White House Gives In On Bush-Era Tax Cuts

No, it's not easy, or everyone would do it. It takes time and effort, things with most people are unwilling to give. But just because someone is lazy or less intelligent or just dealt a shitty hand in life doesn't mean they deserve anything.

Make your own life, don't expect it to be handed to you, this is the single biggest problem in our country.

That's such garbage. You fault others for their attempt to make their own lives better and not your own. Instead you insist that they be forced via taxation to make your life better.

I don't think the government invented wealth.

Wealth is generated by the people not by the rulers of the people.

Yup, you again prove that you are just a stuck up dingbat.
I'm not complaining about money myself...not in the least.
But yet again you simplify things yet again.
Yes! Go take a risk when you are in hard times because if you fail your family goes on the street!
Were you originally wealthy or did you develop your wealth yourself?

Regardless of the fact.
Our government is failing.
And a tax cut will not be the one true solution this time, regardless of what you say.

It doesn't matter. Life's not fair. If the people get fed up with the few face *** the many then the people should remove the few. I'm not giving up my liberties so the government can make life more fair for those who are having "hard times".

It is that simple. It's just not easy.

Life's not fair.
So the rich can be taxed more then, since it's not fair...
:P
Hell I'll use that as a basis for my counter-arguments.
Rich pay more taxes?
life's not fair get over it.

Wealth is also assets not just currency. Which, btw is already worthless, it only has value because people that trade it believe it has value.

that means it has value.
technically using your mindset nothing has values except for the commodities themselves, but since we don't live in a bartering world you can't really base your argument on something such as that.
we haven't had a legitimate backing to USD in a long time anyway.
intellectual property, which apparently if you steal this worthless currency you get thrown into jail for it and you have to shell out more worthless currency to get out.
unless you are rich.
then you don't get arrested and you pay people to handle that for you.

People are going to do what they can get away with. If the rest of the people don't like what X corp. is doing then they need to remove X corp. by no longer supporting it by purchasing their product. X corp. then fails and is no longer a threat.

I'm just going to leave this here:

CBO and tax cuts

I read some of his other posts relating to this earlier as well as the opposed.
seems logical to me....i don't need the extra money lol.

CBO post killed the thread, I was having fun reading people try to justify these...

You never know.
Zandra might be researching as I type this.
People don't use common sense anymore :/

It is from that liberal rag "the Washington post" so forgive me if I start checking their results. First off if you read the summary you find out that yes indeed by extending the cuts for the next 2 years it would promote more income, raise output, and big surprise..... ADD EMPLOYMENT!!! So there it is, check out the summary for yourself below. Probably the reason why Obama is ready to give up these cuts today.

However the CBO doesn't think that the long term effects would be as positive and would reduce income in the long term. BUT this as well as the short term outlook is all under the tagged language of "under current law". So what that says to me is that if we continue to overspend the way we're projected to which I assume account for the upcoming massive debts associated with social security, and medicaid which are current written law, we'll be so buried in debt that no tax cuts will be able to help. I'm sure none of you will believe me so i copied and pasted it below.

This is from the summary,

* All four of the options for extending the expiring income tax cuts would raise output, income, and employment during the next two years, relative to what would occur under current law. A full permanent extension or partial permanent extension would provide a larger boost to income and employment in the next two years than would a temporary extension, and a full extension would provide a larger boost than would the corresponding partial extension.
* But the effects of those policy options on the economy in the longer term would be very different from their effects during the next two years. For some of the options, the estimates based on different models and assumptions cover a broad range. Still, the estimates indicate that all four of the options would probably reduce income relative to what would otherwise occur in 2020. Beyond 2020, and again relative to what would occur under current law, the reductions in income from all four of the policy options would become larger. Either a full or a partial extension of the tax cuts through 2012 would reduce income by much less than would a full or partial permanent extension.

So what you are saying is that we shouldn't have tax cuts unless current laws are changed..if that is so...I am amused.

No that's not what I'm saying.

What I've said all along is that extending the tax cuts is a GOOD thing for the economy. The CBO agrees with me until 2020.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say?
So? no tax cuts or tax cuts?

Lol what did you read?

All I saw was:

That sums it up.

Looking at the numbers the most it would do is help a little until 2012 then hurt the economy big time, you know like what the cuts have already done.

A tea party member calling something a "liberal rag" doesn't help your argument either, just makes you look even more stupid.

No they don't. Says it would help a little until 2012. Learn to read.