He found the tax hikes.
******************************************************
Direct me to the language which specifies tax hikes
Posted on 08/01/2011 11:06:13 AM PDT by Kevin in California
Edited on 08/01/2011 12:52:01 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Just reported that in this debt deal is indeed a BIG TAX HIKE!
This is breaking....:
Tax Hikes 'Impossible' Under Debt Deal? Think Again ...
Published August 01, 2011
| FoxNews.com
The debt-ceiling deal moving toward a vote in Congress could easily pave the way for tax increases despite Republican claims that tax hikes are "impossible" under a deal struck with the White House to reduce spending in exchange for a debt-limit increase.
But as everyone knows, "impossible" isn't really in Washington's vocabulary.
Here's how it could happen:
After Congress enacts more than $900 billion in spending cuts to give President Obama a $900 billion lift in the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, a bipartisan committee will be formed to find roughly $1.5 trillion in additional deficit savings over the next decade.
To get there, the committee is free to look at virtually anything -- including "revenue" -- even though House Speaker John Boehner said Sunday night that current budgeting guidelines make it "impossible" for the 12-member group to approve tax hikes.
Other officials and analysts beg to differ.
"The suggestion that it is impossible for the joint committee to raise tax revenue simply is not accurate, it's false," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Monday.
Tea Party-aligned Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, said that's one of the concerns stopping him from supporting the deal.
"Certainly, tax increases could be something that we could face," Lee told Fox News.
Boehner is able to claim no tax hikes are possible because the committee would work off the assumption that the Bush tax cuts -- all of them -- will expire in 2013. Combined with other expiring provisions, that adds up to $3.5 trillion in tax hikes over the next decade, without the committee taking any action
Excerpt, read more: here
They didn't expire because that was immediately after a huge Republican win, and because Obama was trying to set himself up for 2012. He won't have to do that after next Nov. 6 - and it is fantasy to believe that this issue will be addressed before the election. The whole sticking point on the debt deal was that he DOESN'T want it to come up again before the election. Why would a tax cut or increase be any different in its effects?
If Obama signs another tax cut (assuming that the Dems in the Senate would allow it), then a big part of his base will stay home. This bill itself is being called a "sugar-coated Satan sandwich" - so what would the same constituency call a tax cut? They'd be calling Obama an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo cookie" if he did that again.
Once this is done, we will basically be in paralysis mode in Congress - nothing controversial will get done, except (like now) during or shortly proceeding a perceived crisis. Dial in those tax increases to your finances, they are coming.
“(i.e., call it what you want, taxes will be increased under this bill).”
The whole idea behind the attempted hiding (what world Being attempts to hide?) of the levied “body Act” Vampire-Care Act.
Stamp-Act——Body-Act
What World Being hates the human body...from The Beginning.
They didn't expire because that was immediately after a huge Republican win, and because Obama was trying to set himself up for 2012. He won't have to do that after next Nov. 6 - and it is fantasy to believe that this issue will be addressed before the election. The whole sticking point on the debt deal was that he DOESN'T want it to come up again before the election. Why would a tax cut or increase be any different in its effects?
If Obama signs another tax cut (assuming that the Dems in the Senate would allow it), then a big part of his base will stay home. This bill itself is being called a "sugar-coated Satan sandwich" - so what would the same constituency call a tax cut? They'd be calling Obama an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo cookie" if he did that again.
Once this is done, we will basically be in paralysis mode in Congress - nothing controversial will get done, except (like now) during or shortly proceeding a perceived crisis. Dial in those tax increases to your finances, they are coming.
For Obama, Bush tax cuts shadow further debt talks
Excerpt:
That threat, which Obama has issued repeatedly since reluctantly agreeing to extend the cuts last year, is meant to mollify critics within his own Democratic party who are disappointed that measures to increase government revenues were not part of the deal reached on Sunday.
The agreement, which must still be approved by lawmakers, would cut about $2.4 trillion from the U.S. deficit over 10 years, with a congressional committee set up to find $1.5 trillion in cuts through tax reform and other deficit-reduction measures.
~~~~~~~~~~
Small spending cuts to have little economic impact
Excerpt:
The first phase of a deal to raise the government’s borrowing limit would pose little threat to the economy in the short term because almost none of the spending cuts would occur before 2014.
http://news.yahoo.com/small-spending-cuts-little-economic-impact-144415767.html
This is my note to my Rep. Kevin McCarthy -
Any agreement with the democrats is not in the best interests of this country. Stop this foolishness and start actually CUTTING spending. Reducing “projected” increases in spending and calling them “cuts” are the childish games democrats play.
It’s time that the USA take its medicine and start down this long, hard road to actual fiscal solvency. CUT everything, every program, every department, everything by at least 1% to get started.
The democrats have been making the rules for too long. It’s time for them to be shown the door and to be exposed as the enemies of the USA that they are.
Do not endorse, support or otherwise vote Aye in support of these continued shenanigans. You’re setting the stage for the democrats to screw us again.
I cannot endorse or support a candidate who will not actually insist on fiscal responsibility.
Why would we want it passed anyway?
No debt ceiling increase means an instantly ‘balanced budget’.
Look at the details: (1) up and down vote; (2) no amendments; (3) no filibuster; (4) deem and pass provisions; (5) unconstitutional arrangement (central committee)?
raising the debt limit in itself is a tax. It equals more money, products and services for our government, thus you and I have to pay more to get the same as before!
And every year, the 7 or 8 percent increase is built in so that even if the ‘lawmakers’ have to make cuts from now until the next fiscal year in order to live within the 130 billion per month coming in, next year they will have—by established law—an increase in cost/spending automatically increasing the debt. True reform would eliminate the automatic increase and cut one penny of every federal dollar spent. THEN a truly balanced budget could be achieved in six or seven years if the Republic is still around. And it will not be if the democrat machine is allowed to continue the commie agenda.
The democrats remind me of a thief who puts a knife in your ribs and demands you wallet and watch. When you hand them over, he stabs you in the neck and leaves you for dead. The pubbies are the thief who puts a knife in your back and demands your wallet but tells you you can keep your watch so you can get to work. The he cuts your foot off so the walk to work gets tougher. Bith are thieves, both injure you, but one wants you to keep supporting the society while the other wants it all to end.
Mmmm-thanks!
Inflating the money supply is merely indirect taxation.
The deal absolutely locks in and guarantees tax increases.
T.S. Eliot described the Republicans very well in the last section of “The Waste Land”, “What the Thunder Said”:
The awful daring of a moment’s surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
By this, and this only, we have existed
He found the tax hikes.
******************************************************
Direct me to the language which specifies tax hikes
Link me to the billHe found the tax hikes.
******************************************************Direct me to the language which specifies tax hikes
Excuse me, you claimed their were tax hikes in the bill and I simply asked you for the proof of this.
So find it and direct me to the location so I can read it also. If you cannot then simply admit you have no evidence of tax hikes being in the bill.
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.