Posted on 12/13/2010 6:20:50 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Somewhere, George Bush is laughing . . .
That was the image in Joe Scarborough's mind this morning. The Morning Joe host repeatedly made the point that whereas Dems continue to control the White House and massive congressional majorities, they now are looking at the Bush tax cuts, which for years they vilified, as their last best hope.
When it comes to Republican and Dem support for the tax cut deal, Joe--concerned about the $1 trillion being added to the deficit--has been in pox-on-both-their-houses mode. He seems to side with opponents of the bill including Jim DeMint, Rand Paul. . . and even Bernie Sanders. But Joe took particular delight today in skewering the Dems. As he put it, they are still in charge, and thus "own" the bill. Summed up Scarborough: "George Bush has won."
View video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Somewhere, George Bush is laughing ping to Today show list.
What did the commie wench, Mika, say?
Does anybody over there ever stop and think about this canard?
We don't get another trillion added to the deficit because the tax rates are 28% instead of 33%.
We get another trillion because the gubmint spends it. If you want to argue that GWB started it with the bonzai bailout bonanza, then go ahead, at least you have some firm ground.
But there aren't enough "rich" people to tax, even at 100%, to cover that trillion.
When all the libs are saying you won...you know you just got screwed.
OPPOSE THE DEAL!
Mika tried to argue that the Dems are opposed to the deal but that Republicans forced them into it. Joe repeatedly made the point that Dems still control the White House and both houses of Congress, and thus “own” the deal.
Having both Clinton and Obama urging the retention of the Bush tax cuts on the same podium had to be satisfying for W.
AGREED!
The DEMS won on this!
Hey Joe - tell Mika Barney says *woof*.
Funny how they only care about the deficit when you wont let them increase taxes
But spending cuts never ever ever seem to cross their minds
How did someone this stupid get on the air?
Nope Not by a long shot. And the taxpayers are the losers. Why doesn’t the Senate hold out until the next session? What’s the rush?
Joe, if you are truly concerned about the deficit, there are a couple of things you can do:
First, demand the Congress CUT SPENDING. I know that's a novel idea, but it WILL reduce the deficit. You have the soapbox - use it.
Second, donate some of your own money to the federal government, and rant on the rich libs until they do the same. (Again, use that soapbox.)
Liberals always want to raise taxes, just not on themselves.
Using Lib (anti)logic... I ask my boss for a $100 a month raise... he says “no, get back to work”. I then say “my boss cost me $1,200 a year”. Such is LeftMath!
Using Lib (anti)logic... I ask my boss for a $100 a month raise... he says “no, get back to work”. I then say “my boss cost me $1,200 a year”. Such is LeftMath!
Via bizzyblog - Great editorial in the Colorado Springs Gazette — “Tax relief is not an ‘expense.’” (vote in poll)http://www.gazette.com/opinion/view-109421-obama-vote.html
OUR VIEW: Tax relief is not an ‘expense’ (vote in poll)Wayne Laugesen
2010-12-10
Critics of President Barack Obama’s amazing tax compromise, endorsed Friday by former President Bill Clinton, complain that it’s too expensive. We’re told it is an $855 billion stimulus — a gigantic cost to a government that cannot afford it.
It’s fair to characterize tax relief as a form of stimulus because tax cuts have a proven track record of stimulating constructive economic activity. But it’s ludicrous and completely inaccurate to call it an expense.
Those who have the gall to portray tax relief as an expense remind us of the old system of taxation. Pharaohs and kings in the old world owned all property in the tyrannical territories they ruled. Individuals served government. They paid the rulers for use of whatever land and other property they needed in order to survive. No wealth belonged to the individual; all belonged to the ruler.
Under that system, it would be a genuine expense to the government if the king were to reduce the cost an individual paid in order to use the property, equipment, water and air needed to provide for himself and his family’s needs. It all belonged to the king.
In a free society, discounts and rebates offered by private parties may also be fairly characterized as expenses. When a cellphone company sends a $100 rebate to a customer who bought a new phone, it’s an expense to a company that has property rights and wealth. It’s a decision to reduce the value of a $500 phone, owned by the company, to $400 in order to incentivize another party to procure it.
Reducing taxes, or maintaining a tax reduction, is entirely different. It cannot be viewed as an expense because government does not own the fruits of taxation. In the United States, government serves individuals who have the right to own property and to keep and control the fruits of their endeavors. The founders guaranteed private property rights in the Constitution in order to forbid the tyranny of government owning what rightly belongs to individuals. Here, individuals ostensibly pay a portion of what they own to government to fund that which they have asked government to provide for the collective good. Government owns nothing; individuals own all. Government gets what the people have decided to give it, as decided by representatives they have elected to represent their interests. Government serves the people.
(Vote in poll to the right in red type. Must vote to see results. Thanks!)
If we are something far different than a serfdom that owns and controls wealth, it’s impossible for tax cuts to cost government. The wealth is not property of government. Leaving it in paychecks cannot be an expense.
Democrats who refuse to support Obama’s tax compromise just don’t get all of that, nor do they want to.
Our government is mired in debt because of this confusion. It leads government to spend more than the people who own wealth have agreed to pay. The way out cannot involve more confiscation in the form of higher taxes. Less government is clearly what the people want and precisely what they should get in order to make this tax compromise work. All of the money belongs to the people, not the federal government that serves them.
What cracks me up about this entire debate is this.
Everyone agrees by raising everyone’s taxes it will harm the economy (well except the far left loons). So the debate is about “not raising the taxes” in our slow economy.
People that argue that keeping the taxes at the current rate is going to help our economy are wrong too. Look at the the current economy with the current rates. We are barely growing. So doing nothing regarding the tax rates is not going to inspire a boom in the economy.
Thus, if the current tax rate and raising the current tax rate either leave us in our current situation or makes the situation worse... Then the solution is to cut ALL taxes to help our economy.
I am amazed how little I hear about this. The Republicans, Talk Radio and Fox News needs to be hammering this point.
Instead what I hear are Republicans, etc agreeing with the Democrats premises that this is a “tax cut”. It’s not a tax cut at all. It’s a tax raise. How can you call it a tax cut by leaving the current rates the same? If you agree with their (the rats) loaded argument, then you have already lost half the battle. The verbiage is extremely important.
The problem is not raising tax revenue. Hell the government admits to taking in over 2 trillion in taxes. BTW, I am sure they have way more than they admit. We all know the government lies. It’s a spending problem in Washington and NOT a raising enough tax revenue. People are either stupid or nuts if they believe that by raising our tax rates our federal government is suddenly going to become fiscally responsible.
Just my two cents.
Wayne's editorials remind one of a fly in a cow pasture -- they flit from subject to subject until sheer exhaustion forces them to land on that one final pile.
What's left is shallowness.... and I suppose it's fitting, seeing as the Gazette as a whole is a rather shallow enterprise.
Oh, riiiiiiiight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.