hfojvt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-02-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
| 36. so you think that $300 helps more than $2,000 |
|
in what universe? 26.7% of the benefits going to the top 10% versus 12.1% going to the bottom 40%?
If that's progressive, then you might as well agree with Bush that his tax cuts were progressive, because even though the rich got far more than the poor or working classes, the lower classes got more AS A PERCENTAGE of their tax bill.
Granted, this proposal is not AS bad as the Bush tax cuts, but it is still disgustingly bad. $52 billion goes to the top 20% while $13.6 billion goes to the bottom 40% and you think that is not regressive because of some sort of Bush-type logic?
To me that is the very definition of regressive when the rich get four times as much as the poor even though there are twice as many of the poor.
|
| -REPORT: Debt Ceiling Deal Will Cost 1.8 Million Jobs In 2012 |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 01:26 PM |
#0 |
 -
I've said this all along...we have an unemployment crisis, not a debt crisis. |
jtown1123 |
Aug-02-11 01:29 PM |
#1 |
 -
+100000 |
Dappleganger |
Aug-02-11 01:29 PM |
#2 |
 -
If this report is correct (and I think it is) |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 01:31 PM |
#3 |
| -
We sure will n/t |
OhioChick |
Aug-02-11 03:22 PM |
#13 |
| -
Yep, needlessly driving the economy over a cliff, |
MadHound |
Aug-02-11 01:33 PM |
#4 |
| -
Not too sure about these projections.... |
econoclast |
Aug-02-11 02:11 PM |
#5 |
| -
Of course it will austerity always does that. |
nadinbrzezinski |
Aug-02-11 02:13 PM |
#6 |
| -
Robama throws a fight |
Grrrfun |
Aug-02-11 02:46 PM |
#7 |
| -
This is what the Tea Party wants |
jpak |
Aug-02-11 02:47 PM |
#8 |
| -
So why did Obama accept a plan that does exactly what the Tea Party wants? |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 03:08 PM |
#9 |
| -
Becasue he didn't and any informed Democrat knows this to be true |
jpak |
Aug-02-11 03:17 PM |
#10 |
| -
What? |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 03:20 PM |
#11 |
| -
The douchebags lost Mr. Lewbowski |
jpak |
Aug-02-11 03:25 PM |
#17 |
| -
So where are you disputing the OP or the implications? nt |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 03:33 PM |
#23 |
| -
Nope - the cuts will impact jobs |
jpak |
Aug-02-11 03:35 PM |
#27 |
| -
This EPI report assumes no payroll tax cut extension and no UI extension. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 03:21 PM |
#12 |
| -
You think this group of rightwing nutters are going to do either? |
truebrit71 |
Aug-02-11 03:25 PM |
#18 |
| -
I don't know what will happen. But neither does the EPI. Neither issue has been resolved yet. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 03:28 PM |
# |
| -
Duplicate. n/t |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 03:28 PM |
#20 |
| -
Not entirely |
frustrated_lefty |
Aug-02-11 03:31 PM |
#21 |
| -
I'm not assuming anything. I'm just pointing out that the EPI is making two big assumptions. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 03:33 PM |
#24 |
| -
New America doesn't need workers. |
Octafish |
Aug-02-11 03:22 PM |
#14 |
| -
It's the third way |
Bluebear |
Aug-02-11 03:24 PM |
#15 |
| -
The Third Way: Because "Feudalism" Was Already Taken. |
Ignis |
Aug-02-11 05:11 PM |
#42 |
| -
You said it. |
Bluebear |
Aug-02-11 05:40 PM |
#50 |
| -
I do, because the payroll tax cut is a big benefit to the rich |
hfojvt |
Aug-02-11 03:32 PM |
#22 |
| -
How exactly is the payroll tax cut a big benefit to the rich? |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 03:34 PM |
#26 |
| -
because 2% of $100,000 is a lot more than 2% of $15,000 |
hfojvt |
Aug-02-11 03:52 PM |
#31 |
| -
Your argument contradicts the whole principle of progressive taxation. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 04:03 PM |
#34 |
| -
so you think that $300 helps more than $2,000 |
hfojvt |
Aug-02-11 04:28 PM |
#36 |
| -
Yes, I do. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 04:40 PM |
#38 |
| -
no, you are trying to reverse the argument |
hfojvt |
Aug-02-11 05:04 PM |
#40 |
| -
I would be against extending the payroll tax cut beyond the recession. |
Unvanguard |
Aug-02-11 05:16 PM |
#43 |
| -
I've heard other reports as well. |
mmonk |
Aug-02-11 03:25 PM |
#16 |
| -
That is exactly what the teanutters want. They WANT |
liberalhistorian |
Aug-02-11 03:27 PM |
#19 |
| -
Exactly. nt |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 03:34 PM |
#25 |
| -
That will just about wipe out the jobs repairing the US infrastructure Pres |
Obamanaut |
Aug-02-11 03:36 PM |
#28 |
| -
That's okay...we have plenty of those! |
Horse with no Name |
Aug-02-11 03:37 PM |
#29 |
| -
Kind of stupid, isn't it? |
Yo_Mama |
Aug-02-11 03:46 PM |
#30 |
| -
No Creepers on this thread, huh. |
readmoreoften |
Aug-02-11 03:55 PM |
#32 |
| -
If that's true, we will definitely be in a recession by the middle of next year |
Cali_Democrat |
Aug-02-11 03:57 PM |
#33 |
| -
I hate to break it to you, but by the middle of next year |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 04:31 PM |
#37 |
| -
Technically the definition of a recession is two consecutive quarters with declining GDP |
Cali_Democrat |
Aug-02-11 05:05 PM |
#41 |
| -
You are aware that Q1 GDP was just revised down from over 2% to 0.4%, right? |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 05:17 PM |
#44 |
| -
I mean negative GDP |
Cali_Democrat |
Aug-02-11 05:28 PM |
#46 |
| -
I'm saying that current GDP will be revised downward as well. |
Pale Blue Dot |
Aug-02-11 05:31 PM |
#48 |
| -
That wouldn't surprise me at all. n/t |
Cali_Democrat |
Aug-02-11 05:33 PM |
#49 |
| -
what would you like to call this economy then? |
roomfullofmirrors |
Aug-02-11 05:22 PM |
#45 |
| -
Shit. n/t |
Cali_Democrat |
Aug-02-11 05:28 PM |
#47 |
| -
works for me. |
roomfullofmirrors |
Aug-02-11 05:47 PM |
#51 |
| -
Boehner said he'll work on creating jobs when he gets back from his 5-week vacation. |
Major Hogwash |
Aug-02-11 04:11 PM |
#35 |
| -
Thank heavens our president will be pushing those trade deals. That should balance |
Karmadillo |
Aug-02-11 04:45 PM |
#39 |
| -
This wasn't about helping the economy. |
moondust |
Aug-02-11 06:04 PM |
#52 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread