A political crisis unfolds

[Karee 4,191]

I agree. And next time we have a budget surplus, we should not cut taxes to make sure that the surplus is turned into huge deficts.

Next time we have a surplus (yeah right), they should send everyone a check.

They need to do away with that Earned Income Tax Credit B.S. as well. Whoever came up with that should have their balls cut off.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Next time we have a surplus (yeah right), they should send everyone a check.

They need to do away with that Earned Income Tax Credit B.S. as well. Whoever came up with that should have their balls cut off.

That would be Ford, Reagan, Clinton and George W that you'd be castrating. Three Republicans, one Democrat. Who would have thought, eh? It's the wrong focus, though. I'm much more concerned with millionaires deducting the mortgage interest for their mansions than I am with the Walmart worker catching a break to put food on the family table. You know, if not so fortunate people could still earn a living doing an honest day's work, there would be no need for EITC. EITC is really a subsidy to corporations and their shareholders. It's structured so that the nation would hate on the little guy rather than the fat cat. And judging from your comment, it seems to be working as intended.

Always remember, our tax code was bought and paid for by those that can afford to buy and pay for it. It was not designed by - or for - the little man.

Edited October 8, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[Karee 4,191]

That would be Ford, Reagan, Clinton and George W that you'd be castrating. Three Republicans, one Democrat. Who would have thought, eh? It's the wrong focus, though. I'm much more concerned with millionaires deducting the mortgage interest for their mansions than I am with the Walmart worker catching a break to put food on the family table. You know, if not so fortunate people could still earn a living doing an honest day's work, there would be no need for EITC. EITC is really a subsidy to corporations and their shareholders. It's structured so that the nation would hate on the little guy rather than the fat cat. And judging from your comment, it seems to be working as intended.

Always remember, our tax code was bought and paid for by those that can afford to buy and pay for it. It was not designed by - or for - the little man.

No one is forcing anyone to work at Walmart. They don't like it, don't work there.

The govt. shouldn't be paying people to sit on their a$$ and generate future welfare recipients. Abortion and birth control should be free for low income people

[RGinWA 816]

No one is forcing anyone to work at Walmart. They don't like it, don't work there.

The govt. shouldn't be paying people to sit on their a$$ and generate future welfare recipients. Abortion and birth control should be free for low income people

And should be encouraged with incentives.

When the poor keep having babies we all suffer.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No one is forcing anyone to work at Walmart. They don't like it, don't work there.

Unfortunately, that's not a serious and reasonable position to take looking at the job market in the US. The service sector makes up a significant portion of the workforce that many people will thus not be able to escape. Other industries do not have the demand for the number of workers that the service industries employ. These people deserve to be able to provide for themselves and their families in return for an honest day's work same as people that work in other industries. Simple as that.

[Karee 4,191]

Unfortunately, that's not a serious and reasonable position to take looking at the job market in the US. The service sector makes up a significant portion of the workforce that many people will thus not be able to escape. Other industries do not have the demand for the number of workers that the service industries employ. These people deserve to be able to provide for themselves and their families in return for an honest day's work same as people that work in other industries. Simple as that.

No one is guaranteed a job in this country. That's not how it works.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No one is guaranteed a job in this country. That's not how it works.

Yeah, so? I have not said anything about anyone being guaranteed a job. Getting late?

[Karee 4,191]

Yeah, so? I have not said anything about anyone being guaranteed a job. Getting late?

An hour earlier than it is there.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

An hour earlier than it is there.

And yet, I am still fit. Wassup?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

That would be Ford, Reagan, Clinton and George W that you'd be castrating. Three Republicans, one Democrat. Who would have thought, eh? It's the wrong focus, though. I'm much more concerned with millionaires deducting the mortgage interest for their mansions than I am with the Walmart worker catching a break to put food on the family table. You know, if not so fortunate people could still earn a living doing an honest day's work, there would be no need for EITC. EITC is really a subsidy to corporations and their shareholders. It's structured so that the nation would hate on the little guy rather than the fat cat. And judging from your comment, it seems to be working as intended.

Always remember, our tax code was bought and paid for by those that can afford to buy and pay for it. It was not designed by - or for - the little man.

or more likely as I witnessed last year

Line worker get massive refund. Paid in about 350.00 got back close to 7K

Wife pregnant with 7th kid

Takes FMLA to party for 1.5 months on da cash

KAboom

When it's time for the EIC used car lots pop up around here by the hundreds.

Retailers roll out the polo and designer clothes

If anyone buys that catching a break to improve quality of life bS

Not the Norm

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Anecdotes and fairy tales. You know that those do not impress anyone outside your right wing nut radical bubble. And those inside your bubble don't need impressing anymore. Fox took care of that already. That's how you got impressed.

[Rich and Wen 101]

In 2000, the last year of Clinton's presidency, the US economy had a surplus. The GAO predicted that at current levels, the US debt would be paid off within 10 years. These were the boom years of the 90's, so taxes could not have been excessive.

In 2000, GW Bush was elected, and the Republicans came in with him. I remember him saying, "The American people know how to spend that money better than the government." So tax cuts (the Bush tax cuts of 2001) were enacted, we have not had a surplus since. No paydown of the debt occurred. I think it was Cheney, the Vice President, who said, "Deficits don't matter." Numerous studies have shown that the 2001 tax cuts are responsible for most of the deficits since then.

Provisions of the 2001 cuts were to expire in 2011, but the Republicans fought tooth and nail to prevent that from happening.

NOW, the Republicans suddenly decide that deficits DO matter? What's changed? Maybe it's that there is a Democrat in the White house, do you think?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In 2000, the last year of Clinton's presidency, the US economy had a surplus. The GAO predicted that at current levels, the US debt would be paid off within 10 years. These were the boom years of the 90's, so taxes could not have been excessive.

In 2000, GW Bush was elected, and the Republicans came in with him. I remember him saying, "The American people know how to spend that money better than the government." So tax cuts (the Bush tax cuts of 2001) were enacted, we have not had a surplus since. No paydown of the debt occurred. I think it was Cheney, the Vice President, who said, "Deficits don't matter." Numerous studies have shown that the 2001 tax cuts are responsible for most of the deficits since then.

Provisions of the 2001 cuts were to expire in 2011, but the Republicans fought tooth and nail to prevent that from happening.

NOW, the Republicans suddenly decide that deficits DO matter? What's changed? Maybe it's that there is a Democrat in the White house, do you think?

Though shalt not make sense in this forum. You will confuse them.

Welcome to the discussion.

[RGinWA 816]

In 2000, the last year of Clinton's presidency, the US economy had a surplus. The GAO predicted that at current levels, the US debt would be paid off within 10 years. These were the boom years of the 90's, so taxes could not have been excessive.

In 2000, GW Bush was elected, and the Republicans came in with him. I remember him saying, "The American people know how to spend that money better than the government." So tax cuts (the Bush tax cuts of 2001) were enacted, we have not had a surplus since. No paydown of the debt occurred. I think it was Cheney, the Vice President, who said, "Deficits don't matter." Numerous studies have shown that the 2001 tax cuts are responsible for most of the deficits since then.

Provisions of the 2001 cuts were to expire in 2011, but the Republicans fought tooth and nail to prevent that from happening.

NOW, the Republicans suddenly decide that deficits DO matter? What's changed? Maybe it's that there is a Democrat in the White house, do you think?

Rule of thumb here is nobody can blame Bush, it's all Obama's fault. Secondly since Obama didn't fix it immediately he's a horrible president...unlike Bush.

[Rich and Wen 101]

Well then, can I at least rag on Cheney? Please? And Rove?

And let's not even mention Nordquist.

Edited October 8, 2013 by Rich and Wen