Would you not acknowledge that to receive a “tax-cut” one should have to have actually paid taxes?

Obama claims that the 40% tax cuts are going to 95% of the workers. The problem is, GO, that over 40% of the 95% he claims is getting a “tax cut” do not pay any taxes.

This will be a tax increase for everyone. Not only is Obama planning on letting Bush’s tax cuts expire, but he’ll be raising taxes on businesses (large and small). How do these businesses pay for it? They pass it on to the consumer. And less money for a company means less money to expand and hire more people.

This is not a stimulus package; it’s a spending package.

1. People who make more than the $250K will work it so that they are no longer in that bracket. They’ll just work less and make less. Why make more when you’re going to have to hand so much more over to the govt?

2. Capital gains tax increases will result in a decrease in investing. Why invest when you’re paying huge taxes on your dividends?

So let’s see. Less people making $250K+ = less tax revenue. Less investing = less tax revenue. All of this equals less production and output which equals less tax revenue. The mayor of NY recently vetoed a tax increase on his richest residents because he knew that those 40,000 or so (out of millions) would just simply relocate if they were burdened any more with a heavy tax load. That’s the sort of thing that happens with an increase in taxes.

Some spending is good and even justified. But what the Obama administration is proposing? It’s almost national suicide. There is not one example that shows that this sort of astronomical spending has benefited a country. (Revisit your history books re the 1930s and FDR’s New Deal.) And I don’t care if people think it works; it doesn’t. Just because a group of people think something works, doesn’t mean they’re right. They ought to check the facts.

Food for thought.

And yes, tax cuts DO work. This was demonstrated in the 80s under Reagan. You cannot buy your way out of a recession, like the Dems think. This so-called strategy has never worked…..anywhere. There is ample evidence to prove this. It’s like the Dems are not even considering the side effects of tax hikes (people working less to avoid a tax bracket, less production, less investing, etc, etc.)……or they just plain don’t care.

And I would not call inviting the three most RINO repblicans to the table a bi-partisian effort. The reason the GOP “threw the stimulus back in his face” as you called it, is because it stunk on ice. Now we are finally seeing some dems get brave and go against the party on this budget bill that’s going thru, because it too stinks on ice!

Just because Obama has anointed himself and the media has proclaimed him the Chosen one does not mean he is. Our system is set up to be an adversarial one, not a rubber stamp like that in the UK, it’s good to finally see the GOP standing up for something (although it’s too little too late). Perhaps if they’d have found their courage before the election (and stood up to some of the garbage GWB rammed thru) it would be someone other than Nancy and Harry at the helm in the Congress.

Finally, if you have not noticed, every time a new part of the stimulus or the next stimulus, or Geithner, Bernake speak to Congress or Obama holds a press confrence the markets plummet. The American people know more than their government does about what needs to be done to save ourselves. Sadly, the Congress and the President are like the Emperor admiring his new clothes made out of fabric that does not exist and are parading down the street naked. They seem to be the only ones who think they look good.

In fact Senator Obama went out of his way to include them in the stimulus planning nad they threw it in his face, demanding yet more nad more and showing inability to work for him. All they can ever talk about its tax cuts. Its their answer to everything. It is a shame it doesn’t really work and only gives benefit to a small percentage of society

In any event, most politicians are pragmatists and these are no different, if not we would have seen a grand jury appointed to examine war crimes against the former administration

I’m with you on that one, Kaiser.

Right after Obama was elected I posted a piece about giving him a chance. I’d hoped that he’d do a good job, and include the GOP in his efforts as the leader of our nation — even though I am a conservative. I wanted to give him the chance that the liberals never gave GWB. I don’t pray for him to fail, but I think he will, just because I don’t think the government is the solution.

Anyway….I feel now, that he and his party members specifically, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd, Emmanuel, are taking a “my way or the highway” approach to running the country ‘because that’s what the GOP did’, Sometimes I feel — with the way both parties are acting– like I’m back teaching high school and watching teenaged girls cat fight in the halls….oh so fun!

And Chris, I disagree with your position that because the GOP lost they have no right to expect to be listened to. Excuse me? I pay taxes, I contribute, just because my party happned to have lost does not mean I don’t get a seat at the table, and somehow my concerns are no longer valid. As a nation we’ve a tradition of including the minorty party. Sadly, and again, I blame both parties for this, the minority is ignored, demonized, marginalized and pushed to the side. However, people, just regular people suffer because of the politicians’ antics. I think that’s what frustrates most people. We are willing to work it out, to compromise, to listen to the other side and I think most regular people want to do that — can someone send that memo to DC??

I also not sure I buy the “lesseer of two evils” argument, like Tony Blair in 1997, President Obama attracted a massive following who wanted change

He just couldn’t keep it in his pants and then lied about it.

I’ll agree with the premise of your statement, but don’t forget that Dubbya and a GOP Congress are far from innocent when it comes to fiscal irresponsibility.

You are very wrong, Chris.

Are you seriously implying that those who said “enough” to the big spending under Bush (with a Dem Congress) turned around and voted for someone (Obama) who they KNEW would spend even more?

That doesn’t even make sense.

No, Obama won because some of those who said “enough” felt that McCain was going to be “more of the same” in regards to spending. So, rather than chose the lesser of the two evils, they stayed home.
(I am NOT one of those, as I have well documented in these posts.)

I say that, not to impune his intelligence (boy, did I get tired of the left doing that to Bush, Palin, et al), but simply because it doesn’t take much to KNOW that his socialism-friendly policies will destroy our country.

You forgot too readily that we have just had 8 years of the biggest economy, biggest bank account and largest miliatary in the hands of the right. Could they have made a bigger mess of it?

I am not an economist, but I was always on the monetarist view than Keynesian personally. I also see that no-one knows what the right course of action to take it, there are a number of different govts across the world seeking solutions and even within the European Union there is not a uniform approach to the economy

Why is the “liberal camp” a lost cause, why are you grouping social views and economic views together, they are different.

further you seem to think that the very policies that got us into this mess are the ones to get us out of it and call those who disagree “lemmings”

President Obama is not on an ideological crusade to bring about socialism, if he is, then you will throw him out in 4 years time at the ballot box. He is trying to fix a broken economy, you might not approve of his methods, but if he succeeds then surely you would be happy with that?

I doubt it.

I’d say that’s because those who would truly make great presidents are too smart to run for the office so we end up with the throw backs.

As we realize the full extent of the debt we are incurring, while the monkeys who are throwing darts at the dartboard for economic ideas in the backroom continue to shrug their shoulders and give vague platitudes, as capitalists stay home and wait for the other shoe to drop before losing more of their hard earned money – yea, I hope our country is smarter than a bunch of lemmings.

I don’t think its a question of wanting him to fail as much as its a question of when will we wake up, smell the coffee, and stop the madness before he wrecks more than just the economy.

“Giving him a chance” as some have opined is one thing; handing over 4 years of control to the biggest economy, biggest bank account, and largest military is quite another.

To the moderates among us, I say – we’re getting what you voted for…

And comparing a doctor to being President is apples and oranges.

so RSE, do you want the President’s policies to fail?

1. Democrats over the last 8+ years.

2. Liberals who think we Americans are too wealthy, too bossy, too selfish, and need to get knocked down a peg or two for our own good.

I find great irony in that the same libs that want this transformed society are totally trashing the only engine that can make their dream world possible.

I believe that what we’re seeing is capitalism on strike. “You want to browbeat, spank, and denigrate me for the way I spend money to make money? Fine. I’ll just hold onto it and keep it at home. Let somebody else invest and take their chances.”