I am betting on the latter. This issue has become so politicized that it doesn't even seem to matter what the subjuect is, the finger pointing never stops.

"Constructive", that's Barry's response to what, 90 minutes of talks? I guess changing 18,000 pages of intertwined and convoluted pages of tax code just takes a few minutes according to Barry.

The man doesn't have a clue.

Right now, "constructive" means strengthening the economy and helping us grow jobs and making significant deficit reductions. All sides recognize the problem and here's a chance to do something called compromise. That means being willing to accept less than is ideally idealized in the brain.

1. It means doing something that makes a lasting impact and creates confidence with the Banks, corporations and investors that are sitting on an accumulated $2 Trillion dollars.

2. Over the last ten years, decimating the middle class has become a terrible habit. The focus has been on expanding the financial sector in ways that don't create new businesses and jobs.

3. There was NO deficit at the end of the Clinton presidency and no complaints. So let's go back to that tax rate and fix the revenue shortfall.

4. And how about we reward those corporations that are actually factually hiring?

JS1 -- It's good to see the light is coming on for you. It is clear to most people that Republicans only care about their narrow agenda, most notably tax cuts--not balancing the budget.

Aside from hedge fund managers benefiting from so-called "capital gains" loopholes, not only are corporations like Citigroup, Johnson & Johnson, HP, etc. using loopholes to pay far less than the 35% corporate tax rate (as low as 7.6%), ALL of these companies have slashed jobs, some in the thousands.

This is called Tax Spending, and it has NOT created jobs. It needs to end now. It is the GOP/TP that has no clue, especially the meaning of "compromise."

Obama is hanging on to a thread of reasoning that didn't even work when he had a majority of both houses, seems in denial of November 2010 results, however he is postering today closer to the right than yesterday because, I believe, he sees the writing on the wall. It'll be his head.

Default, or threat of, seems the only way to shame these people back to their desks. Why should they work, they're getting their millions which by the way is 10+ times their salaries and we don't even want to know how that is possible, and they will keep collecting at this rate for at least 2 more years on the job and even after they are gone.

Run it like a business. First, collect income. Second, pay the bills. Third, pay the boss if anything is left over after paying bills. In that order.

"Boss" is defined as President, Congress, and government workers, in that order.

Backhouse

I keep hearing about Clinton's budget surplus , first he lucked out and got the dot com boom. It he is going to get credit for that then he should also get credit for the 133 billion dollar deficit in 2001. Second, Clinton's best year as far as "surplus" goes, he added 18 billion to the national debt. Can anybody explain how he did that?

You must be FOX New's Pride and Joy

It is you who are misrepresenting the situation. First of all, it was Republican spending and unprecedented tax cuts signed in 2001 by Bush that created this unmanageable deficit. Republicans love their pork; in case you hadn't noticed, over the last decade Congress has had an equal opportunity barbecue at tax payer expense, including many a red state Bridge To Nowhere. Then there were also the "War Against Terror" in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Prescription Drug benefit for seniors Bush passed.

President Obama, as we all know inherited a tanking economy, which also impacted revenues, as well as driving up the costs of all social programs to help out- of- work people. He's managed to keep us together, through NO HELP from Republicans, and the economy is turning the corner. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are using this opportunity to dismantle the saftey net they hate so much, while preserving their own benefits and protecting their wealthy patrons' tax cuts.

Do you think the American people don't know what they see with their own eyes?

You were obviously born less than 3 years ago: but if your ideological blinders would allow you to see, the damage was clearly done before Obama started as Prez.: we were losing jobs at a terrifying rate, and shortly after his first actions, the job loss slowed and started climbing: but you are too blind and prejudicial towards Barack Obama to admit this.

Sorry that you have been deluded. :)

You are the one that truly misrepsenting the facts! Pride and Joy gives actual figures but you still stand on those same tired and baseless lies that the liberal media likes to feed you.

JK1963 -- It is nice to see references and statistics from Pride and Joy, which is lacking in your post. However, Pride and Joy presents a simplistic review of tax rates, leaving out many other factors. For example the tax base, which Reagan increased by eliminating loopholes.

Baseless lies are far more prevelent from FOX compared to the liberal media. Check out all the FOX lies on PolitiFact.

@Pride and Joy. Let me discredit your source as conservatives do when liberals post sources to support their statements or discredit conservative MISLEADING or baseless statements.

Here is an easier to read Tax Rate History Chart

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html

Between 1960 (when the "1950s" faded into history) and the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan pushed through landmark tax cuts, top tax brackets had much higher rates than those in place today. For instance, the top rate was 91 percent in 1960, and 70 percent on the eve of Reagan’s election in 1980.

By 1988, the top federal income tax rate fell to 28 percent, and it stayed there until 1990. It ticked up to 31 percent for 1991 and 1992, before rising to 39.6 percent in 1993.

So, for five tax years -- 1988 through 1992 -- the top tax bracket had a lower rate than today’s top bracket. Put another way, out of 52 tax years since 1960, the top tax rate was lower than today’s only 10 percent of the time. (Today’s top tax bracket has been steady since 2003, so in nine additional tax years, the earlier bracket was tied with today’s.)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/29/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-tax-rates-are-lowest-1950s-ceos-/

Given the damage already caused by Bush and his wingnuts, I wish they would tread lightly and truthfully!

I would say they simply misunderstand reports, but this type of thing where they misrepresent and misspeak actual facts happens too often for it to simply be a misunderstanding!

The above wingnuts' posts are not accurate nor true. They simply hope the public will not know the difference, and they have convinced themselves that if they state the lies often enough and loud enough people will believe it. This misrepresentation is obviously deliberate, but those of us who lived through their "trickle down" nightmare of the 1980's and the bully lies of the Bush II administration begining with Saddam's WMD's know better. We WILL believe the real truth of our experiences and history in 11/2012 instead of the t-bag sales pitch they throw at us.

Can anyone logically explain why "The Tax Foundation's" alleged numbers are not wrong or slanted and in the Repubs' view it could only be the President of the United States who has the wrong numbers. Is "The Tax Foundation" one of Norquist's inventions? Sure sounds like it to me!

And THANK YOU Adidas 503 for some truth and accuracy in the real numbers.

Pride and Joy and all posters:

check out THIS link:

http//krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/ the tax foundation NOT a reliable source.

...so YOU have known about this for at least 3 yrs. Pride, but STILL spinning their info and calling it fact?!?!?!

Amy B. of Portland accuses Pride and Joy of being Fox News pride and joy. Then she tries to perpetrate the liberal lie that the recession was caused by Bush's Tax Cuts. Apperently she has been listening to Charles Schummer on CSPAN way too much. If he and Barney Frank cannot sell that lie I would have to say they are both in big trouble. You liberal lotus eaters need to wake up and smell the coffee.

she tries to perpetrate the liberal lie that the recession was caused by Bush's Tax Cuts. Apperently she has been listening to Charles Schummer on CSPAN way too much.

No, Rick... looks like she simply states historical facts, the way things occured - the truth!

Why do you, Pride and Republican/T-nuts try to insist that things happened differently than they did? We were there, and we KNOW what the facts are from our personal experiences; yet the rightwing plan apparently seems to be that we must have been too stoned to remember or something, or we just dreamed it all. Did you guys get that line from Michael Moorer's movie?

Stop trying to tell us we did NOT experience what happened between Nov. 2000 and Jan. 2009: WE WERE THERE (and somehow survived in spite of W's best efforts otherwise)!!

Edward if I am being to personal just say so, I would understand, but I would like to ask you, did your steel mill close or move, and what are you doing now?

For five years I took care of the account and did a lot of work in a tin can factory organized by the United Steelworkers. It was always a very profitable plant but they up and closed and moved south for the cheaper labor and for huge tax abatement's they were promised by the town they moved to. It was never about not being able to make a profit it was about more profit, Steelworkers did not kill that plant, management closed that plant. We might save a lot of American jobs if we start outsourcing management instead of labor. You know an American car going into Germany gets over $7,000 added to the price in tariffs, that is not the fault of the UAW that makes the cars or the USW that makes the steel, and that is one of the biggest problems we have with being competitive. America wants to believe in a free market that does not exist, we are too stupid to tax foreign goods coming in, every other country does this to us, but we believe in the free market. You know the free market that is manipulated by China, Germany, and Japan by their taxes and tariffs on our goods. Another problem is that our CEO's and top level executives take home hundreds of millions of dollars each year in salary and bonus. Foreign executive's do not make that kind of cash. Our executives get paid a bonus to screw guys like you that worked their tail off in a nasty dangerous steel mill for twenty bucks an hour, what a great bunch of guys, I think we should give them a tax break on that bonus, hell they earned that suitcase full of cash, not like a Steelworker sucking up 20 bucks an hour and bleeding the company dry. Good luck Edward I hope you found something as good or better, what ever it is it probably could not be any harder, hotter, dirtier or more dangerous than a steel mill.