bush tax cut expiring

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by airbusfxr, Nov 24, 2010.

  1. airbusfxr

    airbusfxr New Member

    If you make 70k you will pay 2600 more tax in 2011, if you make 150k you will pay 4900 bucks more. Happy Thanksgiving, who dat says they going to beat dem Saints? Another day of retro pay. Federal mediators side with big business, one anyway, in my opinion.
  2. island1fox

    island1fox Well-Known Member

    :happy-very:Wow the Dems have been telling us for years the "Bush Tax Cuts" were for the rich !! We have been Bamboozled !!!
    Obama, Reid and Pelosi have had two years to get this issue settled---yet today they still blame the out of power Republicans----Did they learn nothing from the recent election results ???
    Oh I fORGOT--Obama told us we do not understand --it is just a "communication" problem. What a joke !!!!:dissapointed:
  3. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    As long the government refuses to cut spending, letting the all the tax cuts (not just for the "rich") expire is the only responsible thing to do but even that won't eliminate the deficit. Polls consistently show that the majority of Americans oppose any meaningful cuts in programs like medicare, social security, etc, so it's time for the government to be honest, quit promising the people that they can have all those programs and lower taxes to boot, and either cut some of the spending or raise taxes to pay for it.
  4. island1fox

    island1fox Well-Known Member

    You fail to mention the MAIN problem. Well over forty percent of Americans pay NO taxes. If you do not pay any tax (many of these people make more than me and you combined--underground economy) If you are not paying taxes of course you want to maintain and increase all programs ----raise the "OTHER PEOPLES" taxes --who cares ?:dissapointed:
  5. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    When is it not "OTHER PEOPLES" taxes?
  6. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    The main problem is that the government is spending more than it takes in. Sure there are people who are scamming the system and making a lot of money under the table, but the majority of people who "don't pay any taxes" (which is a misnomer, everybody pays sales taxes) are poor, and they are also the least likely to vote and therefore have very little influence on our political system. Blaming poor people for our economic troubles may be convenient, but it's a red herring at best. The outcomes of our elections are decided by people who choose to participate in the system because they feel invested in it, and most of those people do pay taxes.
  7. island1fox

    island1fox Well-Known Member

    There are poor people that cannot help themselves because of either mental or physical problems but there are also huge numbers of lazy people who are poor but choose to live off the "system".
    You never hear the politicians talking about the lazy only about the corrupt rich --many of them that unloaded packages, delivered pkgs etc etc --that seem to be only villianized today.
    It is amazing with the high number that are presently unemployed --thousands of companies pay for employment ads in all the major newspapers every week----anyone who wants :sad-little: to work can find a job ---the problem is many do not want to work hard and many are hardly working. I could care less what "Government" Programs are eliminated --just stop milking me to pay for too many lazy people.
  8. fxdwg

    fxdwg Member

    Thanks for the drunk commentary.
  9. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of unemployed are running into a problem of either being over qualified or the potential employer fears said new employee might go running back to either old employer or an employer in the same field when the economy ramps up. That is a legit concern too so I can see that point. I wonder how many of these unemployed who have some specific skill would start a small bidness of their own out of their home if for example a setting aside for a time of zoning laws were allowed or entry barriers such as regulation and tax law were set aside for a time? Small bidness has always been a driving economic engine so if the real desire is to get things moving, why not set aside entry barriers for these upstarts? If I were in charge, I'd want to kill all barriers for good (something the big players don't want) but at the very least, remove those barriers for a time just to give potential mom and pop operations a shot in the arm to get going and to build local economies.

    And I'm totally against all bailouts but if you are going to do that then I also think it's just as fair to those folks who are on unemployment who want to start a bidness that as they economically get on their feet profitwise to consider if still eligible of letting them continue to draw especially if they are putting money back into the bidness and are even hiring others as well. At some point a set date will terminate or even at some profit income level achieved but if you are gonna stimulate NY City, Washington DC among others with industry bailouts and ignoring the voters in the process, why not do the same with mainstreet. Hell yeah it violates so much across the board but you crossed that bridge long ago, I'd just like to see mainstreet strong again so they don't need Wall Street, K Street and Penn. Ave so much if at all any more. Use the very system they use to turn it back on itself and free people economically in the process at the local level.

    Also last month, reports circulated that American bidness sat on over $1 trillion in cash (Huffington IMO wrongly used the term hoarding) and I think part of that was 1) lack of any real direction at the gov't level as to what they would do going forward and 2) waiting on the election outcome. Before a bidness can invest longterm and make longterm projections, they need clarity as to the market risks and until they can clearly see all those potential risks, they will wisely stick the money in a sock rather than spend/invest it.

    One last point of something I would do and that would be to end all legal tender laws. If Big Corp. America is hoarding, now the little guy and local economies are free to develop their own local legal tender and thus grow their own economic base. It would shred the Federal Reserve to pieces and likely rip the US taxing model to shreads as tax code only allows the taxing of the federal reserve note (another reason for legal tender laws to begin with) but at this point let's get working America going again and if the Big Boys can keep up and stay alive then let them do so in a true free market, an actual competitive environment!

    I'll bet if I ran I'd either not get one vote or get shot but the question would be which political side would be behind it!

    In the Pittburgh Tribune yesterday, F.A. Hayek's "decentralized money" was in fact discused.
  10. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Here's a great example of the free market at work in hard times, hard times often inflicted by the State itself. Wonder what would happen if farmers started growing tobacco and supplying it to Black market operators to roll and package themselves and then distribute locally? Sound like another product we know of?

    It's Samuel Konkin's Agorism and I applaud it!