KJ. Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Cute, knappy, but that doesn't really answer your claim. Here are the only mentions of Republicans/GOP/Conservatives in all articles on the first page of results: The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of American households will face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the agreement negotiated between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans Obama said the deal "protects 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small business owners from a middle-class tax hike. While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country." Conservative economists claim a complete repeal of the Bush Tax rate combined with ending the Payroll Tax Holiday would cause a reduction in available personal net disposable income of $500,000,000,000. To be reasonable, progressive economist factoring in a combination of Bush Tax extensions into the 2013 code predict only a $357 billion increase. Seventy three percent of Americans, including 64% of registered Republicans, acknowledge the necessity of increasing the tax burden on millionaires and billionaires. That means, under the agreement brokered by the White House and Senate Republicans, 77 percent of American households will be forced to fork over higher federal taxes in 2013. Did I miss something, or should I continue on to page two? Or do you just have a more specific source to address what you said? 4 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It doesn't matter what he said before because the savior is in office again and that is what matters. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 And, pray tell, how do you attribute that to republicans while letting Obama and the dems off the hook? What about that search term says I'm letting the Democrats off the hook? Did you even look at the search terms? Are you saying that the Republicans had nothing to do with your taxes going up this year? Did the Bush tax cuts expire only because the Democrats wanted them to? It doesn't matter what he said before because the savior is in office again and that is what matters. As long as we're being this productive with our rhetoric, I'm sure we'll solve the problems that afflict us. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 guys, newsflash... Doesn't matter if it's the republicans, the democrats, or the president... they all lie... 1 Link to comment
BO B1GRD Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Any way you slice it...Our government spends more than it takes in .... by the Billions. All of this extra money will only help fund our Government for 3 days. I'm no financial expert. But If I have a business that over-spends for generations, I can assure you that I wouldn't have quality health care, a quality home (if any), a car, or food. I would be shut down because all of the bill collectors would be demanding my money and our government would let them take most of my assets. (The non-essential goodies like cars for instance) This country is going down a path where a majority of the citizens want the Government to pay for all their needs with little money coming out of pocket or free. That is Socialism. The way I see it, all of these people who keep wanting our Government to keep giving us things need to move to Russia and see how well they like it. This demand for "more" only forces the Government to keep over-spending. That's only one slice of the budget. The rest of the budget is even more bloated. This "increase" to the normal rate for Social Security will do absolutely nothing for our own retirements. The Govt. already see it as an entitlement (which means they'll take it away if they want, but will still collect that money to recoup the revenue stream in other taxes) funded by us. They merely use that money to spend down on our deficit. None of us will ever see 100% of the money that the Govt. forces us to set aside for our retirement, so we should never accept settling for a higher rate when it's proven we'll never see it. 1 Link to comment
KJ. Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 None of us will ever see 100% of the money that the Govt. forces us to set aside for our retirement, so we should never accept settling for a higher rate when it's proven we'll never see it. First of all, the government is not doing this. The social security taxes you pay are being used to provide benefits to current SS recipients, and the benefits you'll receive will be paid for by someone 40 years younger than you. Think about it: if social security was really just setting money aside for your retirement, would there be any solvency issues? And speaking of solvency, I'm not sure why you say it's "proven we'll never see it". The most recent Board of Trustees Report projects social security to be fully solvent through 2033 and 75% solvent thereafter through 2086 under current laws. So unless you're -8 years old, by the latest projections you'll see least a good portion of the money. The government really isn't to blame for most of the large issues, either. This has been inevitable since the birth rate declined in the 1960's, and if you look at that link you'll notice that after 2033 the program remains stable for as long as we can project. Granted, it's stable at 75%, but still stable. There's really no good way of getting that number back to 100% after that though, but that's the nature of Ponzi schemes. The best you can do is probably just coast. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 And, pray tell, how do you attribute that to republicans while letting Obama and the dems off the hook? What about that search term says I'm letting the Democrats off the hook? Did you even look at the search terms? Are you saying that the Republicans had nothing to do with your taxes going up this year? Did the Bush tax cuts expire only because the Democrats wanted them to? It doesn't matter what he said before because the savior is in office again and that is what matters. As long as we're being this productive with our rhetoric, I'm sure we'll solve the problems that afflict us. Hey, I'm just trying to make sense of your original claim and the supporting information you offered. You said there was ample evidence of it being the result of republican nonsense. I may have missed it but the cute google link you provided contained nothing to backup your claim of this being the direct result of republican nonsense. Where's the beef? Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 "Trying to make sense" of the claim that the Republicans had a hand in the fact that HuKSer's payroll taxes went up. That's what you're doing? You're not just here to help sling mud at Democrats and the Democrat president? OK. If so, and presuming that you've been paying attention to the news at all over the past few weeks, one would presume that the fiscal cliff deadline, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, the end of the payroll tax holiday and all the other financial shenanigans going on between congress and the president didn't completely fly over your head. Presuming that you did not completely miss this news story, one would also presume that you're aware that the Republicans - not Obama alone, as the OP's thread title says - were directly involved in this mess. Yeah, the LMGTFY stunt was poor, especially since I chose not to use some inflammatory search term like, "The Republicans lied about taxes again" or something similar. But to pretend that you have no idea that both parties, not just Obama, are responsible for this mess, that you need to "try to make sense" of such a claim, is absurd. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 LOL....So, pointing out that the President didn't tell the truth in the campaign is now slinging mud. You are priceless. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Wait - we're just now discovering that campaign promises aren't always kept by politicians? Wow. You know about the tooth fairy, right? If not, you'd better sit down. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Oh....but all the uproar during the campaign from the left when Romney was caught not quite telling the truth. I guess you must have believed in the tooth fairy before the beginning of November. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Oh....but all the uproar during the campaign from the left when Romney was caught not quite telling the truth. I guess you must have believed in the tooth fairy before the beginning of November. I am not "the left." And I don't quite recall which specific incident you're talking about, so if you could refresh my memory that would be swell. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Oh Good Lord...... The ends justify the means don't they Knapple. As long as the guy you support is the one getting away with pulling the wool over the eyes it's OK. Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 What ends? What means? What are you talking about? If you just want to bitch at me because I voted for the other guy, that's not much of a conversation. If you have something specific you want to talk about, let's do that. But this mindless blather about "them" being the problem is stupid and gets us nowhere. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 What I get a kick out of is how riled up people get, about organizations that really don't care about you at all... 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts