|
jpn of Seattle
|
 |
« on: June 02, 2008, 10:04:05 PM » |
|
McCain wants to make the Republican tax cuts that expire in 2010 permanent. He wants to add big corporate tax cuts to them. He wants lots of other tax cuts besides. And to pay for them? He's going to get serious about cutting spending. Although he hasn't identified any specific, you know, programs to cut. But he's serious. Because he says so. Um hmm. "Actually, McCain is following the pattern of not just Bush but every Republican president since Ronald Reagan: - Phase One is to enact tax cuts and promise that they’ll cause revenues to rise, or will cause revenues to fall (leading to spending cuts), or somehow both at once, so, either way, there’s no possibility that it will lead to deficits.
- Phase Two is deficits.
- Phase Three is to blame the deficits on big-spending congressional fat cats and to issue increasingly strident threats to cut expenditures, without going so far as to identify actual programs to cut."
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15741.html#more-15741 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 03, 2008, 05:43:58 PM by jpn of Seattle »
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2008, 06:18:25 AM » |
|
Bush one said it best in describing Reagan's trickle down theory.
Voo doo economics.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Yes we can ...and now we will...
|
|
|
|
Cass
|
|
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2008, 04:07:39 PM » |
|
Am I the only one here who watched Olbermann last night. This from the Huffington Post with McCain's involvement with Phil Gramm, who left the Senate, avoiding the law and slinked back to Texas, may be the biggest evidence of McCain being a "Fiscal Terrorist?" Maybe I've arrived late to the party, but I've not noted this as yet being discussed. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/27/phil-gramm-mccain-co-chai_n_103801.html?page=2 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream shall never die.\\" Edward Kennedy, U.S.
Senator
The old lion of the Senate, though a lion in winter, has lived to do more for this nation than John or Bobby though
who knows what life would be like now had they lived.
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
|
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2008, 05:39:29 PM » |
|
Great catch, Cass. McCain famously claimed that he doesn't know much about economics. So he got Phil Gramm to be his chief economic advisor. Were McCain to win the presidency, Gramm would no doubt be Secretary of the Treasury, or head of McCains council of economic advisors, or something similarly scary. Why scary? Phil Gramm is a clown when it comes to economics. A dangerous clown. Gramm's efforts helps precipitate the home mortgage crisis: The general co-chairman of John McCain’s presidential campaign, former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), led the charge in 1999 to repeal a Depression-era banking regulation law that Democrat Barack Obama claimed on Thursday contributed significantly to today’s economic turmoil.
“A regulatory structure set up for banks in the 1930s needed to change because the nature of business had changed,” the Illinois senator running for president said in a New York economic speech. “But by the time [it] was repealed in 1999, the $300 million lobbying effort that drove deregulation was more about facilitating mergers than creating an efficient regulatory framework.” Then, he took his characteristically conservative crusade of anti-government regulation private. To his great good fortune, but to everyone else's ruin: A year after the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act repealed the old regulations, Swiss Bank UBS gobbled up brokerage house Paine Weber. Two years later, Gramm settled in as a vice chairman of UBS’s new investment banking arm. Later, he became a major player in its government affairs operation. According to federal lobbying disclosure records, Gramm lobbied Congress, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department about banking and mortgage issues in 2005 and 2006. During those years, the mortgage industry pressed Congress to roll back strong state rules that sought to stem the rise of predatory tactics used by lenders and brokers to place homeowners in high-cost mortgages. For his work, Gramm and two other lobbyists collected $750,000 in fees from UBS’s American subsidiary. In the past year, UBS has written down more than $18 billion in exposure to subprime loans and other risky securities and is considering cutting as many as 8,000 jobs. http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15050.html In case it hasn't sunk in yet, folks, trusting the government to today's Republicans is like trusting the hen house to the foxes. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2008, 05:47:14 PM » |
|
Am I the only one here who watched Olbermann last night. With an audience of about two dozen, my guess is, yeah, probably. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2008, 05:58:20 PM » |
|
In case it hasn't sunk in yet, folks, trusting the government to today's Republicans is like trusting the hen house to the foxes. Don't worry...the Dems will have full and complete control in the fall. They will have a veto proof majority in both houses. I hope the Dems come back to the middle after tickling the far left fringe for so long. If they follow through on a third of their platform, we're doomed - the American way of life is doomed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gommi
|
|
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2008, 06:06:39 PM » |
|
* Phase One is to enact tax cuts and promise that they’ll cause revenues to rise, or will cause revenues to fall (leading to spending cuts), or somehow both at once, so, either way, there’s no possibility that it will lead to deficits.
* Phase Two is deficits.
* Phase Three is to blame the deficits on big-spending congressional fat cats and to issue increasingly strident threats to cut expenditures, without going so far as to identify actual programs to cut." Too true, JPN. It is difficult for fiscal conservatives to avoid deficits because eliminating social programs is simply not feasible. Imagine for example a politician dismantling medicare/medicaid, leaving senior citizens without vital support. Tax cuts do not compensate for the loss of public services. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 03, 2008, 06:14:08 PM by gommi »
|
Logged
|
\"Ideological and moral confusion are signs of a higher consciousness\".
__IAPer since 2004__
|
|
|
Stratrf_Rus
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-33
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2008, 01:38:19 AM » |
|
Of course you people like me wouldn't be for raising taxes, except to raise taxes of those "lofty corporations" who simply suffer in the form of reduced profits, making you pay more for your consumer goods, and be paid less in wages.
So ultimately higher taxes = less available money and makes you POORER...any way you look at it.
So just perform felatio you stupid liberal bitches.
I am getting tired of your mouth. Second warning. Tone it down or take a hike on MY dime. Get it?
-Biker
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 04, 2008, 04:05:29 AM by Biker Dude »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gommi
|
|
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2008, 06:16:18 PM » |
|
Of course you people like me wouldn't be for raising taxes, except to raise taxes of those "lofty corporations" who simply suffer in the form of reduced profits, making you pay more for your consumer goods, and be paid less in wages.
So ultimately higher taxes = less available money and makes you POORER...any way you look at it.
So just perform felatio you stupid liberal bitches.
I am getting tired of your mouth. Second warning. Tone it down or take a hike on MY dime. Get it?
-Biker
This discussion is addressing McCain's decision to make permanent Bush's tax cuts. If you wish to defend this policy, do so. Please explain how permanent tax cuts can be realistic. In my opinion, ending these tax cuts and restoring tax rates to its previous level would not cause a 'financial crisis'. Contrary, it could stabilize America's fluctuating markets and provide the government with necessary revenues. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\"Ideological and moral confusion are signs of a higher consciousness\".
__IAPer since 2004__
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +212/-207
Posts: 4,097
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2008, 08:28:52 PM » |
|
Am I the only one here who watched Olbermann last night. ... probably. The guy is nauseating... even for me (a "liberal" by some peoples' standards)... Either way, the only reason I would vote for a Republican would be if he was a TRUE economic Conservative and McCain clearly isn't. Plus, "trickle down economics" is crap, except it usually does reduce unemployment. The employment figures come out at the end of the week and I'll be curious to see them. But regardless, I don't think Obama will be any better. UHC (even Obama's less restrictive program) will cost BILLIONS (which means a rise in taxes) and only increases government control over things that they shouldn't have control over in the first place... We have GOT to stop spending. Period. I'm a fiscal Conservative and BOTH economic "strategies" offend me. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2008, 08:59:22 PM » |
|
Of course you people like me wouldn't be for raising taxes, except to raise taxes of those "lofty corporations" who simply suffer in the form of reduced profits, making you pay more for your consumer goods, and be paid less in wages.
So ultimately higher taxes = less available money and makes you POORER...any way you look at it.
So just perform fellatio you stupid liberal bitches.
I am getting tired of your mouth. Second warning. Tone it down or take a hike on MY dime. Get it?
-Biker
Another trickle-down voodoo economics witch doctor...and such a compelling pleasent debating style. His concern for my economic status has brought a tear to to my liberal eye. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Yes we can ...and now we will...
|
|
|
|
Cass
|
|
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2008, 09:07:59 PM » |
|
Interesting point shared today on Americablog, re: McCain's fiscal lack of responsibility or even being aware of those out there among those who are hardly in the fiscal shape they might have been previously. The post has a hyperlink on the link to CNN business. The Obama campaign needs to ask the question once used in a previous campaign, " Are you better off today than you were last year." I don't think there are many who would answer, unless they were war profiteers or beneficiaries of Bush tax cuts big time. Thursday, June 05, 2008 US household net worth crashes again in Q2 Chris in Paris · 6/05/2008 03:35:00 PM ET · Link Is McCain going to explain his recent comment that "America's seen great economic progress" in light of the facts saying otherwise? When you're living the life of Riley like McCain (he does have eight or nine houses, his wife can't remember which), perhaps you don't notice these trends. And to think he wants more of the same on the economy. Americans saw their net worth decline by $1.7 trillion in the first quarter, as declines in home values and the stock market ravaged their holdings. The net worth of U.S. households fell 3% to $56 trillion at the end of March, according to the Federal Reserve's flow of funds report, which was released Thursday. The drop marks the second straight decline in net worth, which fell by more than $500 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007. http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/us-household-net-worth-crashes-again-in.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
\\"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream shall never die.\\" Edward Kennedy, U.S.
Senator
The old lion of the Senate, though a lion in winter, has lived to do more for this nation than John or Bobby though
who knows what life would be like now had they lived.
|
|
|
Stratrf_Rus
Jr. Member
Karma: +1/-33
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2008, 10:07:02 PM » |
|
So at a time when net worth is declining we should....tax people more?
The liberals ARE retarded, and can't think past their noses...let's eliminate 60% of the budget by getting rid of welfare and all that junk.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Quarken
Full Member
Karma: +10/-13
Posts: 165
|
|
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2008, 09:30:12 AM » |
|
So at a time when net worth is declining we should....tax people more?
The liberals ARE retarded, and can't think past their noses...let's eliminate 60% of the budget by getting rid of welfare and all that junk.
Net worth is declining primarily because of the debasement of the dollar. When we have to fund huge budget deficits & lower interest rates, the money supply gets inflated. We had a surplus until Bush & the Republican congress cut taxes & increased spending. Here is a link to the federal budget. What exactly would you cut to get rid of 60%? http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/summarytables.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Buy a toaster, get an investment bank for free.
My EV prediction: Obama 273 - McCain 265
|
|
|
|
Reaganite
|
|
« Reply #14 on: June 06, 2008, 10:00:08 AM » |
|
I AGREE MCCAIN SUCKS!!
He voted against the Bush tax cuts!! he is garbage in my eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You get what you pay for America... Welcome to the Obamanation.....
|
|
|
|
