HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Mr President, take your m...

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:17 AM

Mr President, take your measly tax cuts and stick 'em where the sun doesn't shine.

I hope I am wrong, but if you think the people that voted for you care more about measly tax cuts than they do about standing up for liberty and the social programs that we have struggled for, then you are sadly mistaken, Sir.

Break yourself away from Tim Geithner and the Republican sound machine and come to your senses before it is too late. Take a vacation or go someplace and hide before you give away everything we have worked for.

Sorry if this offends anyone.

21 replies, 2355 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Mr President, take your measly tax cuts and stick 'em where the sun doesn't shine. (Original post)
kentuck Dec 2012 OP
unblock Dec 2012 #1
ProSense Dec 2012 #2
kentuck Dec 2012 #4
ProSense Dec 2012 #5
kentuck Dec 2012 #6
ProSense Dec 2012 #7
kentuck Dec 2012 #10
ProSense Dec 2012 #14
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #11
kentuck Dec 2012 #15
GeorgeGist Dec 2012 #8
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #13
bigtree Dec 2012 #3
great white snark Dec 2012 #12
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #16
bigtree Dec 2012 #17
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #18
Aerows Dec 2012 #9
99Forever Dec 2012 #19
eridani Dec 2012 #20
CheapShotArtist Dec 2012 #21

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:22 AM

1. i know i'm in the minority, but i think it's really all about the spending cuts.

i actually think the tax side politically easy -- go off the "fiscal cliff" and then take up
it's the spending cuts that are more punishing, and especially to those who don't even make enough to pay income tax, i.e., those truly in need.

nevermind the damaging effect of less government spending on the economy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:38 AM

2. Geithner refuses to budge on higher tax rates for wealthy -- Says republicans 'having a tough time'

Geithner refuses to budge on higher tax rates for wealthy -- Says republicans 'having a tough time'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021915362

I'm not seeing the basis for telling the President to "stick 'em where the sun doesn't shine."

The tax cuts for the rich expire in 22 days.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021948493

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:47 AM

4. I guess we hear what we want to hear?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/07/the-fiscal-cliff-deal-comes-clearer-a-37-top-tax-rate-and-a-higher-medicare-eligibility-age/

<snip>


REPORTER: Is there no deal at the end of the year if tax rates for the top 2 percent aren’t the Clinton tax rates, period? No ifs, ands or buts? Any room in negotiating on that specific aspect of the fiscal cliff?

THE PRESIDENT: …With respect to the tax rates, I just want to emphasize I am open to new ideas. If Republican counterparts or some Democrats have a great idea for us to raise revenue, maintain progressivity, make sure the middle class isn’t getting hit, reduces our deficit, encourages growth, I’m not going to just slam the door in their face. I want to hear ideas from everybody.

You see the deal that’s becoming clear here?

Talk to smart folks in Washington, and here’s what they think will happen: The final tax deal will raise rates a bit, giving Democrats a win, but not all the way back to 39.6 percent, giving Republicans a win. That won’t raise enough revenue on its own, so it will be combined with some policy to cap tax deductions, perhaps at $25,000 or $50,000, with a substantial phase-in and an exemption for charitable contributions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:54 AM

5. Yes,

"I guess we hear what we want to hear?"

...you do, especially when listening to bullshit media talking points.

Krugman: I Hope This Isn’t True
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021943877

WEEKLY ADDRESS: Congress Must Extend the Middle Class Tax Cuts

Hello, everybody. Over the last few weeks, there’s been a lot of talk about deadlines we’re facing on jobs and taxes and investments. But with so much noise and so many opinions flying around, it can be easy to lose sight of what this debate is really about. It’s not about which political party comes out on top, or who wins or loses in Washington. It’s about making smart decisions that will have a real impact on your lives and the lives of Americans all across the country.

Right now, middle-class tax cuts are set to expire at the end of the year. Time is running out. And there are two things that can happen.

First, if Congress does nothing, every family in America will see their income taxes automatically go up on January 1st. A typical middle-class family of four would get a $2,200 tax hike. That would be bad for families, it would be bad for businesses, and it would drag down our entire economy.

Now, Congress can avoid all this by passing a law that prevents a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody’s income. That means 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses wouldn’t see their income taxes go up by a single dime. Even the wealthiest Americans would get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of their income. And families everywhere would enjoy some peace of mind.

The Senate has already done their part. Now we’re just waiting for Republicans in the House to do the same thing. But so far, they’ve put forward an unbalanced plan that actually lowers rates for the wealthiest Americans. If we want to protect the middle class, then the math just doesn’t work.

We can and should do more than just extend middle class tax cuts. I stand ready to work with Republicans on a plan that spurs economic growth, creates jobs and reduces our deficit – a plan that gives both sides some of what they want. I’m willing to find ways to bring down the cost of health care without hurting seniors and other Americans who depend on it. And I’m willing to make more entitlement spending cuts on top of the $1 trillion dollars in cuts I signed into law last year.

But if we’re serious about reducing our deficit while still investing in things like education and research that are important to growing our economy – and if we’re serious about protecting middle-class families – then we’re also going to have to ask the wealthiest Americans to pay higher tax rates. That’s one principle I won’t compromise on

After all, this was a central question in the election. A clear majority of Americans – Democrats, Republicans and Independents – agreed with a balanced approach that asks something from everyone, but a little more from those who can most afford it. It’s the only way to put our economy on a sustainable path without asking even more from the middle class. And it’s the only kind of plan I’m willing to sign.

Everyone agrees we need to bring down our deficit and strengthen our economy for the long-term. The question is whether we can do it in a responsible way that allows us to keep investing in the things that have always made America strong. I’m convinced we can. And if both sides are willing to compromise, I believe we can give businesses and families a sense of security going into the New Year.

Thanks, and have a great weekend.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/12/08/weekly-address-congress-must-extend-middle-class-tax-cuts


The tax cuts for the rich expire in 22 days.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021948493

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:57 AM

6. "Everyone agrees we need to bring down our deficit..."

And this is part of the problem. Giving up 90% of the Bush taxcuts is not going to bring down the deficit. It is only going to call for more and more spending cuts. Who do you think is going to bear the brunt of those?

I'm sorry, but you are sadly mistaken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:59 AM

7. Please

"Giving up 90% of the Bush taxcuts is not going to bring down the deficit. "

...deal with the facts:

Krugman: What Defines A Serious Deficit Proposal?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021914963

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:05 AM

10. Since when did you start worshipping Krugman??

Krugman's last sentence. I think you have misread his point?

"I guess we have to understand the definition of serious: a proposal is only serious if it punishes the poor and the middle class."

He was discussing the definition of "serious" versus "nonserious" proposals. He was not supporting them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:09 AM

14. What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Krugman's last sentence. I think you have misread his point?

"I guess we have to understand the definition of serious: a proposal is only serious if it punishes the poor and the middle class."

Again, you're focusing on a point attacking the pundits.

Since you skipped to the end, Here's Krugman on Obama's proposal:

In particular, the Obama administration’s call for higher revenue through increased taxes on high incomes — which actually goes considerably beyond just letting the Bush tax cuts for the top end expire — gets treated with an unmistakable sneer in much political discussion, as if it were a trivial thing, more about staking out a populist position than it is about getting real on red ink.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:05 AM

11. Perhaps you could use clearer language

"Giving up 90% of the Bush taxcuts" sounds to me like "putting back tax rates to regain 90% of the revenue from before Bush", and, therefore, only extending 10% of the tax cuts. But that doesn't seem to match with what you say in your OP.

Can you be clear about what you object to in Obama's proposals, and what you'd rather see happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:10 AM

15. Sorry.

"Giving up" the Bush tax cuts is giving up on letting them expire. Instead, we are supposed to be happy if we make them permanent except for maybe a 1% increase on the most wealthy. That is not going to solve our problems. It is only going to make them worse.

Sorry for the disturbing language but I think it is about time somebody said something similar to the President. I do not like the direction we are going and it doesn't look good, in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:02 AM

8. Is that what you want to hear?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:09 AM

13. You're ignoring the crucial 'if-then' structure of what Obama

 

actually said.

To paraphrase, if the Rape-publi-scum can figure out a way to bring down the deficit without raising the burden on the middle class, then I want to hear it.

In other words, Obama is saying, you can keep your tax cuts on the rich if it will not raise the deficit nor burden the middle class more. That's like saying, "If the sun rises in the west, then I will celebrate Christmas in July." The 'if' portion is never satisifed, and the 'then' consequence is a non-event.

I never thought I would be defending Obama! But really, your interpretation of his words stretches ingenuity to its limits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:40 AM

3. link?

what are you responding to?

I don't know what all the berating is about. All the president has done, so far, is advocate for higher taxes on the wealthy. As far as i can see, this President has done quite a bit to keep the social safety net in place. I don't see him 'giving away everything.' wtf?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:07 AM

12. No link just the 67th threaten/insult speculative OP along the same lines.

But it's ok because the author "hopes he is mistaken" and is "sorry to offend"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to great white snark (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:12 AM

16. Link occurs in post #4 upthread. See the sub-thread that results - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:30 AM

17. is compromised media gossip really the standard for berating the president these days?

This President has expanded, enhanced, and defended the social safety net throughout his presidency. I'm not talking about the speculation, gossip, and unsubstantiated rumor that passes for fact in Washington. I'm talking about the President's actions.

That response from the President that Kentuck provided says absolutely NOTHING regarding what's implied in the op.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:36 AM

18. Agreed. See my reply to Kentuck in post #13 upthread. - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:02 AM

9. He's been elected to a second term

We can now gripe if he doesn't do what we want him to do. And griping *WILL* happen most fiercely anytime there is talk of raising the eligibility age for Medicare, when the exact opposite really needs to happen.

If we had some controls on health care costs like other civilized nations, this would be a non-issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:38 AM

19. Third Way Democrats and Republicans..

... offend me.

You and your thoughts? Not in the slightest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:40 AM

20. My tax cut is $50, which I would be glad to donate to pay down the deficit

If the tax cuts expire, our income tax would go from $100 to $150. If that goddam fucking pukeworthy chained CPI for calculating COLA gets approved, we eventually lose ~$2800+ a year. This is typical for senior households, and is vastly worse if you are disabled and have been on SocSec for a much longer time than average.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:04 AM

21. The Prez is NOT going to give up on letting the tax cuts expire or preserving the safety net.

Let's quit beating around the bush (no pun intended) with these false alarm threads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread