The stacking of the deck using the term "in isolation" is impressive.

So wait. You think the poor people don't pay any tax whatsoever? I mean, they DO pay taxes. Just not income tax.

the point is that if its not causal then you cannot say that if the wealthiest pay higher taxes then jobs won't be created.

No one is arguing that raising taxes will create jobs. We're merely arguing that raising taxes will not destroy jobs.

I don't agree that Obama extended the Bush tax cut for the reasons you speculate though until I become a mind reader it is only speculation.

You don't have to read his mind just listen to his words:


Mr. Obama said the bill would create jobs and boost the still-struggling U.S. economy. He called it a "substantial victory for middle class families" who would otherwise have seen a tax increase.

"In fact, not only will middle class Americans avoid a tax increase, but tens of millions of Americans will start the new year off right by opening their first paycheck to see that it's larger than the one they get right now," he said.

accumulative advantage baby.

and another false assumption.

It's a given that taxes to corporate interests are just passed on to the consumer. Correspondingly, tax increases to the rich will not suddenly find the businessman mowing his own lawn, or his wife cleaning the estate. All the services they currently enjoy will be still done for them. If its a matter of cash to pay for the services, then they will do what almost everyone else does, earn more.

jfc, I'm talking about income tax

I completely agree with this. I also completely agree with the concept that the cost of living, at a point, just doesn't come into the equation.

If you make 1,000 dollars a week you don't really feel rich. Not with mortgages, 2 kids, 2 cars, food, entertainment, and that looming 200k bill for college coming up. No way.

But lets face facts here. There are people who have incomes where costs really just don't come into play. If you make 500k (or another larger figure, just using this as an example) a year can the day to day costs of living/saving really even be considered a burden? Absolutely not. The way they would look at paying for their kids education would be the way I would look at buying a used Honda Accord.

I know. I'm simply saying the argument that "everyone should have skin in the game" doesn't make sense when there are so many people who live below the poverty line.

I haven't been in the income range of "poor" for a long time, but I remember what it was like. I distinctly remember what it was like making 15k a year, and it sucked beyond belief. I'm way way past that point now, and in a relatively short amount of time.

I'm just saying taking even a small amount of money from someone making an amount like that or lower could be absolutely devastating, and I think that's something that could be understood by everyone.

If stimulus spending = increases jobs. Then reducing the amounmt of the yearly budget defecit would have to reduce jobs. Wether that is cutting spending or raising taxes. I think most economist agree that it would reduce demand and jobs.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/1...hner-on-taxes/

Though Obama's plan is really about campaigning for next year. Oh and according to Reid the private sector is doing just fine.

Wil, I agree, that was pretty much the point of my post. It seems that 9-9-9 being net neutral while gaining money from the poor would have to be giving breaks to the rich. It was pretty much a rhetorical question but I am curious who benefits the most by paying less taxes. (meaning corps and or wealthy)

Really? You're under the belief that what a politician says is always exactly what he believes? Why am I 100% certain that you don't believe that.

He's also talking about a bill above, not just the Bush tax cuts. Everyone knows the Bush Tax cuts benefited the wealthier people disproportionately... not the middle class.

Your post seemed to imply that I had to read Obama's mind in order to surmise that the administration felt that raising taxes hurt job growth. If you would have stated that Obama lies so I should not listen to his words then I wouldn't have posted his comments.

He's talking about the pay raise in Medicare?

You do know Obama cut your taxes, right?

Perry taking it to Cain, wanting to one-up him on something simple and on ****ing the poor:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...509538248.html

bahahaha what a ****show this primary campaign is

Yes, yes I do.

Cain said he didn't think Ron Paul would be a good President. Basically that Paul wants to eliminate instead of fix the Fed, etc. (When he was asked who he liked the least)

Says Romney or Newt would be his choice if he doesn't win.

Saw it on CNN a few minutes ago, his interview is at 9PM

This tax policy must litterally be the only aspect of Perrys politics that doesn't involve "Energy"

Oh and....
Hey oh

I think he's trying to base his whole campain now on zingers

Nothing else seems to be working.

I'm going to sell those refrigerator word magnets with republican catch phrases. It will be a huge hit. "Class warfare", "broaden the tax base", "REGULATIONS!", "palling around with terrorists". Palin could have her own set.

The administration has a much simpler messaging. "It's not my fault."

Is there any truth in this or is it just "Hot Air"

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/2...pelosi-family/

I mean, it's really not though. And many many Americans don't believe it's his fault at all.

You have to look at it in the perspective of the severity of the financial crisis. I'm pretty sure it was the largest economic decline since the great depression. I really think people have to stop and read that sentence again. It was absolutely huge.

The problem was the political environment afterwards was extremely difficult to navigate. There was a large disconnect between 2 sentiments :

"This is what we need to do"

"This is what we're able to do"

That has pretty much plagued the Obama presidency. Many people voted for Obama to be an anti-Bush, to roll back all the damage during Bush's 8 years. The issue is Obama couldn't/wouldn't do that. This is why you see so many angry people ON THE LEFT. We're not satisfied with what Obama has done. We want him way more left.

If anything the Republicans should be happy, Obama is a far from a liberal, and that's readily apparent.