countries in education. If the federal government doesn't do something to raise the standard AND even the playing field (local governments are hurting too and having to cut education funding) we will end up a third world country.

    2. A tax cut is a cost in that it is reducing the tax revenue the government takes in. These tax cuts were intended to expire. The government needs the money. The government is proposing to sunset the tax cuts only for the wealthiest of Americans, not all Americans. The level of citizen who we are talking about is NOT living "paycheck to paycheck." This is not a cut in anyone's paycheck. It is collection of tax revenue that is owed with a compromise to NOT cut the paychecks of the middle class -- that is, those who still HAVE paychecks or even still ARE middle class!

    1. couturepopcafe profile image61
      couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't it being cut for anyone earning over $250,00. a year?

    2. kirstenblog profile image78
      kirstenblogposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      From where I am sitting I gotta say it looks to be too late to stop this. The shows that typically report on the blood diamonds in Africa or the children working (illegally, because they can't get money for food any other way) in burning coal mines in India (that frankly look like a vision of Dante's hell) are now reporting on the vast numbers of homeless in America. America has become a country of such poverty for individual people that it is reported about along side some of the most despicable and heart breaking stories of suffering in the world. When you can find well educated Doctors homeless and jobless and hungry in winter there is no 'if' or 'when' in America becoming a third world country, your already there!

      The BBC had no problems finding medical doctors homeless and hungry living the streets and telling stories of how they spend their days walking cause if they were to try to sit down for a spell they would be arrested, if anything the BBC seemed to have a hard time choosing which person to interview, the choice was so wide and varied.

      I saw this as inevitable half way through Bushes first term and left and to this day I am grateful I got out of America when I did.

  4. Evan G Rogers profile image83
    Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago

    I am absolutely amazed that people are asking for MORE TAXATION and LESS SPENDING.

    This is utter madness.

    Only government could be so inept as to screw up "we'll do what you want us to do if you pay us money to do it".

    1. couturepopcafe profile image61
      couturepopcafeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Mindblowing, isn't it?

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      They only ask for more taxation when it is someone else paying the tax, which seems to be the way it goes nearly everywhere.

      I see Idaho is once more trying to raise the cigarette tax - balance the budget on the backs of a few political weak people instead of everyone.  Personally, I suggest an additional $1 a gallon tax on gasoline (I drive a Prius at 50+MPG).  That way someone else can pay most of MY share as well as their own.

    3. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this
      1. Evan G Rogers profile image83
        Evan G Rogersposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        ZOMG!!!  I Can't believe it!!

        I could... I could...

        I could swear you just made that joke yesterday!!!


        1. PrettyPanther profile image85
          PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Well, realistically, it is about the only place you could practice what you preach, isn't it?  I mean, unless you want to move to Somalia.

        2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I was looking at an isolated Montana shack for you to buy, but ol' Ted wants to hang on to it for awhile.

          I'm just trying to aid you in your ultimate quest to be separated from modern society. 

          Maybe there's one remaining band of Neanderthals you could hook up with.

          1. kerryg profile image88
            kerrygposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            They discovered a new tribe in the Amazon the other day.

  5. PrettyPanther profile image85
    PrettyPantherposted 5 years ago

    Some millionaires agree with you:

    Millionaires to Obama:  Tax us

  6. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago
  7. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago


    Neanderthals are way more evolved.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not so sure.  They still order their duck with mango salsa.

  8. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Senator Bernie Sanders:

    "The billionaires and their supporters in Congress are hell-bent on taking us back to the 1920s, and eliminating all traces of social legislation designed to protect working families, the elderly, children and the disabled. No "social contract" for them. They want it all.

    They want to privatize or dismantle Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and let the elderly, the sick and the poor fend for themselves.

    They want to expand our disastrous trade policies so that corporations can continue throwing American workers out on the street as they outsource jobs to China and other low-wage countries. Some also want to eliminate the minimum wage so that American workers can have the "freedom" to work for $3.00 an hour.

    They want to eliminate or cut severely the U.S. Department of Education, making it harder for working class kids to get a decent education, childcare or the help they need to go to college.
    They want to rescind the very modest financial reform bill passed last year so that the crooks on Wall Street can continue to engage in all of the reckless behavior that has been so devastating to our economy.

    They want to curtail the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy so that Exxon-Mobil can remain the most profitable corporation in world history, while oil and coal companies continue to pollute our air and water.

    They want to make sure that billionaire hedge fund managers pay a lower federal tax rate than middle-class teachers, nurses, firefighters, and police officers by maintaining a loophole in the tax code known as "carried interest"."

    "The Billionaires Want More, More, More"--article

    "There are a lot more of us than there are of them. Now is the time for us to stand together, educate and organize. Now is the time to roll back this orgy of greed."

  9. rebekahELLE profile image91
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    the political time-out chair sounds appropriate. but some won't get it.

    http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Political-T … or-Wealthy

  10. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 5 years ago

    You consider this high pay in the US?

    Average Teacher's salaries:

    High School Teacher     $43,293                      
    Elementary School Teacher     $40,469     
    Middle School Teacher     $42,589     
    Special Education Teacher, Preschool, Kindergarten, or Elementary School     $41,133     
    Secondary School Teacher     $42,683     
    Special Education Teacher, Secondary School     $44,238     
    Special Education Teacher, Middle School     $42,513

    http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All … ers/Salary

  11. 0
    GladYaMetMe!posted 5 years ago