Unasked Questions:

While watching the news I am struck by the poor quality of questions asked of Mitt Romney. As an amateur blogger (unpaid) I expect paid professional journalists to ask those questions that are important to voters. Now I'm not talking about "Gotcha" questions, which are the trademark of David Gregory, or questions with loaded words that allow the candidate to spin off track: Just clean straight-forward questions. If Romney wants to avoid the question, ask it again. Bob Schieffer of "Face the Nation" knows how to ask a question repeatedly until an answer is forthcoming. He is the exception to the rule.

Willard likes to talk about his experience as CEO of Bain Capital, so let's start there.

1.As CEO of Bain were there acquisitions made without your knowledge? If there were not, then do you assume responsibility for those acquisitions?

2.The SEC claims that you did outsource jobs to China and India. Is that true?

Governor of Massachusetts:

1.As governor of Massachusetts you were instrumental in passing a health care plan for the residents of your state. If you were governor today, would you pass that same law?

2.What is your explanation for Massachusetts being 47th out of 50 in job creation?

Personal Finances:

1.Most Americans keep their savings in American banks. Why do you put your money in secret off shore bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland, and Bermuda?

2.When are you going to release your tax returns? If you have nothing to hide, then release them to demonstrate you have nothing to hide.

Policy Questions:

1.Do you support the Lilly Ledbetter act?

2.Do you support President Obama's executive order to no longer deport young aliens?

3.You have described the Paul Ryan budget as "marvelous". Is it your plan to discontinue Medicare as we know it today for America's children and grandchildren by implementing a voucher system?

4.Specifically, what cuts in government do you support?

Ten simple questions looking for ten straightforward answers. Plus this is an open-book test so the Romney team can prepare the answers. If you are a reporter on the Romney bus and checking-out First Read, your questions are here and all you have to do is ask them, and be sure to keep the cameras rolling.

Romney Donor

(07/08/2012) The LA Times is on the scene at the Romney fund raiser in the Hamptons and reporter Maeve Reston caught up with a donor on her way into one of the events.

The woman, who wouldn’t reveal her name, but had the following advice for Mitt Romney:

“I don’t think the common person is getting it…my college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies — everybody who’s got the right to vote — they don’t understand what’s going on. I just think if you’re lower income — one, you’re not as educated, two, they don’t understand how it works, they don’t understand how the systems work, they don’t understand the impact”.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-hamptons-fundraiser-20120708,0,4909639.story?track=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=56325

So just because you are a multi-millionaire or billionaire automatically means you are smarter, better educated and you understand things that none of the other 99% of can.

Your arrogance is showing.

Great comments Feisty, Ron and Dennis,

*NONE OF THE PROVISIONS in the so-called 'House Jobs Act' creates jobs.
HR 3630, touted as The Middle Class Tax Relief & Job Creation Act of 2011:

• "In addition to freezing federal workers' pay for three years, it requires issuance of a permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline in advance of the proposed routing by Nebraska, suspends the newly-issued mercury regulations and extends 100% expensing of business equipment (including private jets). Another so-called "jobs bill", HR 1938, was passed giving a November 1, 2011 deadline for the Keystone pipeline.
• With regard to unemployment insurance benefits, it cuts the 99-week maximum down to a 59-week maximum by mid-2012, allow states to drug-test UI recipients, and allow states to reduce state unemployment benefits and substitute federal funds. It also cuts funding for key provisions of the Affordable Care Act coming online, and adds the requirement to welfare payments that EBT cards cannot work in strip clubs, liquor stores and casinos.
• Provisions were included to auction more broadband spectrum and reclassify the 700mhz D Block as public safety broadband use only, which would be a huge payoff to Verizon Wireless lobbyists, who won that block with requirements that it remain open, after Google challenged the auction process.
• It would force Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to pay increased guarantee fees similar in scope to those due from large banks as a part of the Dodd-Frank Act, means-tests unemployment insurance benefits and food stamp programs and increases Federal employees' contributions to their retirement system by 1.5% while freezing pay, so their pensions take a double-whammy.
• Finally, it repeals the new timing rules for estimated corporate tax payments for companies with assets of $1 billion or more so that they can use payments of estimated taxes as a timing tool for fourth quarter profit declarations." (Karoli's Blo

Back when they were running for election in 2010, GOP said their #1 goal was to increase jobs. Speaker Boehner said "We're going to have a relentless focus on creating jobs." That turned out to be a lie.

Since President Obama was sworn in, not one piece of Republican legislation was intended to create jobs.
Who is in any doubt by now? Sabotaging our economic recovery while making life as difficult as possible for non-affluent Americans, has been the key GOP/Koch 2012 strategy since day one of President Obama's term 3.5 years ago.

Good Morning, another good weekend and here we go again.

Not a bad deal for someone who only works 9 days a month for full pay & benefits!

I say make them pay a portion of their Benefits, like most of us middle class do. This goes for all. Dems, and Reps and Independents.

Feisty, what about the 40 some bills that Senator Reid is blocking? Anything on that?

Concern Citizen - they will never talk about that. Their primary objective is to spread the Soros Media Matters drivel around whenever they have a chance. To actually discuss issues logically is above this lot.

Dennis,

The woman that was quoted attending the fundraiser was at the estate of Revlon chairman, Ronald Perelman's estate.

Now I am sure she had her nails done for this event. Does she talk like that to her manicurist in person?

Does her host know that she probably does not use Revlon products?

OPI should have a new nail color: Hampton rich red.

House Republicans are planning votes over the next four weeks to give Democrats heartburn

The GOP/Tea Tools the obstructionist Party of NO is at it again.....

...if it’s not threatening to obstruct unemployment benefits for people out of work caused by their economic policies during the Bush debacle, it's their opposition to the Economic Recovery Act, or Health Insurance Reform, or Cash for Clunkers or the Credit Card Holders Bill of Rights than it’s their desire TO DESTROY Social Security and Medicare all the while giving their rich, corporate, puppet masters obscene tax breaks.

If the GOP gets its way there will be a rich 1% and the once middle class will look like refugees in a third world country.

Keep it up republicans. That whoooosing sound you hear is people leaving the G.O.P.

Yes, I want Congress to give me a job. Maybe I can be a trash collector or street sweeper at the Federal park down the road? Or maybe I can be the money collector for the parking lot at the park? Jobs jobs jobs!

Just so everyone is clear - the "new" EPA mercury regs were written under Bush's EPA, but the effective date for compliance is only now approaching. Yes, we could delay or postpone the regs, but that would be creating a precedent (just like with the tax rates), that nothing can be implemented that might have a adverse economic impact during down economic times.

I see all the bots are forgetting that superobama extended the tax cuts last time, will probably do so again, kept gitmo open, kept the patriot act, but never mind, let's talk about the minority party because that's where the power is...

Grover will never let his lemmings vote for any tax increase on the 1%..............

You see Concern Citizen, the left doesn't care. The left is trying to frame the blockage of the "AJA" is a bad thing just on the title alone. They are wrong. The blockage is a good thing because this administration has no answers, only smoke and mirror attempts at covering up its incompetence. They gave a new meaning to "shovel ready" and "laser focus." This administration has been given too much leeway because of Hope and Change and has failed. I saw a promo for a movie that is extremely appropriate for this administration. It was for Resident Evil and the tag line is "No Hope Remains."

The left is trying to frame the words "forward and backward" to their definitions as one being bad and the other being good. Moving forward to continue down the precipice of failure after failure is a bad thing. A strategic withdrawal is called for here. It is evident to those with one ounce of intelligence that moving forward under this administration will further lead to a worse disaster. It would be like backing up the Titanic to hit the iceberg again.

Feisty, just so. On the same page.

We want all the jobs that GOP/Koch has been cutting and blocking since 2010, when they fooled their electorate by telling them that JOBS would be a priority.

GOP/Koch is hoping to slide "no-comment/no info" Romney by us, all the way till the election.

They figure candidate one-tenth-of- 1%-er Romney wins, he will sign off 100% on their agenda of slashing and burning on 98% of this country. He plans to give $5 Trillion in additional tax cuts to the wealthy, while slashing Education, ending planned parenthood, medicare, health care, medicaid, food stamps, Wall Street Reform, the EPA, and every kind of deregulation.

Romney is all about the Ryan budget. Ryan plans to cut Medicaid by 30%.

And what will wealthy Americans do if the Bush tax cuts are not extended? Well, we might take a look at what one wealthy (and prominent Democrat) American decided to do...

Denise Rich, the wealthy socialite and former wife of pardoned billionaire trader Marc Rich, has given up her U.S. citizenship - and, with it, much of her U.S. tax bill.

Rich, 68, a Grammy-nominated songwriter and glossy figure in Democratic and European royalty circles, renounced her American passport in November, according to her lawyer.

Another kick in the teeth to the Republicans by our President. Did you want him to extend tax cuts? Sure, not a problem, (as long as you make under 250,000 a year). Oh you say you make more than that? Sorry, your taxes are going up rich guys. I love it. Boy, the kicking and the screaming and rolling on the floor will start today. Good for our President. Help the lower classes who really need the tax break and make the well to do and obscenely rich (including Corporations) pay a fair tax.

OFFSHORE ROMNEY, WHERE ARE THOSE TAX RETURNS? HIDEN ACCOUNTS? IS HE A TAX CHEAT? GO TO JAIL, DO NOT PASS GO, HAVE A NICE STAY.

And this liar wants to be President? Give me a break.

OBAMA IN 2012.

It may not be possible to raise taxes on those whose income is more than 250000, without raising it on the middle class too, when today's GOP is considered. If raising the taxes on everyone who is able to pay federal income tax is O'bama's only option, then I day do it, and give the GOP full credit for forcing the issue.

@Rick

We produce and export very little in terms of supply which means industry has disappeared.

DON'T come at me with all that "union" BS because the industries that have had the most impact on our failing economy aren't unionized at all.

America's working men and women didn't engineer poor loans, cheat consumers, and transform financial institutions into giant casinos.

It is and always has been about greed. These so called executives are paid to do one thing well: INCREASE PROFITS AND SHAREHOLDER RETURNS. If that means they have to put Americans out of work, if they can send their production and service operations over seas to pay what is tantamount to slave wages, if they have to lie, cheat and steal, they do it and do it with impunity.

Adding insult to injury is that these executives get ENORMOUS salaries and bonuses for taking down our economy in the name of greed & profits for the top tier of their management and shareholders. If that's not Un-American, I don't know what is.

They use our tax money in the form of bail outs AFTER they've run their empire aground and the GOP IS OKAY WITH THAT? WOW! You republicans must dearly LOVE Corporate Welfare because, let's get real, Capitalism is GRATE (yes, GRATE...look it up) and the people working behind the scenes for little more and often less than a fair living wage. . .ehh. . .not so great. Do you HEAR YOURSELVES?

Feisty, quite a list of unimportant stuff the House has done since taking control. The GOPTP motto and bumper sticker should be Vote for us and Vote for ANYTHING BUT JOBS.

Ron, terrific post and questions. It is frustrating to watch the press fail to ask tough questions of Romney, to challenge his failure to answer when they do slip one into an interview. Schieffer is the exception. Tim Russert would be in his face but, then, I doubt Mitt Romney would have the courage to be interviewed by Tim Russert.

Backhouse, terrific post as well. Nothing like pointing out the sham/con that has been the GOPTP so-called jobs bills. The CBO estimated that President Obama's American Jobs Act would have created 2 million jobs but, hey, the GOP knew that passing it would interfere with their obstructionist tactics to cause further harm to the economy. Party First, and so what if the American people suffer from their decision that defeating President Obama was more important that helping the American people.

It looks like the liberal disinformation campaign of 2008 is back online for the 2012 elections. This tactic worked in 2012 because the opposition fell asleep at the wheel, but this time around you folks just may have gone to the well once too often.

I doubt very many voters will believe the man the Democrats are pimping this go is not the same guy who spent the last four years undermining this nation from within.

Try running on your record Barry; doubling down on the lies may seem like a better option right now, but the deer in headlights responses you see were not brought about by the radiance of the power and the glory that is you.

time to end Welfare for the Rich

Much like many of the supporters of the GOP/TP we see here everyday, the cons simply don't care for Romney. They simply don't want a democrat in office and especially not President Obama. If it is not his race, what is it about him that has fired up the GOP/TP in such a manner BEFORE he even took office.

This isn't about failed economics as the GNOP would want people to believe. They have been stuck on this agenda of ousting the president BEFORE he took office and has continued ever since.

There is no logical reason. Boehner says: “I’ll tell you this: 95% of the people that show up to vote in November are going to show up in that voting booth, and they are going to vote for or against Barack Obama. Mitt Romney has some friends, relatives and fellow Mormons ... some people that are going to vote for him. But that’s not what this election is about. This election is going to be a referendum on the president’s failed economic policies.” The GOP/TP folks made it clear from day one that they would do everything possible to prevent President Obama from winning a second term. They have tried to do this regardless of what it has done to the country and it's people. The results have been devastating against the people and it is time to send those jokers from the House packing before they do more damage.

As Feisty pointed out in the opening statement, all they try to do is to push their agenda and prevent anything and everything from the President and the democrats that would help the bulk of the people that voted for them.

This may come as a shock to the GOP/TP elected people in the House, but the vast majority of voters are NOT earning more than $200,000. There are a very few making that type of money. But they would rather shoot down a bill aimed to help the vast majority that voted for them rather than to cut off a tax break for the wealthiest benefactors that aid them in their campaign donations.

Let's stop the welfare for the rich and end this money give away to the over $250,000 crowd.

The GOPTP motto and bumper sticker should be Vote for us and Vote for ANYTHING BUT JOBS.

Now that you mention bumper stickers Jody - after reading the right wing rebuttal's above, it's clear their critical thinking skills don't extend to anything larger then what would fit one!

Lot's of no substance, knee jerk, one liners & nothing else! lol

For all of the RWNJ's hollering about Harry Reid blocking certain bills, for once, who don't you display a hint of honesty & tell us about all of the BS amendments they're loaded with?

*waves to Patty*

Sounds like someone could use a {{hug}} this morning honey!

More people filed for Social Security Disability last month than there were jobs "created" -- a step in the right direction.

The left is trying to frame the jobs issue as "created" and not "net" jobs. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that is total crap. It should be -- and is to those living in reality -- about the unemployment rate of 8.2%; the real unemployment rate of 14.9% (black unemployment rate at 14% and we "got your back" wink wink) not jobs created. The left has try to Houdini this into this direction because they know their argument will not fly in comparing the unemployment numbers of Gov. Romney and themselves.

If you notice the latest figures released on unemployment statistics, all the the states under a Republican governor -- especially those swept in in the 2010 election -- are dramatically better than their democrat counterparts. It is the Republican ideas and policies that have lead to that difference -- another reason the left can't touch the really good news on the unemployment front.

Of course Obama is committed to raising taxes. Economists agree it will have absolutely no significant impact on reducing the deficit. Our taxes were high enough as it was. Why is he doing this you ask? It is political theater. He is trying to sell this from the point of view that millionaires and billionaires don't need a tax cut. If you are earning $250,000 a year you are nowhere close to being a millionaire. This is not sound economic policy. This is an attempt to rouse independents, who don't make that kind of money, to vote for him. In the end, the tax cuts will curb spending and worsen he economy. We don't have a tax issue. We have a spending issue. This is a defining moment for Obama. If he goes through with this he will have shown no interest in cutting spending to reduce the deficit.

Money, says the proverb, makes money. When you have got a little, it is often easy to get more. The great difficulty is to get that little - Adam Smith Wealth of Nations

There are the deserving poor who can really use some of this money which has been given away to those rich who don't need it and don't deserve it.

Feisty.....You know what the Obama bumper sticker should say for 2012? It is STILL not my fault!

Dennis - if you had to bet money, would you bet that younger people and poorer people are typically more, less, or exactly the same educated as wealthy people?

I'm not saying that different people deserve more or less voting power, but I do think that she is probably correct. (although it makes her sound ridiculous)

"During that time period, George W. Bush presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades;"

Typical biased reporting using biased studies. The main measure of the economy is Gross Domestic Product, and here are the records since Reagan;

Reagan = 83.85% increase

Bush 1 = 24.63% increase in 4 years

Clinton = 57.34% increase

Bush 2 = 46.56% increase

Obama = 4.86% increase in 3 years

How about we base the amount of a tax break corporations and wealthy people receive on the number of jobs they create with those tax cuts? Sounds like a sensible plan to me, but I guess the mega wealthy would never do the right thing, never have yet, so I don't really expect them to start.

It is about time he raised taxes on those making over 250K. After all, his "absolutely not a tax" Tax, raised taxes on the middle class and low income people. Why should he just be bleeding the low income people dry? I mean, who else is going to be hit by that penalty/tax for not having insurance other than people who can't afford it. So now that he has raised tons of taxes on the lower income people, he needs to tax those rich.

I hope in November we re-elect Bush err umm Obama. Same difference I guess. Of course we could always go for Hope and Change and elect Romney. But will Romney be any better than the garbage we have had for the past 20 years?

If the left is so concerned about the tax cuts for all being extended, you really need to lobby about seven Democrat senators who will probably not fold to pressure from this heavy-handed mafioso-like administration and support another temporary extension. Your time is wasted on here. It won't be the Republicans who bring this about, it will be democrats. Sleep well.

It is not up to the president to create jobs!

This is up to congress to create a jobs bill that will help the American people.

What they will not do is present a bill that is just for job creation and not fill it with a ton of pork.

The game that they are playing on the hill is killing this nation and WE THE PEOPLE are paying for it.

The bottom line is it is not up to Obama to create jobs so lets put the blame where it goes, our fine elected congress is playing games with us on both sides of the fence.

Obama ,The middle class does not need money in the bank all they need is each other .Romney 2012

Harry Reid is a Mormon!! Forget?

I have no idea what you're talking about..?

Is he running for President?

If you think raising the top tax rate from 35% to 39% will bring in som much money as to solve all our problems i have a bridge to sell you.

The Bush tax cuts DID help get us out of the last recession that took place at the beginning of his first term, which is what they were designed to do. They have not helped much since then because the tax rates have been the same since then, meaning businesses have nothing to look forward to, they either will have the same tax rate or a higher one, no one is talking about lowering their taxes.

Also Bush tax cuts wre ACROSS the board, so getting rid of them will also raise rates on everyone who pays taxes which is just over half the country. Add that with the now TAX penalty of Obamacare and you have a poor country being taxed to death. Read Robin Hood liberals, he didn't steal from the rich and give to the poor, he stole from the government who was taxing everyone poor, and gave it back to those who earned it to begin with.

Rick-3416939

There is just nothing like spending more borrowed money on municipal and government jobs.

Spending borrowed money seemed to work pretty well for Ronald Reagan. That's how Saint Ronald of Reagan got the country out of the recession it was in during the Carter years.

Pigotry

Money makes money, when you have a little, you are going to make more. The problem is - it is hard to get that little.

There are the deserving poor who can really use some of this money which has been given away to those rich who don't need it and don't deserve it.

Honestly, you are being played masterfully by the great puppeteer, Obama. Wake up and see this for what it really is, a divisive message of class envy and an attempt to distract you from his abismal failures. This used to be a nation of people with aspirations of becoming successful. It seems to be progressing into a nation of whiny, jealous wimps who want the government to take care of them. Blechhhh....

Just remember that the GNOP can't handle facts....

THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

Both repub and demo job bills are loaded with amendments, that's a weak excuse fiesty. But most of your excuses are. Both parties are blocking this country, and you'll only show understanding when you finally admit that your party is part of the problem too.

Aw look - Obama is going all republican and now calls for tax cuts.

THis is just what you libbies were looking for out of your guy, right?

Obama=Bush with a different hair cut.

Wonder what he'll say about them job numbers today?

Why should we continue to talk about health care if this subject has been settled. Its constitutional, studies show it saves states money and will adjust the cost of health care, polls show people either want it or want to improve it, where only a minority of about 30% want it gone because they dont know whats in it. Great job by the president to propose this tax cut extension for one year for those under $250k. I hope this time he sticks to his guns and doesnt cave on this one like he did before in hopes of a compromise on other areas. But i do think $250k is not the same in the CA, NY, and MA as it is in AL, TN or SC so maybe an adjustment to the amount earned in a year should be debated.

It is not up to the president to create jobs!

This is up to congress to create a jobs bill that will help the American people.

Actually, it is up to business to create jobs. I have not seen any instances where a president or congress is very good at creating permanent jobs. Capitalism does that. From an economic stand point raising taxes makes no sense. From a political stand point, for a democrat, I suppose it appears to.

Gee, I still don't see no Job creations and the cuts have been running for 11 years when do you think it will start to work? When we are all dead and gone GOOD job REPUBLICAN'T.

Alex, I have to agree, both parties are to blame.

LogicReguired

The Bush tax cuts DID help get us out of the last recession that took place at the beginning of his first term, which is what they were designed to do

Yeah. Tax cuts and deficit spending. The spending on two unfunded wars did wonders for the economy -- if you were a defense contractor during the Bush years. If you were a U.S. soldier or an Iraqi civilian at the time, it didn't help quite so much.

When will uninformed Democrats understand that we don't have a tax problem - we have a spending problem. Taxes for EVERYBODY is too high but understand that Bush had an average deficit of about $300-$400 Billion per year - Obama has a deficit of $1.5 TRILLION per year!! So Obama borrows FOUR TIMES what Bush did?!?!? And THEN says raising taxes is needed to cover the deficit.

But anybody with the IQ at least 10 points above a turnip and does just a LITTLE research realizes that the tax increases Obama is proposing on the "wealthy" will bring in less than $100 Billion a year in additional tax revenue (and that is assuming no negative affect the economy which, again, any intelligent person knows will have significant negative affect on the economy).

So let's assume Obama got this tax increase approved then does that resolve the deficit? Not even close. So we borrow $1.4 Trillion instead of $1.5 Trillion. Big whoop!! I got a deal for you. Cut $1.4 Trillion in spending so we are only short $100 Billion and I'll be the FIRST person to approve changes in taxes to make up the difference but any intelligent person knows (we have seen this before) that increasing taxes NEVER cut spending or the deficit. It is simply more money to spend and THEN government will ask for more.

Once this president shows he has some restraint from reckless spending THEN we can talk about tax increases but this president has no plan on the economy, no deficit spending, no jobs plan, no spending cuts plan, and no plan on how to actually run a country. Until we have a president that gives a damn about the people and the people's money no more tax increases.

A lot of people have the talent but not the money to achieve the American Dream and also help re-invent America, but the Bush tax cut gives that money away to those who don't need it and don't deserve it. It's a waste. Wasting money is a crime. Time to indict Bush for this crime.

Remember the words of the sage of capitalism - a sound money policy can really help -

Money, says the proverb, makes money. When you have got a little, it is often easy to get more. The great difficulty is to get that little - Adam Smith Wealth of Nations

zeropointfield

Actually, it is up to business to create jobs.

Wrong. It's up to business to create wealth, the goal of businesses is to make a profit while employing the fewest workers possible. How can you be pro-capitalism and not know that?

nomoresameo -- For Democrats this election is about the failed policies of the GOP we are still struggling to overcome. They ran up debt, decimated the economy and then went and hid, taking no responsibility for their actions. Election time comes around and they come out from under their rocks or emerge from their tunnels and think people have forgotten what they did. WE HAVEN'T.

Vote the Republicans out.

Concern Citizen-856329

Good Morning, another good weekend and here we go again.

Not a bad deal for someone who only works 9 days a month for full pay & benefits!

I say make them pay a portion of their Benefits, like most of us middle class do. This goes for all. Dems, and Reps and Independents.

Feisty, what about the 40 some bills that Senator Reid is blocking? Anything on that?

This is an easy one, the 40 bills blocked by the Senate are the bills that where mentioned earlier that does nothing to create jobs or forward the interest of the middle and lower class. All they do is pander to the Republican Rich. If it where not for the Senate doing thier job to protect all Americans, the House would be passing garbage all day long. Even so, I am sure the President would have used his Veto power to block the House Republican not American peoples agenda bills.

These discussions are getting more boring everyday. Don't you people get sick of copying and pasting the same B.S. everyday?

It's not a "tax cut" it's an "endentured servant waiver". With more regulation, more government programs, and more government spending we all are becoming endentured servants, so why not call it that? It's kind of like saying that the Obamacare tax wasn't a tax, but a penalty for choosing not to participate. Well it was a tax, but a penalty tax- or a waiver penalty- or a waiver until you need it tax.

One question: Why did Harry Reid say it would be "silly" to vote on a Congressional budget when it is one of the primary directives of their jobs? Why isn't anyone at all concerned that Congress has yet to pass a budget in over 1,000 days?!

Spending borrowed money seemed to work pretty well for Ronald Reagan. That's how Saint Ronald of Reagan got the country out of the recession it was in during the Carter years.

Spending borrowed money, really? It wasn't those huge TAX CUTS that helped? Of course he had to do some spending of borrowed money, after all his budgets were passed by a democrat controlled congress.

Feistyredhead- In response to your bias comment, ALL of you on this panel are jealous of Mitt Romney's wealth, what about all the Liberal Left who are RICH like Mitt.? Oh THEY don't count right? Second of all Mitt used his own money to build himself up what did Obama do but use tax payers money which was flushed down the toilet with the green energy companies that went under like Solyndra and many others that went bankrupt. All the tax payers $$$$$$ wasted. You are such a hypocrite lady.!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Houston! says, "Spending borrowed money seemed to work pretty well for Ronald Reagan. That's how Saint Ronald of Reagan got the country out of the recession it was in during the Carter years."

So what you are really drawing for a conclusion is that a Republican President, Ronald Reagan knew where to spend to get the country out of a recession. Regan added 1.6 trillion to our national debt in 8 years. Where Obama having already spent almost 6 trillion needs more time? Or could your conclusion be that Obama has no clue what he is doing?

You and your DNC PACs can keep trying to collapse my comments, but I will keep posting

Personally, I would like to see you tattoo it on your forehead!

I could care less...

You are such a hypocrite lady.!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Feel better now? lol

Maybe you & Patty could give each other a hug! You'll sure got your panties in a bunch!

What a bunch of angry birds swarming around here this morning! lol

Pro Business -- We have a REVENUE problem. Dave Camp(R), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee said as much recently in the WSJ. We need revenues to be around 19% and we are somewhere in the range of 16%. Obama is correct in calling for ending the tax breaks for some.

We could also demand Camp and company end the loophole for carried interest.

Don't_Carry_it_All.................. Your statement #1.63 is spot on.

Not only do we need to re-elect Obama, we need to send the worthless GOP from the House to the unemployment line to see how they like it.

I knew before I looked that Feisty would be the first one to throw her 2 cents in.

Jim in Houston--you are so right! There's been a bumper crop of class warfare, blame and jealousy the past few years all lead by the liberals.

Things you should know about Mitt Romney:

Under Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts manufacturing declined by double the national rate, and was the third-worst overall in the country.

Governor Romney left behind a $1 billion budget deficit for the next governor and saddled Massachusetts taxpayers with more debt per person than any other state.

During Romney’s term as governor, state budget spending increased every single year.

The Washington Post reports that as CEO, Mitt Romney advised companies that were “pioneers” in outsourcing jobs overseas. As governor, Romney drew from the same playbook and outsourced state jobs. And today, Romney has proposed eliminating all taxes on companies’ foreign profits—which would actually encourage companies to send jobs overseas

Jobs. 47th out of 50 states in job creation

Taxes and Fees. Increased by $750 million per year.

Long term debt. Increased more than $2.6 billion.

Bain Capital recently bought a Chinese video-surveillance company reportedly “used to intimidate and monitor political and religious dissidents,” and Cisco “has marketed its routers to China specifically as a tool of repression.

Romney is still paid by Bain Capital.
Here's how a Romney style equity predation works;

1. Uses his position to get 'investment' money that isn't his own so he can;

2. Buy up companies with 'invested' money to wring a profit from;

3. Squeeze out profits by cutting costs, i.e. destroying employees lives by firing workers and the alleviation benefits including pensions;

4. Using the company as collateral to borrow money from banks and deducting that interest from the taxes, showing a falsely inflated profit for that company;

5. Getting the company to pay a special dividend to repay the original investors and a bonus for himself. Everything from here on out is gravy;

6. They sell the now 'profitable' company for more than they paid an pocket 20% of the gains from the sale, capital gains that they pay a lower tax rate on. That's the scam, because the lower rate is supposed to be an incentive for people to risk their own money to improve the state of the nation.

The worst thing about these folks who game the tax code is that you and I wind up paying for the unemployment or retraining or pension replacement or making up for their interest deductions.

That's what Romney did at Bain, move the burden of the financial game onto the backs of common folk who don't like a fixed game, folks like you and me.

IS THIS THE GUY YOU WANT AS POTUS?

Watching the Sunday talk shows, I, once again, thought to myself "we need new pundits." The current crop of over-paid bloviaters on TV are way out of touch with America. When they diss healthcare reform, I just want to ask them: do you not have any relatives who work in jobs that don't provide health insurance? No nieces or nephews who are carpenters, daycare teachers, waiters or retail clerks? No one in the family that is self-employed, even a professional, and who tells you about how expensive private insurance is and how high their deductible is?

Gee, I still don't see no Job creations and the cuts have been running for 11 years when do you think it will start to work? When we are all dead and gone GOOD job REPUBLICAN'T.

If lowering taxes does not create jobs then raising them won't create jobs. It won't reduce the deficit to any degree that makes any difference either. Then what is the purpose for raising taxes again? Raising taxes is designed solely to placate liberal democrats so he can energize his base in time for November. Again, this is nothing more than political theater.

Here is a really good article on why increasing taxes will not help the economy or reduce the deficit.
http://www.american.com/archive/2011/august/obamasfollytaxingtherich/

Job1 wrote:

Let's stop the welfare for the rich and end this money give away to the over $250,000 crowd.

So thanks Job1 for exposing the fundamental logic flaw of you and other liberals; and you managed to do it all by your lonesome self. IT'S THEIR MONEY TO BEGIN WITH, NOT THE GOVERNMENT GIVING IT TO THEM!

Good Lord. I'm waiting for the village to call to reclaim their idiot...

Logic Required. -- Reagan then turned around and had to RAISE TAXES several times because it dawned on a few more level headed people that they needed REVENUE.

Well kiddies the "job creators" can keep their @#$&*(@#&(@(#*(# Tax cuts if they'll just do THEIR job and create the some jobs for the rest of the country.

If not, then I say end their tax breaks, ALLLLLLL their tax breaks. Tell Romney to bring his money home from the Caymens and Switzerland and keep it in the USA where it can help the USA.

My tax plan:

END ALL TAX BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHY (defined as more than $250,000 in household income).

TAX THOSE MAKING $250K+ at 45% (they can afford it)

TAX COMPANIES WHO SEND JOBS OVERSEAS

TAX GOODS MANUFACTURED OVERSEAS BY US COMPANIES

TAX INCOME FROM OFF-SHORE BANK ACCOUNTS AT 50% until they are brought back into the US.

Now, if you're like me, NONE of these reverse tax incentives will affect me. My wife and I make a lot less than $250K a year, in fact less than $100K a year. I don't have any money overseas. I try to buy US made goods when I can and I'm not enjoying any of the tax breaks currently enjoyed by the 1% of even the top 15%.

I'm not whining. My wife and I live quite comfortably on our modest household income. No, we don't drive luxury cars, we don't owe multiple houses and we don't take ski vacations in Vail or winter in Florida. But we live very well and have more than 90% of the folks on this planet.

NOBODY needs a 50 room mansion (unless they are operating a bed and breakfast) NOBODY NEEDS to drive a Mercedes or a other high priced car and NOBODY needs to own multiple homes all over the globe.

We should be addressing the needs of the lowest levels of the working poor. When everybody has what they truly NEED, then those who have more can enjoy it. Until then, they need to pay their fair share. I'm looking at you KOCH brothers!

Am I a commie? No!

Am I a socialist? No!

In fact I'm not even a Christian! (gasp)

I simply believe it is wrong for the 1% to live in excessive, obscene, luxury while children go to bed hungry and those willing to work cannot find jobs. It is WRONG for millions of Americans to go without proper medical aid or a clean, safe place to live while 1% of the population lives like kings and queens.

We all count or nobody counts!

Obama/Biden 2012

If you think raising the top tax rate from 35% to 39% will bring in som much money as to solve all our problems i have a bridge to sell you.

The Bush tax cuts DID help get us out of the last recession that took place at the beginning of his first term, which is what they were designed to do. They have not helped much since then because the tax rates have been the same since then, meaning businesses have nothing to look forward to, they either will have the same tax rate or a higher one, no one is talking about lowering their taxes.

Also Bush tax cuts wre ACROSS the board, so getting rid of them will also raise rates on everyone who pays taxes which is just over half the country. Add that with the now TAX penalty of Obamacare and you have a poor country being taxed to death. Read Robin Hood liberals, he didn't steal from the rich and give to the poor, he stole from the government who was taxing everyone poor, and gave it back to those who earned it to begin with.

• !

#1.49 - Mon Jul 9, 2012 10:01 AM EDT

Bush ended a recession? That is NOT true, he caused the current depression. His policies almost caused a complete melt down of the economy, and you want to continue those policies on steroids? I watched the strong economy Clinton left be destroyed by Bush's regressive policies. The only way to fix the economy is the return the tax rates to Clinton levels, not hope the failed economics will work at last.

Yeah. Tax cuts and deficit spending. So deficit spending is ok during a recession only when a democrat is in power? Bush's deficit spending was a drop in the bucket compared to Obamas and got results.

The spending on two unfunded wars did wonders for the economy -- if you were a defense contractor during the Bush years. So you were for America doing nothing after the largest attack on American soil? Is that Obama's stance as well?

If you were a U.S. soldier or an Iraqi civilian at the time, it didn't help quite so much. Are you talking about the record number of VOLUNTEER SOLDIERS we had? And are you talking about the Iraq civilians who we found in the many mass graves filled by their mass murdering dictator? Or maybe you're talking about the Iraq Civilians who were being tortured in prison, the women being raped and killed by Saddams sons, maybe those are the Iraq civilians you care so much about. No you only care about a dead Iraqi if it was an American involved, mass killings don't matter to you unless you can somehow use it against America, which is why you were so silent about Iraqi suffering while Saddam was murdering them.

I not too crazy about Romney myself, but I do know one thing with Romney and the GOP I'll keep my freedom that I've known for the past 60 years not what Obama's selling.

Nothing screams middle-class more then Willard in the Hamptons!

1.7

TexasT-2966501

I see Axelrod's minions were running a little late this morning. So the best you all could come up this weekend is to bash a rich man again? Wow! It's really sad when the President cannot run on his own record.

Returning the tax base to pre Bush is not bashing.

You won't starve.

You won't be without your"rich" perks.

You'll be a fair contributor in the country where you live.

The whining is pathetic.

The Affordable Health Care Act is off the radar because all the hundreds of millions of dollars gambled by Karl Rove to spread misinformation has misfired. The true facts are starting to be understood and the GOP will pivot swiftly away as voters weigh the advantages against unspecified alternatives.

One young man in my office got a refund check from his insurance company last week because he remained healthy last year. My 24 year old is back on my policy. Thank God I do not have to worry about getting coverage after a couple of incidents that occured to me during the last decade.

It is the law; live with it; amend as necessary. It is far from the evil that Rove portrayed it to be.

The problem, for me, with the arbitrary $250,000 cut off, is that you're lumping together someone with a really good job (maybe they've been working somewhere for a long time, or maybe they work like 2,000 hours a year) making a $250,000 salary with Lebron James, Warren B., Bill Gates, Tiger Woods, etc. as opposed to someone who makes $10,000 less...?!?!

I don't know where people get the $250,000 number from, but I think it is a bit low. Especially if you consider the fact that someone making $250,000 a year gets probably $150,000 after taxes, then has to pay for ALL of their childrens' education because they're "rich"

AMY. Your post #1.76 is so true.

If we really wanted to get things moving in the right direction in this country, we'd have to have elected officials in the same situations as the average American that they are supposed to represent. We don't.

How fast do you suppose a congressperson would enact a bill to lower taxes if they earned $50,000 or less?

How many would be on board to stabilize Medicare/Medicaid if their lives depended on it rather than an enormous pension such as a golden parachute that prevents their feet from touching ground after they leave office?

How many jobs do you suppose the House would try to create if their family depended on them?

1.84

I'm amazed and irritated by your juvenile name-calling.

Let's see, the job numbers continue to suck, I have not done ANYTHING but blame and campain, can't get the senate to pass a budget in 3 years, my hometown is leading the country in murders, and I passed the biggest tax increase in history on the middle class, but I promise the next 4 years will be better. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

So thanks Job1 for exposing the fundamental logic flaw of you and other liberals; and you managed to do it all by your lonesome self. IT'S THEIR MONEY TO BEGIN WITH, NOT THE GOVERNMENT GIVING IT TO THEM!

You have put your finger on the red button issue of our time. Democrats just can't understand that one simple fact. That is the tax and spend mentality. It is the redistribution of wealth for a so called better society. The only problem is we don't get a better society in exchange. Again, we do not have a tax issue, we have a spending issue.

Just a few of the supposed "jobs bills" that have passed in the House and submitted to the Senate.

H.R. 872, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act

H.R. 910, the Energy Tax Prevention Act

H.J.Res. 37, a Resolution of disapproval regarding the FCC’s regulation of the Internet and broadband industry practices

H.R. 4, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act

The majority of the bills passed by the Republican House are tax cuts and deregulation bills with no direct connection to job growth, just a rehash of the same message they always have. "If we just help corporations make a little more money everything will fix itself."

The Bush tax cuts resulted in the most pitiful private sector job growth in modern history. The only way the Bush administration was able to maintain any sort of respectable job numbers was through public sector job growth, the rights dreaded "GOVERNMENT JOBS". By denying appropriations to pay for public sector jobs the Republicans have created this level of unemployment along with the proud members of the Chamber of Commerce. Taxes are already low, lower than when the Obama administration took over, and all I hear from the right is they must be lower. How low is low enough? Why would corporations hire more if they can make record profits without hiring? Lower taxes and remove any checks and balances provided through regulations and still the question remains, why would they hire?

Only $71 million for Obama last month?

Nomoresameo - this month that check of yours better be HUGE.

So golly gang, why is Obama king of the cash back on '08, getting pummeled?

TAX THOSE MAKING $250K+ at 45% (they can afford it)

Are you serious. Have you ever taken an economics course in college? If we did that you would see an economy contract so fast it would make your head spin. It would make the recession an order of magnitude worse. Please, research this stuff before you vote in November.

Logic Required. -- Reagan then turned around and had to RAISE TAXES several times because it dawned on a few more level headed people that they needed REVENUE.

Don't carry it all, - Try doing some research for a change. REVENUE under Reagan went up despite the tax cuts. The government as usual was getting more money every year but was spending at a faster pace then it was receiving even with the EXTRA revenue that was coming in. Reagan did raise taxes to try and curb the deficit spending, but only after the economy had turned around and was growing at a very good pace. Obama has done nothing that can be compared to Reagan other then maybe Amnesty for illegals.

Have the Bush Tax Cuts worked?

Take a look at our stagnant economic growth rate and our pitiful jobs numbers. Then look at record corporate profits and revenues coupled with record layoffs. The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy are not the only problem, but are a portion of it, and you have to start somewhere.,

Notwithstanding, the Bush Tax cuts also reduce taxes for middle class Americans, that is something I agree with, the middle class needs to have more spendable cash in times of recession to assist with recovery

Amazed and Irritated-Now just stop what you are doing. Stop making cogent and logical arguments that make sense. Just who do you think you are?

Great post by the way!

Patty-

'Feisty' and 'Tyler' work in the same office. How else do you think she ALWAYS gets on the board first? She couldn't possibly be just sitting there waiting, could she? That would be kinda sick.

Guessing I'll be 'banned' for this comment.

Feisty -

Nothing screams middle-class more then Willard in the Hamptons!

I'm sure you said the same thing about John Kerry, John Edwards, and Ted Kennedy. Typical know-nothing, liberal water carrying, hypocrite.

When are all you government jobs lovers going to realize that those are not sustainable without private sector growth?

While Obama tries to reduce deficit spending through repeal of tax cuts on millionaires, the Republicans want to increase the national debt by repealing and NOT replacing the ACA. This will insure that the US continues to have the most undeveloped health system of the industrialized nations.

Feisty -

Nothing screams middle-class more then Willard in the Hamptons!

I'm sure you said the same thing about John Kerry, John Edwards, and Ted Kennedy. Typical know-nothing, liberal water carrying, hypocrite.

When are all you government jobs lovers going to realize that those are not sustainable without private sector growth?

Hey Skippy -- Did you know that your favorite bailout success story -- General Motors -- makes 70% of it's vehicles (that's 7 out of 10 for the libs that are mathematically challenged) over seas????? Hey and they still owe us (U.S. taxpayers $30 billion) so you want to raise taxes on imports there?????

Bush tax cut has led to the WORST budget deficit ever in US history.

Our infrastructure needs rebuilt including our communications infrastructure. If the GOP were really serious they would have gone along with the President's proposal to begin working on rebuilding it. Instead Congress has done all it could to bloke any type of legislation to address the most important backbone of any country, its infrastructure. It is time to vote these clowns out of office and replace them with people who will act for the betterment of this country. Get rid of the tax breaks and let's get down to business.

Romney should and must come clean on his hidden offshore bank accounts. He keeps his mouth shut on how he would fix the economy and get Americans back to work. Of course we have the priviledge of seeing Mittens enjoying a lush vacation which is way beyond the means of the 99% club. Does it not seem Romney is un-American with his secretive bank accounts, lack of detail on how much wealth he has stashed away, lack of paying taxes to OUR economy but has no problem depositing money in other countries. As for the wealthy earning the money all on their own I have reservations with this claim. If you will look closely most if not all made their fortunes from corporate welfare and/or government contracts that you and I would never have access to. Enough is enough even of the cry baby Boner.

Unemployment Rate Dropped In Every State That Elected A Republican Gov. In 2010

If Republicans had such bad ideas why is it these ideas are working in every state they are being tried? And why is states being ran by Democrats are in such bad shape, much like the country which is ran by democrats. Argue all you want to, results speak louder then your talking points and class warfare.

fagetaboutit! Just let the stupid, budget busting, deficit increasing Bush tax cuts lapse for EVERYONE! Than take ALL the revenue from Bush taxcut lapse and put toward the deficit for the next 12 years. DUH!

DontCarryItAll: You really can't be that naive can you? Obama is spending money like a sailor on leave. This is not a revenue problem. This is a spending problem.

Federal government spending has typically stayed between 18% and 22% for over six decades. In 2008 (the last year of the Bush administration) Federal spending was at 20.8%. 2009 (first Obama year) it was 25.2%. 2010 was 24.1%. 2011 was 24.1%. 2012 projected at 24.3%. BTW, Economists say a country cannot sustain itself when the Federal Government spends 25% of their entire GDP. We are there.

So stop with the "we have a Revenue problem". That is like a spouse going on a spending spree buying new shoes, purses, new car, and cruise then blaming their debt on her husband because he is not "making enough". NO!! You MUST spend within your means. This president has a spending problem. You could tax everybody making $100,000 or more 100% and STILL not have enough to cover this president's spending problem.

DumbFux...Barry's failure at creating jobs is not your best talking point!

Kardashian.... and the President is also a much better liar than carrot top!

I think Americans need to step back and look at this number very closely. "250K or less?"...Frankly, that number should drop by at least 100K. IMO, this push is more symbolic than anything and will only prove to promote some twisted class war. Let's be smart about this...how many Americans are we actually talking about that make more that 250K. How big is the pool of earners...And what real impact would it have in bringing in more revenue. I don't know too many people that make 150K a year let alone 250K a year...You want to really help the middle class...then lower that 250K number...bring it down to 150K, so those Congressmen/women who are overpaid can start paying into the pot as well. Lord knows they make too much money for what they do...which is absolutely nothing.

Probusiness,

How much of the 2 unfunded wars, tax cuts, and medicare part D were part of Bush's deficit? Let me help you, NONE. He never put the costs on his books. Obama despite the fact it wasn't his spending "took the spending out of the dark", and put them on the books..Changes your facts, just a little , huh? Then you talk about reckless spending..Another falicy. Under Obama, spending has had the smallest increase of any recent Presidency..Quit spreading lies..

Wrong. It's up to business to create wealth, the goal of businesses is to make a profit while employing the fewest workers possible. How can you be pro-capitalism and not know that?

Actually, it does both. You can't create wealth without creating a successful business. A successful business is one that is profitable and one that grows. To do that will create permanent jobs and prosperity. Companies like Staples, Apple, Microsoft, etc., are decent examples of how this works. The profit these corporations generate helps to build capital and investment in other companies that also build wealth and create jobs. People often forget that our entire private retirement system is built on the success of corporations. I for one want them to make huge profits so my retirement investments grow. I do not intend to work until I die.

Amy - we definitely need new pundits for Sunday morning. However, I was seeing shades of Sarah Palin in Bobby Jindal when he refused to answer the question asked and went back to his GOP talking points. It was almost funny.

skip - great post.

trilliondollar - luckily you don't speak for MOST people.

And, to whoever posted it, no one with any common sense is jealous of Mitt Romney. He is an empty suit with no personality and few true friends. He can't relate to anyone but Anne and absolutely no one wants to be around him. I'll take my income and friends any day over the empty, vacuous Mitt. But to those of you who worship this man - and it appears some on this site do - how very sad you have such small lives you'd want this shell of a man to represent you.

Obama/Biden 2012

fagetaboutit! Just let the stupid, budget busting, deficit increasing Bush tax cuts lapse for EVERYONE! Than take ALL the revenue from Bush taxcut lapse and put toward the deficit for the next 12 years. DUH!

You couldn't pull Obamacare out of red ink with that revenue, let alone Social Security, Medicare, medicaid, ect...., ect....

The Bush tax cuts DID help get us out of the last recession that took place at the beginning of his first term, which is what they were designed to do. They have not helped much since then because the tax rates have been the same since then, meaning businesses have nothing to look forward to, they either will have the same tax rate or a higher one, no one is talking about lowering their taxes

The Bush tax cuts acted as a brake against the economy. The recession was caused by inefficient use of money - too much put into companies where the business plan meant shipping bags of dogfood all over the country. So you have venture capitalists and Wall Street to thank for that. But the internet revolution was for real. It let to massive increases in productivity which really got the economy humming, till, you guessed it, Wall Street destroyed it by gambling again, this time on housing, because like, y'know, housing never goes down in price.

If you think raising the top tax rate from 35% to 39% will bring in som much money as to solve all our problems i have a bridge to sell you.

You really don't understand much about economics, do you?

If you allow a poor person to have an extra dollar, he uses it to buy necessities. This money is used to employ poor and middle-class workers. The dollar this guy paid gets distributed to them, who then have more money to spend on necessities, and that one dollar goes a long distance.

If you allow a rich person a dollar, it goes to Wall Street where it is used to play trading games against other rich people, or hatch schemes which end up in the sort of debacles that have happened twice in the last 13 years.

Let me offer you a little experiment. Find a poor person and ask him what he would do with an extra 100 dollars. Now find a rich person and ask him what he would do with an extra 10,000 dollars. You will see that the poor person has a practical answer. The rich person's answer will usually be of the form "I will invest it", which in today's terms means giving it to a Wall Street firm. See above about that.

The bottom line is that average rich people aren't very smart. They don't really know what to do with money. They just know that they want it.

Yes, there are real entrepreneurs and real business folk who do have some idea, but they are as likely to be middle class or poor as they are to be rich. Since there are many more poor and middle class people, the best ideas are mostly in the lower 99%. If you have a strong social net, these people will feel empowered to take risks. If you have a weak social net it's much harder to take the risk. Many of these risk takers will fail, but the few that make it will completely turn around society. This is the American story and it happened because America was a lot more socialist - people could take risks and know that if they fell flat on the faces, they could just pick themselves up and try again. But we have got rid of welfare, our healthcare is now so expensive that you have to have an employer pay for it. Those days are gone and as a consequence India and China are starting to emerge as the places where it now happens.

These are the very real costs of President Bush's tax cuts. Add in a few wars that were kept off the books till Obama came into office and you will understand why today we are where we are.

Let's elect Romney - more tax cuts and another war with Iran.

Intellect @ comment 106, Its true that one of our most important needs is investment in infrastructure. Its also true the republicans have blocked a lot of useful legislation in the past 3 years; but let us not forget the "genius" responsible for the faux filibuster. Yes that "shining light" who orchestrated the idea that the threat to filibuster was the equal of an actual filibuster, none other than Harry Reid.

So the republicans jump on a democrat idea and basically punk them out for 3 years, and the democrats do nothing but whine about it. Don't worry though; you see, there's a group out there every bit as hypocritical as the democrats. They're called republicans. You know, those guys who came up with the health care mandate, only to renounce it when a democrat president embraced it.

I am so sick of these Republicans spewing their incessant tax cut benefit nonsense. It’s been going on for decades.

“Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.” - Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.” - Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.” - Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill

OH WAIT!!!! These were all quotes from John F. Kennedy. Why would anyone listen to him, he didn’t know what he was talking about, obviously.

1960’s “Ask not what your country can do for you”
2000’s “Give us free stuff and make the rich taxpayers foot the bill”
You’ve come along way Libbies.

I don't know too many people that make 150K a year let alone 250K a year...You want to really help the middle class...then lower that 250K number...bring it down to 150K,

Depending on where you live 150K may seem like a lot of money, but in most cities a household that makes 150K is not on easy street. My wife and I almost make together 150K a year and we have three kids and a home. Our home is in a middle class neighborhood that is full of teachers and mid level business people. We struggle to get all our bills paid, between mortgage, daycare, insurance, food and clothing, and our energy / water costs have all continued to go up and you think taking MORE of my money will help the ECONOMY??? You might just be helping put more people in foreclosure and bankruptcy. Try living in New York, San Diego, Los Angeles, on $250k a year with a wife and kids and see how good you got it. Not everyone lives in Kansas or Montana where homes are $50k, most live in cities where homes start at 200K in smaller cities and 500K for larger ones.

Can someone tell me what the formerly democratic party controlled congress did during Obama's first two years? I'll answer that for you.....Nothing. The same thing that the current democratic Senate has done....Nothing. Obama can't run on his record so let's find ways to divide people further. My dry cleaner makes over 250K a year and would hardly call him wealthy. He worked his way up from immigrant to owning 3 small dry cleaning shops. He has a steady group of loyal employees and now his reward for working hard....pay more taxes to support a bloated government bent on handing out money to freeloaders.

@SeekingSanity (SS) --

do you know how pathetic you sound. You focus on semantics instead of the message. But, you're a good little small minded democrat! How petty - how idiotic - how democrat!

Sen. Barack Obama, March 2006
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here’. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

This tax cut BS means nothing. Nobody that makes over $250,000 needs Bushwacker era tax break. Just like magic underwear man, they bank over seas and shuffle money to not pay any tax anyway. Unless Obama goes after Bush and Cheney for lying us into war, goes after defense contractors and other crooks who entitle themselves to 10s of millions of tax dollars, freezes their bank accounts and throws them in jail the $ disparity will grow. Obama and the republicans are still signing free trade treaties. These elitist spawn will not be happy until Americans are all working for a bowl of rice a day.

Question for the top Noobs at the top of this.....

Libs on the majority seem to have wanted to end the Bush tax cuts, well lets call them what they are shall we, "Obama tax cuts". He is the one who extended them, so they are now his.

Libs do you want to end the Obama tax cuts or not? Some Libs have expressed how none of the tax cuts are payed for and some Libs scream keep Obama tax cuts but only for the middle class.

Which is it libs? You want Obama's tax cuts or not? You can't have it both ways here.....

Romney is middle class, seriously?

RevengeofPodus,

Why resort to such vile name calling? Didn't you have parents who taught you better?

Have the tax cuts for the rich worked? Sure they have, the rich are richer now and the middle and lower income workers net income has dropped, there are less jobs, cause the rich take their money and invest it out of the country where they get more return and pay no American tax what so ever.

Trillion, Reagan would certainly be able to work with a democratic congress because he would be a "democrat" by todays republican standards. He would not stand up to the party craziness.

And as far as taxing those making over $250,000 at 45%.... That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard. We make over that and are certainly not "rich" we work hard and pay a significant amount in taxes. What we need is a "fair" tax code not punishment for being sucessful.

It is not "fair" that I pay 25% in tax and mitt Romney and the president pay less on their millions (percentage wise) than I do on my $250K. That is what needs to be addressed here, not sucessful people that work hard for their money.

Let's quit giving tax "refunds" to people and corporations that do not pay any taxes, let's cut down the disabilty rolls, decrease some of the deductions... Like $77,000 deductions for olympic horses. ( I own horses and cannot deduct a single penny for them) There are lots of places that we can change the tax codes and make more money for this county without punishing "rich" people". I just want all people to pay their "fair" share. Rich and Poor. (even if it is only 1% the poor can pay something.)

eropointfield

Wrong. It's up to business to create wealth, the goal of businesses is to make a profit while employing the fewest workers possible. How can you be pro-capitalism and not know that?

Actually, it does both. You can't create wealth without creating a successful business. A successful business is one that is profitable and one that grows. To do that will create permanent jobs and prosperity. Companies like Staples, Apple, Microsoft, etc., are decent examples of how this works.

Staples jobs are mostly low-wage and dead end. As for Apple and Microsoft, they wouldn't have gone anywhere without the creation of the Internet, which was, in fact, created by the government with some of the legislative initiatives sponsored by Al Gore (who never claimed he invented the Internet, as Republicans lie). And you ignore the inconvenient fact that corporate profits have skyrocketed under President Obama while the corporations have failed to create many new jobs. Corporate profitability isn't related to job growth, at least since Obama has been president.

People often forget that our entire private retirement system is built on the success of corporations. I for one want them to make huge profits so my retirement investments grow. I do not intend to work until I die.

Conservatives often forget that corporate profitability is inextricably tied to government investments in research and infrastructure.

Seeking, re: your comment:

However, I was seeing shades of Sarah Palin in Bobby Jindal when he refused to answer the question asked and went back to his GOP talking points. It was almost funny.

It wasn't almost funny it was hilarious! He just couldn't stop his runaway mouth! My personal favorite from This Week that rang so true:

IFILL: Actually, one of the great ironies of this election is that they're -- neither of these candidates is having this debate that we're having at this table.

I can't wait until they do!

I guess if you have no truthful substance, you resort to vile name calling..Nice way to represent your Party and ideals..

Hmmmm, what do we have here?

Year-------------------Tax receipts (revenue) in constant FY 2005 (Billions of dollars)

1999-------------------2,136.4

2000-------------------2,310.0

2001-------------------2,215.3

2002-------------------2,028.6

2003-------------------1,901.1

2004-------------------1,949.5

2005-------------------2,153.6

2006-------------------2,324.1

2007-------------------2,414.0

2008-------------------2,288.1

2009-------------------1,899.0

2010-------------------1,927.9

2011-------------------1,998.7

Estimates

2012-------------------2,089.4

Source: Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Table 1.3 whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals/

OH WOW, LOOK!

It seems that even with the nasty, mean, “unfair” Bush tax cuts revenues (in constant FY 2005 dollars) grew from a low of 1,901.1 in 2003 (after the dot-com recession and 9/11) to a high of 2,414.0 in 2007 before the economy collapsed. They even surpassed the highest revenue year under the Clinton administration (2000).

Yes, deficit grew also, but that was because of Bush’s exorbitant spending.

NOT BECAUSE OF REVENUE LOSS!

When will you Libbies finally understand that our economy is collapsing because of uncontrolled spending, not because the tax rate isn’t high enough? Or, as you like to blather on “not FAIR enough”.

Time to wake up Libbies, austerity is the ONLY economic principle that will work. Our decade long fiscal insanity of spending our way out of debt will never work. Keynesianism didn’t work in the Depression and it won’t work now!

Decades of fiscal malinvestment into unconstitutional entitlements and social programs, monetary malfeasance and elimination of a commodity based standard have created this mess we are in.

Today Spain is teetering on collapse as its bond rate reaches 7%. It will need further massive infusion of capital to save its economy. Just as Portugal, Ireland and Greece have refused Draconian austerity so will Spain and it too will eventually collapse.

We generate enough revenue, but we spend more than we make. Any middle school student can explain it to you if you can’t comprehend it.

Keep dreaming that a ridiculous tax increase on upper wage earners will help anything. We all know its just your indoctrination into Barrack Hussein’s class-warfare meme. It's typical Liberal envy and spite for those who have achieved and become successful.

No more, no less.

Rick-3416939

So what you are really drawing for a conclusion is that a Republican President, Ronald Reagan knew where to spend to get the country out of a recession.

He spent it on aid to states for teachers and firefighters and other "useless" government workers. He was able to do that because he had the cooperation of the Democrats who controlled Congress who cooperated with Reagan for the benefit of the country, unlike the Republicons who control it now who are deliberately obstructing the economic recovery in order to keep Obama from being reelected.

Regan added 1.6 trillion to our national debt in 8 years. Where Obama having already spent almost 6 trillion needs more time? Or could your conclusion be that Obama has no clue what he is doing?

The deficit is almost entirely due to the unfunded Bush Medicare mandate, the two unfunded Bush wars, the Bush tax cuts, and the shortfall in revenue due to the Bush Recession. The Republicons, of course, want to blame Obama for their consequences of their own malfeasance, but it's not working. The majority of the public still recognizes that Bush is mostly to blame for the current state of the economy.

Ah, Monday morning hacks at it again. It's you repukes , no it's you Libtards, it's actually both parties of NO. Bush started the fall and Obama is speeding it up. Republicans nor Democrats can create jobs without the assistance of the other party so blaming each other is a waste of time. Tax cuts for the rich are BS, where's the budget? Work together for the country not your party. feisty red love your comments ,they're always good for a laugh

LogicRequired --

In 1982 Reagan signed the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raising taxes during a recession.

In 1983 Reagan signed the Social Security Reform Act raising payroll taxes. He raised taxes in 84 and 86.

And on and on. I think Reagan raised taxes a dozen times as President. Raising taxes raises revenue.

Ben - do you know how absurd and ignorant EVERY post you make sounds? You don't have a clue but go around posting the GOP idiotcy daily. But, we understand, it's all you have. And, as usual, you have to copy me because you don't have an original thought in your vacuous head. But, that's okay and so totally ignorant - as usual - so Republican.

Obama/Biden 2012

Its the two party system at its peak nether side works! its strange, the GOP cant pass Mr O's bills because they know they would be damaging in the long term not just to the rich but to the nations economy, all Mr O wants is a new source of capital when its budget reduction and GNP that needs work, personally I would rather see the corporations in charge of their money then a mismanaged, dysfunctional government. if you want to see something get screwed up let the government handle it, every one complains about how screwed up there agencies are and now you want to trust them with more, sure take away from those that have it and redistribute to those that don't have it, that looks good on paper till you find out if you do that the bucket will run empty, why don't the have nots just go out and earn their own, that's the way things used to work. I keep seeing the same people posting every time I check out the comments section, it appears that most of you have nothing better to do? you are hear all day every day names like Pigotry, Fiesty from the land of Dumb Fux, how do you people find so much time to bitch? do you even have the right to bitch. get a job. if you cant find one create one. but quite hanging around sucking up government handouts, and demanding more and better entitlements. start your own corporation and enjoy the profits I'll bet your complaining turns 180 degrees. right along with your political affiliation if it was your hard earned money at stake, I'm not rich by any means but I know quit a few that are and I see them do allot of good with their money in the lines of charities, scholarships, community support and volunteer organizations, they make up where the government fails, I wish you people would recognize the good that they do, oh but then you would have to pay attention first wouldn't you, something you never thought of doing. as for these two Politicians I doubt it will make much difference who wins neither is worth a damn, the only difference between them is their Party affiliation. maybe one lies better then the other its hard to say narcissistic people don't realize when they are lying, all they know is that they are the center of the universe and all is well. and by the way Mondays suck.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

To date, the 112^th Congressional Republicans have introduced;

46 Bills on Abortion

113 Bills on Religion

73 Bills on Family Relationships

36 Bill on Marriage

72 Bills on Firearms

604 Bills on Taxation

467 Bills on Government Investigation

And BLOCKED the American Jobs Act.

Obama and the left lies to America. Feisty is NO exception. Senate Republicans tried to make Democrats hold a quick vote on President Obama's jobs-stimulus bill, but were blocked by Senate Majority Harry Reid (who is sponsoring Mr. Obama's bill) claiming other matters take priority. For Feisty's statement to be correct, Harry Reid had to have flipped and become a Republican. We all know that didn't happen.

pssst... there were also over 30 bills passed by the House specifically addressing our economy all of which were kept from a vote in the Senate by Reid. The real obstructionists here are the Democrats and Harry specifically.

@trilliondollar

Feisty....Most of us will be voting against libtards in November. You will have a front row seat on your couch watching TV and picking popcorn kernels out of your a$$.

This is why most of us don't think people like you are very bright. You completely lack the thought process to make an intelligent decision. You feed off the faux notnews hate and just spew up their phony little talking points that mean nothing. Your blind hatred for President Obama is almost pathological.

I just love it when Mittens says something stupid and all of you little piggies squeal in delight and dance around the burning cross like it's a May pole. Dance on little piggies. When the music stops there won't be a seat at the table for you.

This is nothing but the latest transparent attempt to buy votes with the taxpayer's own money by the Panderer-In-Chief

Romney was wondering what to do with his dog when the family had to go on a long drive....He looked at the dog and said....Well doggy poo, where should I put you on this long drive?.......The dog looked up at him, wagged his tail and went....ROOF....ROOF...........and the rest is history. Now you know how he makes his decisions.

Romney the gazillionaire could have bought another car, could have rented a car, could have hired a dog kennel company to transport the dog...nope.....he took the advice from his dog.

Is this the man you want to answer the red phone at 3 a.m.......Scooby Romney flip flop? Roh Roh!

One can guarantee when Nasty One is the leader of a thread, the overall intelligence level of the thread goes DOWN. It is easier to disregard the thread when she is first, so as not to read the same 5 people say the same thing over and over again. As if repetition will magically allow their "faux facts" become reality.....

Bottom line, there is no point in allowing more taxation of any sort as long as we have a govt. that does not make the first effort to cut the budget. Billions and billions are wasted and they don't care. It is all about buying votes.

NOBAMA 2012, for the good of the country!

Yeah, sure John. Mitt's platform: "Obama bad, Me good". Then all the piggies cheer. It's all kind of underwhelming. I would rather somebody buy my vote then have a bunch of Koch puppets actually buy me. These guys will expect return on their investment, all at the expense of the American people.

John - you've got to be kidding. Have you heard and actually understood anything Romney is saying? He is going to throw the middle class under the bus - as usual with the GOP! You clearly don't have two brain cells in that small heard of yours.

Obama/Biden 2012

I rest my case!!!!!!!!!!

willowbrook - one can guarantee when any of the Republicans on this site posts the intelligence level is nil. You guys just spout the party line nonsense over and over. You don't even understand what you post but you do it excitedly. You don't care about the country - just about "winning." (Sound more and more like Charlie Sheen everyday!) How totally pathetic.

Obama/Biden 2012

Pro Business -- WARS and TAX CUTS are expensive. Where the hell do you think the money comes from to pay for those things? Here's a clue -- Money doesn't grow on trees.

I agree that taxes are an issue, but when 48% don't pay any federal taxes, something is wrong.

I would like a flat tax and a balanced budget.. I just can't figure out how our government can't live on 2.5 trillion dollars per year. That about $7800 per each person in the country that they are spending at the 2.5 trillion rate.

$11000 per person is what they are spening at with the 3.5 trillion being spend.

I paid my $11000 these past years... Now they want more from me because they can't manage want they taken from us.

Seems like our government is the 1% that everyone complaining about!

Dear he who has no logic,

There was never a recession that bush inherited. Look it up, the numbers are in and proof positive, no recession.

The recession lie was just the lie the republicans cooked up to justify tax cuts for the rich our country could not afford.

We can't blame bush and the republicans for the condition they left our country, but the republicans are still trying to blame Clinton for a recession that never happened.

Think about it. The rich could not be asked for a small surcharge to get Americans working again. It was too much to ask and would send our country into a depression.

But these same rich folks have hundreds of millions of dollars to convince you to vote for the republicans that have promised them permanent tax cuts, no matter the harm to our economy and jobs.

In 2010 the republicans promised jobs, jobs, jobs. No jobs but the republicans seem to be downright gleeful when bad job numbers come in. How dumb do you have to be to believe they ever intended to create jobs?

VOTE FOR REAL FREEDOM...VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT 2012

w/ee

Have you even looked at those 40 jobs bills that are supposedly sitting on Harry's desk. Everyone of them is an attempt to roll back and defund the EPA or some other department they have hated for years. They refuse to send a bill up that isn't a Trojan horse containing amendments that no sane person would ever vote for. Their dishonesty is staggering. It's always something underhanded coming from them.

Houston!

The deficit is almost entirely due to the unfunded Bush Medicare mandate

Really? Medicare Part D is the most cost-effective program within the federal health insurance programs and a good deal for taxpayers. Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicate that Part D's price to the public will come in at 46% less than initially estimated for the first decade.

In fact, Part D is saving the entire Medicare program money, according to a recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Improved access and adherence to medicine is saving $1,200 per year in hospital, nursing home and other costs for each senior who previously lacked prescription drug coverage, according to the study. This is saving the Medicare program an estimated $12 billion each year.

It’s a good deal for seniors too because they are paying less out of pocket for their prescriptions. The total average out-of-pocket prescription drug costs dropped between 13% and 15% thanks to the creation of Part D.

Medicare Part D plans are available for as little as $14.80 per month in most States.

The competitive-based Medicare Part D program is working and should be used as a model for reforming other elements of federal health care programs. Medicare Part D enrollees are overwhelmingly satisfied with this program. A recent Medicare Today survey reported that 84 % of seniors are satisfied with the program.

If it’s such a horrible plan why didn’t the Democrats eliminate it when they had control of both Houses. Perhaps it was because more than 39 million elderly approve of it.

the two unfunded Bush wars,

With enactment of the sixth FY2011 Continuing Resolution through March 18, 2011, (H.J.Res.

48/P.L. 112-6) Congress has approved a total of $1.283 trillion for military operations, base security,

reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated

since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror

operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and

Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This estimate assumes that the current CR level continues through the

rest of the year and that agencies allocate reductions proportionately.

Source: Congressional Research Service, The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other

Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11

Amy Belasco

Specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget

March 29, 2011

and the shortfall in revenue due to the Bush Recession

Reference my post (1.135) above regarding your assertion there has been some mythical shortfall in revenues. Revenues are rising in the last 3 years even getting close to pre 2005 levels.

Nice try.

pssst... there were also over 30 bills passed by the House specifically addressing our economy all of which were kept from a vote in the Senate by Reid

*yawn*

Like I said;

For all of the RWNJ's hollering about Harry Reid blocking certain bills, for once, who don't you display a hint of honesty & tell us about all of the BS amendments they're loaded with?

So far, not a one of you have taken up my challenge...

Bob-the-plumber

OK, do you have any idea who is in that 48% that you guys keep crying about? They are mostly people who are too poor to pay taxes, working poor, sick people and senior citizens. Add to that the few mega rich that manage to avoid taxes also. So tell us Bob, what else do you want? It has always been this way. It seems though that if it's happening under a Republican it's OK but if it's under a Democrat, especially THIS Democrat it's bad. You need to grow up pal.

JimSpence

Houston!

The deficit is almost entirely due to the unfunded Bush Medicare mandate [Sentence truncated dishonestly by JimSpence]

Really? Medicare Part D is the most cost-effective program within the federal health insurance programs and a good deal for taxpayers.

As I stated in the comment I made that you dishonestly edited, there were many other Bush blunders that caused the deficit. And I don't recall saying that Medicare Part D was "horrible." I said it was unfunded. What is it with you cons and you're dishonest editing of other people's comments?

For all you people voting for Romney, just ask yourself a couple questions. What is he offering? And Can I really believe anything he says?

I can actually answer them both, What is he offering = well he wont tell us until he becomes president

Can I really believe anything he says = hell no, the guy is on every side of every issue.

Here’s an entirely different question: Have these tax cuts worked? Have they promoted economic growth? Have they created lots of jobs? The Bush-era tax cuts have been in existence for 11 years now. During that time period, George W. Bush presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades; the Great Recession took place; and job creation during Obama’s presidency has been lackluster. In this renewed debate over the Bush tax cuts, we’re going to hear Republicans claim that not extending them -- especially for the wealthy -- will hurt the economy. And we’ll hear the same from Obama when it comes to extending them for the middle class. But what evidence is there that these tax cuts have truly benefited the U.S. economy? This is one of these accepted pieces of conventional wisdom that doesn’t get much study on the policy front because, politically, it’s so lethal.

The answer is simple. The Bush tax cuts have NOT helped the economy; all they did was increase the deficit and worsen this country's fiscal health at the very time we needed to focus on strengthening it. I didn't like how Obama extended the tax cuts in 2010 (although I do realize that the managed to extend unemployment benefits and stave off a double-dip recession), and I won't like it if he does it again. Personally, I don't care about "Taxmageddon;" I say bite the damn bullet and let the cuts and tax increases happen. We gotta start focusing on our fiscal health, not just because we are in debt but because it will finally shut up those fiscal nutcases on both sides. We could easily use most of the savings from the Bush tax cuts (which would reduce the deficit by about $3.8 trillion or more over the next decade) to reduce the debt, and use the rest into something useful, like infrastructure spending or something like that. If you want a serious deficit reduction bill, here's mine:

I. Reduce the debt by $14.6 trillion over 10 years.

• $750 billion in defense cuts: cut waste in private contracting; reduce investments in new military projects to more sustainable levels; reduce active military personnel by about 8%; demolish 200 bases, mostly overseas, to save over $55 billion a year; prioritize investments for drones, efficient weapon systems, and cyber-defense systems.
• Entitlement reform: Raise payroll cap to 90% of income; reinstate COLA; reinstate estate taxes; raise premiums for beneficiaries who make over $250,000; progressive indexing.
• Cut $1.5 trillion from discretionary spending except from NASA and Department of Education. Find ways to remove waste, trim costs, etc.
• Save $3.8 trillion by ending Bush tax cuts for ALL.
• Add two low income brackets to tax code. Raise top income tax rate to 45% and the second to 39.6%. Third and fourth go to 33% and 27%. Fifth and sixth are 21% and 18%. Seventh and eighth are 12% and 8%. Raise AMT tax rates by 3 points. Estimated revenues=$3.67 trillion.
• Increase capital gains and dividends tax rates to 24%.
• Reform tax code: decrease about 50% of all tax expenditures unless they are PROVEN to promote a significant amount of growth. Close loopholes, lower corporate tax rate to between 20-25%. Eliminate all corporate welfare. Broaden tax base. Convert most other expenditures to refundable tax credits and deductions. Approximate savings=$6.5 trillion.
• Reduce subsidies to oil companies, farmers, and ethanol producers by $100 billion.
• Institute 5% national VAT starting in 2015. Estimated revenues:$2.02 trillion.
• Place a 5% national fee on all financial institutions with assets totaling the equivalent of 5% of GDP.
• Total savings=>$18.3 trillion.

II. Economic Recovery Package

• Education reform. Increase funding for Department of Education, adopt RAND education policy and further Head Start programs. Invest extra $600 billion over next decade and focus on improving test scores, furthering expansion of programs like Khan Academy, and modernization of school teaching techniques and technology systems. Institute merit-based pay with a minimum salary of 80% of local median income and an "insurance bonus" of 15% for teachers who move to troubled school districts.
• Create Department of Tourism with $36 billion budget to support 150,000 employees to speed up process for foreign tourists to apply for visas to US and make system more efficient.
• $100 billion in infrastructure bank to leverage capital for infrastructure repairs to employ millions of Americans.
• $2.5 trillion in direct public investment to repair US infrastructure (roads, highways, bridges, and power grid included) over ten years.
• Incorporate policies of Obama's Jobs Bill.
• Temporary payroll exemption: the first $20,000 is exempt from the payroll tax, giving thousands of dollars to consumers so they can spend our economy back to health.
• Offer incentives for businesses to buy US-made equipment and to employ people in America to the tune of perhaps $2,000-$3,000 per head; includes only people earning the median salary that the companies provides for its workers.
• Increase duties and tariffs for Chinese goods by 50% until China appreciates its currency and lowers subsidies; place more cases on Chinese fraud and stealing,
• $44 billion in incentives and federal loans and grants to green technology every year for 10 years.
• Regulatory overview to decrease unnecessary regulations for economy and add regulations were needed.
• Reinstate Glass-Steagall.
• Lift moratorium on offshore oil drilling and open up certain areas for energy exploration WITH safety and environmental precautions and insure safety.
• Invest $25 billion in new R&D projects every year for 8 years.
• Offer more scholarships and Pell grants; prioritize scholarships to promote getting degrees in engineering, technology, etc.
• Negotiate lower tuition deals with private institutions in return for aid and invest more money public higher education. Negotiate with states for a state education surtax to pay for public universities.
• Help housing market: tighten regulations on housing and financial markets, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; create partnership programs between the government and the private sector to buy houses and rent it out to former owners; persuade banks to write off parts of underwater mortgages; quicken time for foreclosures; demolish old buildings to open up to construction projects.
• Increase federal gasoline tax to $.404/gallon and use extra revenues to invest in high-speed rail projects and subways.
• Extend payroll tax cut.
• Reform Post Office. Eliminate 60,000 payrolls through early retirement, increase stamp costs to $.59, cut administrative salaries and budgets, pay freeze, adopt methods that FedEx and UPS do, transition to an energy-efficient postal fleet and turn postal buildings "green," and find more ways to trim costs.
• Increase minimum wage to $8.45 and institute living wage. Index minimum wage to inflation and mandate that all employers increase their employee's salary by 2% every year to correct for inflation/
• Regulate the derivatives market.
• Break down big financial industries and mandate that no one institution can control more than 10% of the industry or have domestic assets and liabilities larger than 15% of GDP.
• Reform healthcare: institute a single-payer universal healthcare system with a partnership between government health agency and private contractors of medical equipment and private doctors. Model healthcare system after top 5 nations based on cost effectiveness, system efficiency, and health of population. Institute a 4% fee on all sugary and fatty meals and foods to help decrease obesity rate.
• Institute immigration reform: extend cap for high-skilled immigrants applying for work visas to 450,000 a year; streamline regulations and enforce laws already on the books; give green cards to high-skilled immigrants with diplomas, with an emphasis on science, technology, and engineering. Pass the Dream Act. Put more emphasis on economic-based immigration and limit family sponsorships to the immigrant's nuclear family (the family cannot sponsor anyone).
• Trade reform: raise duties and tariffs on all countries with markets relatively closed to US exporters until they open them. Enact a 25% duty on countries who force U.S. companies to manufacture there and require licensing. Put into place a tariff that covers the difference between one country's wages and our own to level the playing field.
• Total cost=$4.4 trillion.

Total net savings=>$13.9 trillion.

If you have any problems, feel free to comment.

@ seeking sanity - You claim Romney is going to throw the middle class under the bus. How are we going to tell when Obama has already shoved us under the bus and ran over us a few time for good measure? And you wonder why we anyone else OTHER than Obama? Sheesh!

@ seeking sanity - You claim Romney is going to throw the middle class under the bus. How are we going to tell when Obama has already shoved us under the bus and ran over us a few time for good measure? And you wonder why we anyone else OTHER than Obama? Sheesh!

@ seeking sanity - You claim Romney is going to throw the middle class under the bus. How are we going to tell when Obama has already shoved us under the bus and ran over us a few time for good measure? And you wonder why we anyone else OTHER than Obama? Sheesh!

For all you people voting for Romney, just ask yourself a couple questions. What is he offering? A change from Obama, which is enough for me. He is also offering a better economic model, (REFORMING the tax code) some taxes will go down but the loopholes and write offs, and specially treatments will be eliminated making wealthy actually pay MORE in taxes.

And Can I really believe anything he says? I don't know if he is lying or not, but I do know Obama said Obama care was not a tax and then had the defense attorney defend it as a tax. I know he said he would have the most open administration ever but has declared Excutive Priviledge when it may hurt his image. His administration has had many horrible embarrassing leaks, pathetic and disappointing economic numbers every month. He said he would work across party lines, then passed his health care bill without one single Republican vote, said he would help break down racial tensions, yet made judgmental statements on the Martin case, and the Professor / Cop, beer summit case with no knowldege of what happened he just turned both into a race matter. He has more broken promises and lies then I can list and I ready for a change, even if it means more of the same.

He also said he would not continue to add to the deficit. The most laughable lie!

wej1970-3110905

Whow, I'm never disappointed in the left. You all want "stuff". In case you've been under a rock for last 10 years, the U.S. doesn't have money to give you free "stuff".

Not quite. The US produced around $125 trillion worth of goods over the past 10 years (GDPx10). And in actuality, the US doesn't give "free stuff." It gives benefits and tax breaks to people, but they are financed either by taxes, fees, or borrowed funds.

If you extend unemployment taxes you're only extending the time some lazy ass will sit there before going back to work. As for Docial Secial and medicare, it's already destroyed. What do you thinks going to happen win Obuma takes 500 million out of medicare to pay for Obumacare????

First of all, it's unemployment benefits, not taxes. Secondly, it is estimated that extending unemployment benefits will boost the economy in the short-term by giving the tens of millions of unemployed Americans extra cash to spend (and are you saying that 23 million Americans just left their jobs to take a smaller check from the government???) on basic necessities, boosting demand and growing the economy. Thirdly, neither Social Security or Medicare are "destroyed." They merely have financing problems, which is understandable considering the fact that the Baby Boomers are retiring. The best way to solve that problem is to trim benefits, raise taxes, and cut healthcare costs. And by the way, you say that Medicare is destroyed, yet blast the President for asking $500 billion in cuts to FUTURE INCREASES in spending over the next decade. Don't I recall people on this vine saying that cuts in spending increases are not cuts at all?? What's with the double standard???

I don't hear you left wing zealot's screaming over that. When will everyone realize this county is broke? We need to pull back the freebees; cut taxes and put people back to work. Extending entitlements will do none of the above. So before you spout off, please know what you're taking about!

Okay, in case you haven't noticed, our nation is not broke. If it was, we'd have unemployment similar to that in Greece, which is around 18%. The money is just in the wrong hands. If we were to, hypothetically, raise taxes and cut spending, we would balance the budget and have money to fix the economy. And finally, you seem to be confused on how to reduce the deficit. First you say we should eliminate the freebees, but you also say that we should cut taxes. Doesn't that give everybody a freebee check from the government??? And how can you balance the budget by cutting taxes??? Tax cuts don't always help the economy, especially if they are made permanent or come from things like the income tax. Finally, the ONLY way to put people back to work immediately is to SPEND money on things like roads, bridges, schools, etc. It seems like you need to know what you're talking about....

OH WOW, LOOK!

It seems that even with the nasty, mean, “unfair” Bush tax cuts revenues (in constant FY 2005 dollars) grew from a low of 1,901.1 in 2003 (after the dot-com recession and 9/11) to a high of 2,414.0 in 2007 before the economy collapsed. They even surpassed the highest revenue year under the Clinton administration (2000).

Just because revenues increased from their amount under Clinton doesn't justify the existence of the Bush tax cuts. Revenues always expand every year, due to an expanding economy, population growth, and inflation. You'd best check the revenues to GDP, which slid off considerably in 2001 (thanks in part to the dot-com bubble) and only returned to around 18% because of the housing bubble, not the Bush tax cuts.

When will you Libbies finally understand that our economy is collapsing because of uncontrolled spending, not because the tax rate isn’t high enough? Or, as you like to blather on “not FAIR enough”.

Are you @!$%#ing kidding me??? Economies don't collapse because of TOO MUCH spending (at least not normally); they collapse because of a LACK of spending.

Time to wake up Libbies, austerity is the ONLY economic principle that will work. Our decade long fiscal insanity of spending our way out of debt will never work. Keynesianism didn’t work in the Depression and it won’t work now!

Austerity is not an economic principle; it is a fiscal principle. Austerity works in the long-run, but it can destroy an economy because it takes money out of the economy right when we need more money to be pumped into it. Austerity should be held off until the economy is better, so that it won't throw us back into recession. And last time I checked, World War II brought us out of the Great Depression; do you know how we won World War II??? By MASSIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING on weapons, soldiers, and equipment, creating jobs and increasing tax revenue. THAT IS WHAT KEYNESIANISM IS ALL ABOUT.

Decades of fiscal malinvestment into unconstitutional entitlements and social programs, monetary malfeasance and elimination of a commodity based standard have created this mess we are in.

No, deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy brought us here. I frankly don't care if the entitlements that we have are unconstitutional: THEY WORK. Would you rather watch your family be murdered because you are against killing, or do whatever is possible to help them??? And frankly, the gold standard is impractical. It can lead to deflation (which can hurt the economy, check the Great Depression) and limits economic growth and a currency's value to either the amount of gold reserves in a country or gold produced, which is very inefficient.

Today Spain is teetering on collapse as its bond rate reaches 7%. It will need further massive infusion of capital to save its economy. Just as Portugal, Ireland and Greece have refused Draconian austerity so will Spain and it too will eventually collapse.

Spain and Ireland had low debt burdens and surpluses until the recession, and then they bailed out the banks and serviced the needs of their unemployed. THAT is what pushed them into debt crises. And Germany's austerity requirements are only making things worse, sending these countries deeper into recession, reducing future economic output, and increasing their deficits, requiring more bailouts, more austerity, and so there is a never-ending cycle of economic destruction.

We generate enough revenue, but we spend more than we make. Any middle school student can explain it to you if you can’t comprehend it.

Keep dreaming that a ridiculous tax increase on upper wage earners will help anything. We all know its just your indoctrination into Barrack Hussein’s class-warfare meme. It's typical Liberal envy and spite for those who have achieved and become successful.

No more, no less.

In case you haven't noticed, revenues to GDP are at 14%, well below the 18% average. Spending is higher than usual, but both are because of the RECESSION. And we cannot expect either to return to normal levels because of the Bush tax cuts and the growing entitlement costs. If you want to help the economy, we have to raise taxes AND cut spending, and I say raise taxes on EVERYONE. It's about time that we feel some hardship. And is asking the wealthy to pay the rate that they did during the prosperous Clinton years (which are only 4 points higher in income taxes and 5 points for capital gains) class warfare??? I'd say it's a fair deal. In fact, I'd raise taxes to 45% and 39.6%, and make our tax system both fair and progressive. I do not despise the successful or the wealthy; I myself want to become one of them someday. Me and my liberal friends despise those who make their wealth by burdening the American people and cheating them out of a living through unnecessary outsourcing, financial gambling, and lobbying. Maybe you ought to stop worshiping the successful and realize that they aren't as perfect or important to the economy as you have been told...

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

You think First Thoughts, First Read, MSNBC, or anyone will ever do a story on what Obama has promised and what he has actually done?

One story about it not being a tax then having the Attorney defend the mandate based on it being a tax?

One story about the economic promises he has made and never delivered on?

One story on how Obama care was passed as being deficit neutral but is already projected to be in the red and will most likely get worse and some are perdicting it adding TRILLIONS to our debt?

Just one story that isn't a defense of Obama, a shot at Romney, or a B.S. article about Bush Tax cuts, but actually takes on the powers that be who don't have an "R" behind their name, just one?

Staples jobs are mostly low-wage and dead end. As for Apple and Microsoft, they wouldn't have gone anywhere without the creation of the Internet, which was, in fact, created by the government with some of the legislative initiatives sponsored by Al Gore (who never claimed he invented the Internet, as Republicans lie). And you ignore the inconvenient fact that corporate profits have skyrocketed under President Obama while the corporations have failed to create many new jobs. Corporate profitability isn't related to job growth, at least since Obama has been president.

Most of the jobs that Obama says he created are also low paying. 25,000 of the 80,000 created in June were temp jobs at that.

Yes, the internet was "started" by work initiated by Eisenhower after Russia launched Sputnik. That investment was a tiny, and I mean almost invisible, portion of the federal budget back then. Beyond that the reason the internet has grown so massively is because our government has largely stayed out of the way and allowed it to grow. To even attempt to argue that the government is capable of producing permanent job growth demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of economics. Businesses create jobs. Capitalism creates jobs.

Here is a great quote from an article I read. This is as real as it gets.

"Government is economically incapable of creating jobs and wealth. It is impossible because of taxation. Since government possesses no assets or wealth without coerced taxation, taxation simply reallocates money paid by taxpayers to government projects; it prevents from new investment in capital, labor, land or maybe even entrepreneurship.

It merely shifts attention and valuable resources from one industry to another.

What this reallocation of resources does is it hides the true costs of government interference in the market. Government projects assume that it only knows how to allocate resources better than consumers or businesses know how to spend or invest."

What has happened is that public sector jobs have grown at a faster rate then public sector jobs. All of these jobs have to be paid through taxpayer dollars. This grows the size of our federal government and puts pressure on congress to raise taxes. Raising taxes will slow economic growth.

I have said this many times before. The kinds and types of jobs available in the United States has been changing for a long time. Corporations are investing in more efficient machinery and equipment.. This results in reducing the pressure to hire new workers. Second, due to the recession, and global competition, corporations have had to lay employees off. This is unavoidable in this economic climate. As a result, their profits appear larger due to reduced operating costs. We are losing jobs in good-producing and manufacturing. This hits the middle class because these are jobs that the relatively uneducated and untrained middle middle class would undertake. Our economy is changing. We have to understand this and adapt. The middle class will have to change the way they think about how to make a living. They need education and training for jobs that may not even exist yet. This process will not be without some degree of personal sacrifice.

So...for the struggling Small Business that makes less than $250k (about 18% of businesses and 3% of the workforce) they get a tax break, but, the struggling Small Business that makes $260K gets a tax increase. Wow...that ought to help tremendously. Jobs for everyone!

And, since about 45% of the people that make less than $250k don't even pay Income Tax, that ought to boost the job market through the roof!

But, I notice Obama didn't dicuss the taxes which will be invoked by ObamaCare - 75% of which will borne by people earning less than $120K.

Jed -- You should be more concerned with the loophole carried interest costs this nation. It adds up to over a trillion dollars over ten years. That's the special favoritism that Congress wrote in the tax code for Hedge Fund managers and private equity groups like Bain. Instead of taxing them like they do any other worker, they enjoy a tax rate of 15% on their INCOME. That's outrageous.

He is also offering a better economic model, (REFORMING the tax code) some taxes will go down but the loopholes and write offs, and specially treatments will be eliminated making wealthy actually pay MORE in taxes.

Unfortunately, Romney neither outlines any loopholes that he wants to reduce or eliminate, nor does he admit to the fact that his original tax plan (and the one he may put in place when president) will both increase the deficit by about $3.4 trillion and increase taxes on those making less than $40,000. Now, I am all for tax fairness, but I do not think cutting taxes for the wealthy and raising taxes for the lower class is fair. I say increase them for both, so they can pay their fair share.

ProBusiness

DontCarryItAll: You really can't be that naive can you? Obama is spending money like a sailor on leave. This is not a revenue problem. This is a spending problem.

Federal government spending has typically stayed between 18% and 22% for over six decades. In 2008 (the last year of the Bush administration) Federal spending was at 20.8%. 2009 (first Obama year) it was 25.2%. 2010 was 24.1%. 2011 was 24.1%. 2012 projected at 24.3%. BTW, Economists say a country cannot sustain itself when the Federal Government spends 25% of their entire GDP. We are there.

First of all, you are right; revenues averaged at about 18%, and spending averaged to about 21% (within the sustainable 3% deficit). However, we are not in the average years right now. Normally in recessions, as I believe you (as an economics professor) would know, tax revenues go down and spending goes up due increases in unemployment and failures or revenue losses of corporations and small businesses. Therefore, it is normal for spending to rise during a recession, and for revenues to fall. Revenue now stands at about 14% or 15% of GDP, while deficits are at around 24%. Neither are unsustainable. But, when the recession is over, spending will decrease and revenues will increase, until the Baby Boomers retire. Now, Obama didn't technically spend this money; his only major expenditures were the Afghan surge and the stimulus (including TARP), and the extension of the Bush tax cuts. That was it. Every other increase in spending was automatic and irreversible, unless you wanted to destroy the economy by cutting spending or raising taxes.

So stop with the "we have a Revenue problem". That is like a spouse going on a spending spree buying new shoes, purses, new car, and cruise then blaming their debt on her husband because he is not "making enough". NO!! You MUST spend within your means. This president has a spending problem. You could tax everybody making $100,000 or more 100% and STILL not have enough to cover this president's spending problem.

A nice connection, but not quite correct. The spouse did not go on a spending spree for luxuries; during the recession, it went on a spending spree for basic necessities, while the husband lost money due to pay cuts and lower hours. In order to fix their balance sheet, the couple will have to cut spending and find other ways of revenues, such as a second job. The assumption that we only have a spending problem is incorrect, mainly because revenues are below the average. Even if the recession was to end, revenues would still be below, because of the Bush tax cuts and massive tax expenditures. The only balanced way to fix the deficit in the long-term is to raise revenues by ending the Bush tax cuts, reforming the tax code, while cutting spending. I propose a 1:1 ratio of spending cuts to revenues, but if that is too much we could go to 2:1 or even 3:1 in favor of cuts. But I will only go that far; I cannot and will not give in without getting a share of the meat. What say you??

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

*yawn*

Like I said;

For all of the RWNJ's hollering about Harry Reid blocking certain bills, for once, who don't you display a hint of honesty & tell us about all of the BS amendments they're loaded with?

*Stretch*....

So all mighty leftover from the State with the most corrupt political machine in the nation, tell us, what things were so bad in those 30+ bills offered by the House that would keep the Senate from proceeding forward with helping our economy and stimulate job growth? You do realize that the Senate could change any verbiage in those bills from the House, vote and pass it, then send it back to the House for another vote right? Seriously, it's their job to do so, not do nothing. It's called "negotiating".

Nothing? I didn't think so. America is tired of having "leftovers". They need real nutrition now called private sector job growth.

I do not think some of you geniuses on the right understand how a marginal tax works. IF someone makes 249,999dollars and someone makes 250,001 dollars holding all things equal the amount taxed will be nearly identical. The increase tax liability only exists on the 1 dollar over 250k the person made.

So if the tax rat on 250k and less was 20% and that for over 250k was 30% the person making 250,001 would end up paying guess what? 50 cents greater in taxes. the first 250 will still be taxed at 20% only the amount that is over will receive the 30%. So 1 dollar will be taxed at 30%. Tax increases aren't as scary as the right would have you believe, marginal tax rates do not put a cutoff on "success"

Jim Spence # 1.35 shows a table of federal revenues from 1999 through 2011 in order to show that the Bush tax cuts did not reduce TOTAL federal revenue. He uses Table 1.3 from the White House OMB budget tables.

First off, thanks to Jim for providing the link to your material. It was quoted exactly right.

If he also used table 2.1, he would note that Personal Income Tax is only a portion of the total federal revenues, and pesonal income tax dropped over 26% from 2000 thru 2004................(in 2005 dollars from $1,145,320 million to $838,733,99 million).

So, the personal income tax is less than half the fed revenues, and during those 4 or 5 years the income tax fell from 50% to 43% of the total fed revenues, and has never recovered to either its value or its percentage of the total that existed in 2000.

So, in fact, federal revenues have been seriously diminished by the Bush tax cuts.

Table 2.1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist02z1.xls

Table 1.3 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z3.xls

Thanks, Jim, for the interesting discourse.

1-167/ Jed, Are you serious only 3% of the work force earn less than $250,000 per year.? I don,t know where you are coming from,but you are sadly mistaken,or boasting . Most of the population in this country do not make half of that amount and I am sure that you are well aware of that fact. There is a strong need for the A.C.A. and it is not as strong a need for those that are fortunate enough to make the amount that you claim .It is a cry from the more than 97% of us in the U.S. population. There is a desperate need for unemployment coverage for all of the unemployed who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. There is a need for a better education ,that should equal the cost that we pay,so that our youth can compete with the rest of the world.One that would stop this ridiculous , no one left behind, that has resulted in put education,in this country as to educate to the lowest common denominator. There is a need for this country to stop being the arbiter and cost bearer, of the paying for most of the planets wars and economic problems. There is a need for us to stop paying this bribery to foreign governments to be our friends. There is a need for our representatives to do what we hire them to do ,which they do in name only To represent us and govern for our betterment.

Romney is not going to get specific with economic details until after the primary in August. Right now it is fund raising and influencing the psychology of the nation time. So far he is doing a very good job. Obama's approval rating has dipped to 45%. Obama will start getting desperate, he may already be, and the media will take more liberties with attacks on Romney.

Romney raised 100 million dollars to 70 million for Obama. Most of those for Romney were in the $250 range. Sounds to me like the people are tired of Obama.

Akeem -- You were reading my mind. Thanks for posting. A repost is needed on the Romney article. Ha.

GreenTimer -- Nice catch.

Houston! "Spending borrowed money seemed to work pretty well for Ronald Reagan. That's how Saint Ronald of Reagan got the country out of the recession it was in during the Carter years."

Interestingly, Clinton spent just about as much 'borrowed money' as Ronald Reagan. Here are the figures for spending above receipts (increases in the National Debt);

Total National Debt Increase under Reagan in 8 years = $1.692 Trillion ($212 Billion per year).

Total National Debt increase under Clinton in 8 years = $1.628 Trillion ($204 Trillion per year).

Yet people seem to think that Reagan was a 'spendthrift' and Clinton was 'frugal'. See what media spin does to people who don't actually check the official figures?

GreenTimer "Jim Spence # 1.35 shows a table of federal revenues from 1999 through 2011 in order to show that the Bush tax cuts did not reduce TOTAL federal revenue. He uses Table 1.3 from the White House OMB budget tables........First off, thanks to Jim for providing the link to your material. It was quoted exactly right............So, in fact, federal revenues have been seriously diminished by the Bush tax cuts."

Thanks for the laugh. First, you admit that federal revenues significantly increased after the Bush tax cuts, and then you went through some gyrations to claim that federal revenues were 'seriously diminished by the Bush tax cuts' because the portion from personal income taxes dropped. In effect, you are saying that 'Yes, overall revenues actually increased, but they really didn't because one part of the revenues didn't'. Did it occur to you that if there was an overall increase, but one small part decreased, it means that other parts must have increased even more?

It appears that math is not one of your 'long suits'.

The whole idea of the Bush tax cuts was twofold;

1 - To get the country out of the recession caused by 9/11.

2 - To generate more net revenues from a strong, growing economy.

It appears that it worked on both counts.

People like to talk about the 'Bush tax cuts', but I have news for you - they expired in 2010.

They are now the Obama tax cuts, since he is the one that approved them after the Bush expiration date. If Obama really disliked them as much as he claims, he should have just done nothing and let them expire as planned by Bush.

Good points Roy!

Roy Wilson,

Revenues from personal income tax did not rise, but they fell 26% from 2000 thru 2004.

Psst,...the first round of Bush Tax Cuts happened PRIOR to 9/11 - June 7, 2001 to be exact,...

so yeah,...it was ALL about 9/11 - I'm just curious - where's your noun and your verb, Roy?

Good grief!

There's gullible and then there's just plain ignorant,...I'll let the readers decide which column to put you down in.

JULY 09, 2012

Time to Get Mad

Three Ways the Super-Rich Have Cheated Young Americans

by PAUL BUCHHEIT

My own generation faced the Vietnam War. We were at risk of getting drafted, and then maimed or killed in an unwinnable battle against imagined evils.

Today’s young people are being drafted into an economic war that they don’t understand. It’s a slowly waged, diabolical war that substitutes debt and underemployment for missing limbs and psychological disorders. The soldiers are college-age men and women who can’t find jobs or pay tuition, and who are seduced into submission by the promise of eventual rewards. The Vietnamese jungle has turned into Wall Street.

For those of us who weren’t particularly good activists in the 60s, age has widened our perspective, and the lack of opportunities for our children has given us a second chance to protest, to help make it clear how the leaders of my generation have abandoned the people they no longer need.

Young America, here’s why you should be angry:

1. The Great WEALTH Transfer

– 18- to 35-year-olds: Your median net worth has dropped 68% since 1984. It’s now less than $4,000.

– The Richest 1%: They tripled their share of income between 1980 and 2006, then took 93% of all the new income in the first year after the 2008 recession. Their median net worth is now over $5,000,000.

2. The Lack of JOBS: No one’s hiring, so you have to “create your own job.”

This from Michael Barone of the Washington Examiner: “The good news is that information technology provides the iPod/Facebook generation with the means to find work and create careers that build on their own personal talents and interests…creating your own career will produce a stronger sense of satisfaction and fulfillment.”

Sounds easy, doesn’t it? Just grab your iPhone, open up Facebook, and create your own job. Become an entrepreneur, just like the richest Americans. Except that the richest Americans aren’t entrepreneurs. Based on U.S. tax return data, only 3% of the wealthiest 130,000 Americans are entrepreneurs. Most are in management or finance.

As your parents and mentors, we told you to stay in school and work hard and everything would be fine. But you don’t have jobs. Over half of college graduates were jobless or underemployed in 2011. More than 350,000 Americans with advanced degrees were receiving food stamps or some other form of public assistance.

If you do have a job, it’s probably not paying much. Salaries for new graduates dropped 10% just in the last year. Worse yet, most of you are dealing with college loan debt, which averages $24,000, and with the reality of zero net worth for over a third of you.

As wages are hitting an all-time low, corporate profits are hitting an all-time high. But the corporations that have built their profits on American innovation and labor are telling you they don’t need you anymore. Apple — much admired for its slick products — shows little respect for anyone below upper management. With 47,000 employees, about 1/10 the number employed by IBM, Apple makes a profit of $420,000 per employee. Yet most Apple store workers make about $12 per hour.

And your representatives in Washington are no help. In October, 2011 Senate Republicans killed a proposed $447 billion jobs bill that would have added about two million jobs to the economy. Nearly two-thirds of the American public had supported the bill.

3. The Portrayal of EDUCATION as a “lifetime investment”

Yes, it’s a lifetime investment, for the holder of your student loans.

As corporate profits and CEO salaries and incomes of the 1% have surged over the past ten years, education financing declined by 24 percent, and tuition at state schools increased 72 percent. Since 1985, while consumer prices have approximately doubled, tuition has risen almost 600%.

Total state education cuts for fiscal 2012 were $12.7 billion. A study by Citizens for Tax Justice noted that 265 of our nation’s largest companies avoided about the same amount in state taxes each year from 2008 to 2010.

So your massive tuition bills are paid for with mounting student debt, which has more than tripled in the past ten years. Here again my own generation has deceived you. Our once-idealistic anti-war activists now excel at flashy marketing and sloganeering, with admissions pitches of “affordability” and “lifetime investment,” and carefully avoided references to costs and debts and contracts.

To make up for lost revenue, cutbacks continue and educational opportunities disappear. State colleges are eliminating expensive-to-run engineering and computer science departments. Arizona doubled college tuition in four years. California K-12 schools have one counselor for every 800 students. Ohio’s Governor Kasich suggested rationing college majors among state schools. Illinois cut 2012 educational funding by a greater percentage than any other state; not to be outdone, Pennsylvania’s Governor Corbett tried to cut higher education funding by half, and New Hampshire DID cut university funding by half. Florida’s college tuition is up 15% in a year, Nevada’s is up 13%, Tennessee’s about 10%, Washington’s 24% over two years.

Hell No, We Won’t Go Into Servitude

College graduates, you shouldn’t be working for $12 an hour. The computer and networking technologies that gave life to companies like Apple and Google grew out of 50 years of public research. It was an accomplishment of society, not of a few well-positioned individuals. You, the descendants of industry pioneers, and the potential creators of even greater technologies, deserve at the very least a decent-paying job.

Your anti-war protest, if a time-weathered opinion matters, would include a flood of job demands at the offices of U.S. and state senators and representatives. In person and online. You are part of the fastest and most sophisticated means of communication ever devised. You have the power to make demands.

But first you have to get mad.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/09/three-ways-the-super-rich-have-cheated-young-americans/

@ Freshiee - Unemployment benefits are also a TAX. Employers are taxed at the State and Federal level for this "benefit." Now in some states, (including mine) Not only has our State rate quadrupled, but the Federal is also assessing an additional amount on our yearly Fed. unemployment return to recover some of the money they loaned to the States and the States have been unable to pay back. What does this translate to? Increased prices for goods and services, and yet another reason why employers can't or are reluctant to hire, especially if they can only keep them for so long and then send them back to the unemployment line. This practices increases how much they will be responsible for in "benefits" to the former employee, and in turn, increases the amount they owe the State.

You all do know that 80% of America pays less than 15% in federal taxes most of the people that make 100K+ pay more than 15%

Willowbrook/ The employers may pay into unemployment insurance,but we employees pay into either as well,or exclusive;y ,I can't remember. I have never heard of employees laying themselves off,so who is at fault for this depression? It certainly is the employees.

Q.) How does the REpublican Party get a guy who is making 410/hr to align his voting interests with a billlionaire making milllion annnuallly through hufffling paper on Wallll Streeet?

A.) By tricking him with emotional isssues like gay marrriage, bowing tours, claims of "Socialism, abortion, and the usual smorgasbord of fear based propaganda.

Two-Face Tea Banger:

Good try, but no meat on that bone. You forgot the War on the environment. Please get a little more facts and top spewing the Liberal talking points.

Right, the Republicans have declared war on everything because Obama says its so. Wow, how do liberals wade through crap that deep anyway?

Obama saved Michigan by bailing out General Motors. Even though investors got screwed the unions made out like bandits. Of course 7 out of every 10 vehicles are not even being made in the United States, and the stock price is below the IPO while GM lags behind almost every foreign manufacturer in market share. But since the federal government is now General Motors largest customer, with purchasing up 79%, Obama is still spending tax dollars to make himself look good.

You forgot the War on the environment. Please get a little more facts and top spewing the Liberal talking points.

Thanks for reminding me!!

The GOP/Tea Bangers is the party that wants to increase usage of finite resources and also believes that we can pollute all we want and it wont have an adverse effect on the environment!!

Because the GOP/Tea Bangers honestly believes that science is a corrupt field and billionaires like the Koch brothers have all the right answers!!! Hahahahaaa!! LOL!!!

Conservatives will allow Romney and the Republican Party to walk all over them. SMH.

Tax fairness is realizing Romney is likely involved in under the table exchanges and the American people would be faced with higher taxes if he would be given some position of authority. The Republican party should just nominate Rush Limbaugh or better yet, Al Capone.

Romney is the Bain of Society.

Funny, but seems like Obama and his minions are not super concerned with the economy, cause none of them seemed to want to talk about it on the Sunday shows.

Nope, it's all about Swiss Bank accounts for these guys.

Poor Obama. No clue.

Two-Face Tea Banger

What are the 'issues' that Conservatives are upset about?

You missed one: Too many black people voting for Obama, which is why we suddenly need voter photo ID laws despite the fact that elections have run fairly well for two hundred years without them in America.

Debby Wasserman Schultz called the jobs report "good news".

Obama called it a 'step in the right direction".

I guess whatever's in the KoolAid really does cause visions. It sure does nothing for memory.

See, Obama fought the battle of the tax cuts two years ago- and lost. He tried blaming republicans for the dismal economic conditions- and lost. He took on republican donors, the Supreme Court, and opponents of his HCR disaster- and lost. Now, he thinks doing exactly the same thing will help him win.

What's that definition of insanity again?

Things you should know about Mitt Romney:

Under Romney's leadership, Massachusetts manufacturing declined by double the national rate, and was the third-worst overall in the country.

Governor Romney left behind a $1 billion budget deficit for the next governor and saddled Massachusetts taxpayers with more debt per person than any other state.

During Romney's term as governor, state budget spending increased every single year.

The Washington Post reports that as CEO, Mitt Romney advised companies that
were "pioneers" in outsourcing jobs overseas. As governor, Romney drew from the
same playbook and outsourced state jobs. And today, Romney has proposed
eliminating all taxes on companies' foreign profits—which would actually
encourage companies to send jobs overseas

Jobs. 47th out of 50 states in job creation

Taxes and Fees. Increased by $750 million per year.

Long term debt. Increased more than $2.6 billion.

Bain Capital recently bought a Chinese video-surveillance company reportedly
"used to intimidate and monitor political and religious dissidents," and Cisco
"has marketed its routers to China specifically as a tool of repression.

Romney is still paid by Bain Capital.
Here's how a Romney style equity predation works;

1. Uses his position to get 'investment' money that isn't his own so he can;

2. Buy up companies with 'invested' money to wring a profit from;

3. Squeeze out profits by cutting costs, i.e. destroying employees lives by

firing workers and the alleviation benefits including pensions;

4. Using the company as collateral to borrow money from banks and deducting

that interest from the taxes, showing a falsely inflated profit for that

company;

5. Getting the company to pay a special dividend to repay the original

investors and a bonus for himself. Everything from here on out is gravy;

6. They sell the now 'profitable' company for more than they paid an pocket 20%

of the gains from the sale, capital gains that they pay a lower tax rate on.

That's the scam, because the lower rate is supposed to be an incentive for people to risk their own money to improve the state of the nation. The worst thing about these folks who game the tax code is that you and I wind up paying for the unemployment or retraining or pension replacement or making up for their interest deductions.

That's what Romney did at Bain, move the burden of the financial game onto the backs of common folk who don't like a fixed game, folks like you and me.

IS THIS THE GUY YOU WANT AS POTUS.

NJNB -- Two years of extended cuts and they didn't create all those jobs the Republicans claim they do. End the cuts for the wealthy. They can afford it! Obama will not lose this time around he has plenty of leverage.

Two-Face Tea Banger

You missed the most important war the Republicans are waging, the war against Science. Just this weekend, I heard George Will, the conservative pundit, scoff at climate-change, claiming "it's summer people, that's why it's hot!" Which is ridiculous, considering this summer's heat wave is of historic proportions, and just a taste, according to scientists, of what our future summers will look like, never mind the extreme storms and tornadoes occuring across the globe thanks to man-made emissions of green house gases. The only reason this is a political issue is because Republicans are protecting the interests of the oil and gas companies, and blocking the development of alternative energy. Anti-climate change "science" is bogus and funded by Koch Brothers to cast doubt where there is no doubt. Real scientists have made climate-change research their life's work and Republicans are not listening to the science establishment.

I think Americans need to step back and look at this number very closely. "250K or less?"...Frankly, that number should drop by at least 100K. IMO, this push is more symbolic than anything and will only prove to promote some twisted class war. Let's be smart about this...how many Americans are we actually talking about that make more that 250K. How big is the pool of earners...And what real impact would it have in bringing in more revenue. I don't know too many people that make 150K a year let alone 250K a year...You want to really help the middle class...then lower that 250K number...bring it down to 150K, so those Congressmen/women who are overpaid can start paying into the pot as well. Lord knows they make too much money for what they do...which is absolutely nothing.

Just raise their taxes already....they'll still be doing just fine after you do!! And the Bush cuts are just a drop in the bucket compared what could be done if we unraveled some of Reagan's budget-busting tax cuts for the rich!!

Two-faced - great posts - all of them and right on target. I don't think any sane voters are dismissing the GOP's targets on basically everyone but the top 1%. Romney is so out of touch he can't talk intelligently to anyone. And, no one wants to listen to him as evidenced by this "crowds." When did such small groups become "crowds?"

Obama/Biden 2012

Louis, put down the crackpipe and cash your welfare check. Obama on Mt Rushmore?????? Why not just add Jimmy Carter.

Don't_carry_it_all. Two years of extended cuts and they didn't create all those the republicans claim they do. Remember when the Senate leader of the republican leader got on tv and said these tax cuts will create jobs. He lied. Just like they all do thats both sides. The only difference is the right lies are bigger and their sheep believe them.

Mike Davis-433554:

Yall seem to forget, Once Obama Extended the Tax Cuts,They BECAME HIS... Don't Blame Bush for everything....

If I bought a used car from somebody, and it need engine work... I would not sit there and blame the last owner and not do anything about.... I would get the SOB fixed and Move on...

BLAMING gets NOTHING, repeat, NOTHING DONE!!!!

We don't need a Obama we need a new Jimmy Carter! He was one of the Greatest presidents of all time. He also had on of the greatest economy's ever. The only president that is better then him is Bill Clinton and that is buy a hair.

"During that time period, George W. Bush presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades;"

Typical biased reporting using biased studies. The main measure of the economy is Gross Domestic Product, and here are the records since Reagan;

Reagan = 83.85% increase in 8 years.

Bush 1 = 24.63% increase in 4 years

Clinton = 57.34% increase in 8 years

Bush 2 = 46.56% increase in 8 years

Obama = 4.86% increase in 3 years

Well, I see all the cut-and-paste crowd is out in force today. Don't you people have any new material? Keep spewing the Oblameo lines and don't let facts confuse you. But remember your silliness when he goes down in flames in November.

It's not like Mitt Romney actually stands a chance of winning (he's way too far behind on the electoral map) but let's suppose his magic underpants grant him his wish and he somehow finds a way to pull 270 electoral votes out of his ass; In that event, I find it incredibly likely that Republicans would be just as disappointed with Willard as they are with Chief Justice Roberts right now. He has a pattern of saying whatever the audience in front of him at the time wants to hear, then doing whatever he wants, whether or not it lines up with what he said to those audiences. In 2008, he was dismissed for being "too liberal" and even before he wrapped up the nomination this year, he was given the same label. Everybody expects that he'd toe the right-wing line should he be elected, I wouldn't be so sure.

But like I said, the above scenario is highly unlikely considering President Obama's massive lead on the electoral map. In order to get to 270 electoral votes, Romney would have to win every single swing state, but unfortunately for him, Obama leads in most of them, and those leads are increasing every day. Hell, Obama has even taken the lead in Florida! Florida was said to be red for sure earlier this year. Mitt's going to need a whole hell of a lot more than just the two swing states in which he currently leads, because when we add NC & MO to the 181 electoral votes he already has locked down, it comes to a mere 206, well short of the 270 needed to win. Whereas President Obama has 221 already locked down, and with the swing states in which he leads (CO, FL, IA, MI, NV, NH, OH, VA & WI) his total would be 332.

So, if the election were held today, the result would look like this:

Romney: 206

Obama: 332 <-Winner

Raise the tax rate to Clinton era levels. The country needs a boost,some incoming tax money.Legalise pot and prostitution and tax them.Its going on anyway.Put fifty% of the money to health care and the debt.

All this military build up for a war with Iran,its a bad idea! Oil well skyrocket the minute the first bomb goes off.We dont need this!

President Obama needs to lead and go deal with our do knothing congress.Dont leave it all to Harry Reid,its obvious he isnt doing anything.Ive read he dosent call anyone or make any deals.

There is no GOP war on anyone...That class warfare that Obama supposedly declared on the rich is nonsense too. Knock off the fear-mongering!

Two faced Tea-bagger....It is the Democrats who have declared that the Republicans are at war with these groups. It is their divide and conquer strategy. So I presume you are a Democrat and you are sipping the kool aid on a regular basis. In reality it is President Obama who is creating the division between groups and classes. He took the Catholic Church mandate and turned it into the war on women. He made an African American election video specifically targeted at getting the Black people on his side. He wrote an executive order allowing illegals "work permits" to get the Hispanics on board. He approves of same sex marriage which pits Christians against non believers. Instead of getting the wealthy to invest in America he wants to tax them, that way there there will be more money available for food stamps and welfare. ...not jobs. He was all for the Trayvon Martin protest and in lock step with the black community...where was he 6 weeks ago when 2 black teenagers killed a 27 year old white mother of 2 children in Nebraska. Never heard a peep from the black community about that or the white community either. Time to stop labeling people and dividing this country. You claim there is a Republican war well it is equal for the Democrats. Either both parties get in lock step with America or the American people need to get rid of both parties.

Jack,

You're kinda right, kinda wrong. The GOP "war on women/gays/poor/minorities" surely isn't "war" but rather an indifference to those particular groups (for the majority of them, but, for a small hand full of loonies, it's war baby!) However, when it comes to President Obama, they have openly declared war on him, stating that their focus is "making Obama a one term president." Placing their desire for power over the welfare of the people is their stated mission. It's not working (see my post above) but it's their mission nonetheless.

Why do liberals refer to the tax cuts as "the Bush tax cuts" when CLEARLY they are not the Obama tax cuts. Obama had the chance to make good on his obviously hollow campaign rhetoric of repealing the tax cuts but instead CHOSE to renew them when given the opportunity to end them. That makes them THE OBAMA TAX CUTS, not the Bush tax cuts. Now, Obama wants to extend THE OBAMA TAX CUTS yet again...

You just can't trust a liberal to keep his word. Obama has re-nigged on every campaign issue since taking office.

NORQUIST PLAN PREVENTS ANY negotiation or compromise by republicans.

REPEAT.....NORQUIST PLAN PREVENTS ANY negotiation or compromise by republicans.

Unless repubs remove their names from the pledge ANYTHING they say about tax reform is pure B.S.

Repubs pledged to the oath of office they were elected to, then like traitors, they pledge to king Norquist putting him above the nation and the people. DUMP NORQUIST PLEDGE!

Hmmmm, what do we have here?

Year Tax receipts (revenue) in constant FY 2005 (Billions of dollars)

1999 2,136.4

2000 2,310.0

2001 2,215.3

2002 2,028.6

2003 1,901.1

2004 1,949.5

2005 2,153.6

2006 2,324.1

2007 2,414.0

2008 2,288.1

2009 1,899.0

2010 1,927.9

2011 1,998.7

Estimates

2012 2,089.4

Source: Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Table 1.3 whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals/

OH WOW, LOOK!

It seems that even with the nasty, mean, “unfair” Bush tax cuts revenues (in constant FY 2005 dollars) grew from a low of 1,901.1 in 2003 (after the dot-com recession and 9/11) to a high of 2,414.0 in 2007 before the economy collapsed. They even surpassed the highest revenue year under the Clinton administration (2000).

Yes, deficit grew also, but that was because of Bush’s exorbitant spending.

NOT BECAUSE OF REVENUE LOSS!

When will you Libbies finally understand that our economy is collapsing because of uncontrolled spending, not because the tax rate isn’t high enough? Or, as you like to blather on “not FAIR enough”.

Time to wake up Libbies, austerity is the ONLY economic principle that will work. Our decade long fiscal insanity of spending our way out of debt will never work. Keynesianism didn’t work in the Depression and it won’t work now!

Decades of fiscal malinvestment into unconstitutional entitlements and social programs, monetary malfeasance and elimination of a commodity based standard have created this mess we are in.

Today Spain is teetering on collapse as its bond rate reaches 7%. It will need further massive infusion of capital to save its economy. Just as Portugal, Ireland and Greece have refused Draconian austerity so will Spain and it too will eventually collapse.

We generate enough revenue, but we spend more than we make. Any middle school student can explain it to you if you can’t comprehend it.

Keep dreaming that a ridiculous tax increase on upper wage earners will help anything. We all know its just your indoctrination into Barrack Husseins class-warfare meme. It's typical Liberal envy and spite for those who have achieved and become successful.

No more, no less.

Just this weekend, I heard George Will, the conservative pundit, scoff at climate-change, claiming "it's summer people

@Amy - wasn't that priceless .. some 23,000 record temperatures broken in just 4 months, buy hey .. it's just summer. In March, we had broken some 6,000 records, and I'm sure his claim was hey, it's just spring!! Funny how the right view global warming. It is through the same lens they view anything economic - they forget to take off the lens caps. About the only thing we know for sure from these freaks is that when Florida is under a foot of water, they will blame Obama.

jack dulouz Great statement. it is fear-mongering and the gop does it well. Painting the President to look like hitler during the health care debate, the birthers, The President is a muslim, and a socialist hell just read what they call him on here and the best part is they think there right. Are all you republicans/tea baggers real proud of yourselves?

When will you Libbies finally understand that our economy is collapsing because of uncontrolled spending, not because the tax rate isn’t high enough?

Oh goodie - another right wing freak that doesn't understand math. Get back to us when you put that spending in context to the amount spent per citizen.

VirginiaDemocrat78 "President Obama's massive lead on the electoral map. In order to get to 270 electoral votes, Romney would have to win every single swing state,"

Keep fooling yourself. As of now, Romney has comfortable leads in states with 206 Electoral Votes while Obama has the lead in states with 217 Electoral Votes. Of the 9 'Battleground' states, Romney only has to win Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin and Florida to get to the magic 270, and according to Rasmussen, the most accurate pollster over the last 2 Presidential elections, Romney has a slight lead in Ohio, Iowa and Wisconsin, and they are essentially tied in Florida among Likely Voters. Even though Romney doesn't need any of the other 5 'Battleground' states (PA, NH, NV, CO, and VA), he is close or tied with Obama in most of them. This could be one of the closest races in decades, or possibly a landslide for Romney.

By the way - Don't give too much credence to polls of 'Registered Voters' because they are always skewed toward Democrats by about 4% versus actual results. Cases in point - In 2004, polls of Registered Voters just before the 2004 election had Kerry up by 2%, whereas polls of Likely Voters had Bush ahead by 2% - the actual result was Bush won by 2.4%. And in 2008, polls of Registered Voters had Obama winning by 11%, but the actual result was Obama by 7% - if just 3.5% of voters had switched to McCain, he might have won the popular vote. Voters are far less excited about the 'first Black President' and the 'Change we can Believe in' rhetoric now than in 2008.

From: dpcc.sen.gov Romney supports this disaster Ryan plan

Republicans have claimed that their tax plan would renew the expiring Bush tax cuts and reduce tax rates even further without increasing the deficit, all by getting rid of unspecified "loopholes" in the tax code. But a new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) shows that Republican math simply doesn't add up. The new JEC report shows that the Republican tax plan would actually necessitate a $1,300 tax increase on average middle-class families to pay for a tax cut of over $285,000 for each millionaire.

The Republican tax plan would cost a total of $10 trillion - $5.4 trillion to extend the expiring Bush tax cuts, and according to the Tax Policy Center an additional $4.6 trillion to lower the top tax rate to 25%. Republicans have refused to name any of the specific "loopholes" they would repeal to cover the huge price tag of lowering taxes on the rich, and the JEC report explains why. In order to make their tax plan revenue neutral, Republicans would have to eliminate nearly every deduction and credit in the tax code, including those that mainly benefit middle-class families.

JEC's report shows that because Republicans would do away with middle class deductions, even with lower tax rates the Republican plan would amount to a net middle class tax increase.

• Families making between $50,000 and $100,000 would pay over $1,300 more in taxes, while families making between $100,000 and $200,000 would pay over $2,600 more.
• Meanwhile, millionaires would reap massive additional tax cuts. Under the Republican plan, those making over $1,000,000 would get a tax break worth over $285,000.
• The Republican tax plan would give the top 0.1% of earners more than $1 million in tax breaks.

The American people overwhelmingly oppose giving millionaires more tax breaks at the expense of the middle class. Republicans should work with Democrats to pay down our deficit in a balanced way that will create jobs here in America and ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share again.

Hey Virginia- There is no GOP indifference to those groups, we simply have a different solution for the problem, and if it is not a solution that libs like, they attack or smear. Indifference towards women? How? If you are talking about abortion rights, half the babies killed in abortions are women, I don't see libs fighting for those women. Gays, some people simply don't agree that marriage designed for adam and steve. Child rearing certainly isn't either. We think the poor don't need a hand out, or at least not a consistent government one. One its inefficient and two people flourish when they have the liberty to produce and make something of their own and be rewarded for it- not get it from the government. Minorities-Lib talking point-when are liberals ever going to become truely colorblind?

Houston!

You missed one: Too many black people voting for Obama, which is why we suddenly need voter photo ID laws despite the fact that elections have run fairly well for two hundred years without them in America.

you forgot people with "funny" foreign sounding last names that might vote for a Democrat. But then again, Bush won by 500+ votes, so the Republicans are doing everything they can to repeat 2000.

JR...they are called the Bush tax cuts because they are!...Repubs kept the Bush tax breaks instead of the President Obama tax breaks which were for ONLY the middle class and poor..The Bush tax breaks GAVE IT TO THE RICH, which was excluded in the Obama tax breaks. The repubs held the nation hostage and destroyed the credit rating of the nation just to keep the Bush tax breaks for the rich.

So the cuts to middle class and poor are Obama tax cuts. Bush cuts are for the rich!

Proud vet...if you bought a car and it needed engine work....I charge $100 an hr. Only $50 if it's a muscle car. Now if you never changed anything on the title....that title says the previous owner still owns it!

VirginiaDemocrat78

One last thought on Obama's supposed 'shoo-in' for winning this year. Pollsters say that Undecided Voters typically vote for the challenger by anywhere from 70% to 90% (the 'this is not working, let's try somethinh new' syndrome), and with about 10% undecided, that could result in another 4% to 8% advantage for Romney.

@roy wilson, first of all your bs figures are nothing more than a figment of your emagination made up bull@!$%#. Are you getting your money from Romney to be a Heckler. I got to dig up some figs here but don't worry I'll be be back. Jarhead rubute this When Clinton left office this countries deficet was at a +1%. That was the condition of the country when GWB took over. I have never seen the Republican leave the office with anything you call even moving on an uphill trend.

Just like John Kerry, Charllie Rangel and the rest of the Democrats, bail on paying your taxes while you raise the taxes on others. I expect to see Obama on the list after he's booted from office as well.

@Amy - wasn't that priceless .. some 23,000 record temperatures broken in just 4 months, buy hey .. it's just summer. In March, we had broken some 6,000 records, and I'm sure his claim was hey, it's just spring!! Funny how the right view global warming. It is through the same lens they view anything economic - they forget to take off the lens caps. About the only thing we know for sure from these freaks is that when Florida is under a foot of water, they will blame Obama.

What were temperatures before the little Ice age? What were Temperatures before the big Ice age?

JRB,

Obama has gone back on every campaign promise? Really? He promised healthcare reform, we got it. He promised to hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden, and he is dead. He promised to end the war in Iraq, that's done. He promised to end the occupation of Afghanistan, that's in the process of happening. He promised to extend child tax credits, done. He promised to create an Advanced Manufacturing Fund to invest in peer reviewed manufacturing processes, done. He promised to create an international tax haven (like Romney's) watch list, done. and here's a list of more promises kept:

Increase minority access to capital

Require economic justification for tax changes

Implement "women owned business" contracting program

Change standards for determining broadband access

Create a consumer friendly credit card rating system

Establish a credit card Bill of Rights

Extend loan programs for small businesses

Close the "donut hole" in Medicare prescription drug plan

Expand the Senior Corps volunteer program

Require insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions

Give tax credits to those who need help covering health premiums

Expand eligibility for Medicaid

Expand eligibility for SCHIP

Increase funding to community based prevention programs

Set goals and timetables for implementing section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act

Launch a supportive services -housing program for veterans to prevent homelessness

And that's just the beginning. There's a complete list on politifact.com

President Obamas new tax cuts are for 97% of people that are $250,000 and under. This includes the small business owners. This is a tax break for small business owners as well. PRO JOB PLAN!

Romney plan....put more money in his off shore accounts.

Jim Spence,

I happen to agree with you, but posting factual numbers won't convince the liberals out there that over the top social spending what is dragging us down! 40% of government outlays go to social programs. 24% to defense and the rest is discretionary, government pensions, and interest on the national debt. They just can't see what is wrong.

Democrats tout 4m + jobs created by Obama in 3 years. I wonder what that figure would be without the extension of the "Bush" tax cuts. Hmmm.

Roy Wilson,

Like with Jim Spence, I agree, but posting facts won't over come the effects of the KOOLAIDE! It is unfortunate that liberals refuse to see reason or even try to understand that what is happening now on both sides of the table is wrong.

So tax the rich already, geez, your guy seems completely gutless on this issue as he has talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked and talked about it ad nauseam - when will he grow a spine and do something about this "tragic" unfairness.

But tell me all you hate filled and wise Democrats - after you get that $54 billion annually by 2015 (assuming no one changes how they receive income in order to skirt paying higher taxes), what about the other $945+ billion deficit, plus all those pet projects - what is the plan to pay for all this crap after you've tapped the "wealthy"?

The fact that liberals still fall for this nonsense, when this loser President has wasted trillions just shows that they enjoy the shallow end of the pool.

You can bleat on all you like about all your wonderful ideas on how to change the nation, but your IDIOT is not talking about any of them. He is assassinating people around the world using drones, he has expanded government with Obamacare to a scale we still cannot measure using healthcare to build up IRS staff, and talks about himself. He has no answers, no plan, other than to keep borrowing more money to hire more government workers.

Do none of you realize that there is an end to the borrowing? At some point the Chinese and everyone else stops buying our worthless debt? Then what? When 40% of your annual budget is provided by debt, and it goes away, do you think a cataclysmic depression is not the likely result?

So go ahead - the smartest thing Boehner could do (and won't, because the tanning has fried his brain long ago) would be to go along with the IDIOT President. Take away the issue, tax the rich, and see how the economy continues to flat-line. Because no nation has ever taxed its way to prosperity, not has any nation borrowed its way to financial health.

ROY WILSON,

Actually, recent elections suggest that Rasmussen is not as accurate as they once were. This is an excerpt fom an article in November 2010, by Nate Silver, after the midterm elections:

The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.

Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued.

In reality, the RCP averages tend to be the most accurate guide.

Tax breaks to the rich is the same as spending. Problem is the Ryan plan has a plan to offset the tax breaks for the rich. The Ryan plan raises taxes on the middle class and poor by 20% and also cuts food stamps for starving children and families. Kills Soc Sec and medicare.

Now the benfit of giving tax breaks to the rich are...?.....NONE! Trickle on economics never worked.

starsailing  "Romney supports this disaster Ryan plan"

The Ryan plan calls for a 3% per year increase in federal spending.  I guess you think that's a 'disaster'?

Compared with Obama's first year increase of 18% in spending, I guess some WOULD consider it 'disasterous'.

By the way - Obama increased the number of federal civilian workers by 240,000 (13%) while the rest of the country was losing millions of jobs.  Why did he need to add so many new workers?  Answer - Since the vast majority of federal workers vote for the Democrats, that could give him another 500,000 votes (worker and spouse) - at taxpayer expense.  And that was a huge increase in actual costs because the average federal civilian worker gets more than double the compensation (pay + benefits) of the comparable private sector worker, as the link below shows;

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/income/2010-08-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

Florida01

Just like John Kerry, Charllie Rangel and the rest of the Democrats, bail on paying your taxes while you raise the taxes on others. I expect to see Obama on the list after he's booted from office as well.

So, they should do like Mitt Romney and offshore their money to avoid taxes?

There is something wrong with a President and country that taxes those that DO WORK, wants to increase the taxes on those that earn the most and rewards those that DO NOT WORK with the workers money that do work, through Government Entitlements, while not addressing government waste and the holes in the system that allow able bodied people to draw entitlements.

Especially when, in this society the numbers of people that DO NOT PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES are 50% (and growing) and are given a standard of living waay beyond their work ethics and effort!

The government should require the people who do not pay Federal taxes and are drawing government entitlements to do some "government work" (clean along roadways, pick up garbage, work on keeping America Green) and require those "entiltees" to pay in a portion of that income in taxes, as others do.

VirginiaDemocrat78

I've heard the 'Rasmussen favors the Republicans' nonsense before - it's nonsense because Rasmussen got the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections almost exactly right - # 1 in accuracy for 2 straight elections.

Those biased 'studies' made the ridiculous claim that Rasmussen was 'biased for the Republicans' because they didn't agree with the other pollsters, 83% of whom were biased toward the Democrats. You can argue against Rasmussen's accuracy all you want, but it doesn't change the facts. Here's a link;

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/graduate_schools/gsas/elections_and_campaign_/poll%20accuracy%20in%20the%202008%20presidential%20election.pdf

ROY WILSON-336103

starsailing

By the way - Obama increased the number of federal civilian workers by 240,000 (13%) while the rest of the country was losing millions of jobs.

By the way: You're wrong. The executive branch civilian workforce has only increased by 84,000 since 2008. Rather amusingly, the federal workforce was largest under Ronald Reagan -- 3,054 million in 1988 as opposed to 2,776 million in 1010. Here's the statistics:

http://www.opm.gov/feddata/HistoricalTables/TotalGovernmentSince1962.asp

Come in Houston.......we no longer have a problem with Roy spin. Spin debunked....mission accomplished...over.

Houston! "ROY WILSON-336103 By the way - Obama increased the number of federal civilian workers by 240,000 (13%) while the rest of the country was losing millions of jobs...........By the way: You're wrong."

Perhaps I should have been a little more specific - Obama has increased federal civilian workers by 240,000 (13%) compared with the beginning of the recession at the end of 2007. This was reported by msnbc yesterday - if I can find the link, I will post it for you.

Houston! Here's the link to the NBC (msnbc) story about Obama increasing the federal workforce by 240,000 compared with the beginning of the recession.

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/06/12600616-building-buying-and-governing-fridays-data-adds-to-debate-over-where-the-jobs-are

starsailing Sorry to disappoint you with some actual facts, unless of course you consider msnbc to be a 'right wing' source.

ROY,

From your link: “Governing: According to the BLS data, there are more federal workers today than when the recession began -- about 50,000 more.”

You should also understand that most of those were in the Department of Homeland Security many of which were additions signed into law by GWB.

MtMike -- Why are so many not paying federal taxes? See below.

Half Of Americans Don’t Pay Any Taxes

Published 1, July 29, 2011 Congress , Politics 79 Comments

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

It’s a common claim from the Right, but it’s not true. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas), in a Senate floor speech, claimed “Fifty-one percent — that is, a majority of American households — paid no income tax in 2009. Zero. Zip. Nada.” At least he used the often omitted “income” adjective. However, those individuals still pay payroll taxes, like Social Security and Medicare, sales taxes, and often property taxes.

When Republican Senators give speeches complaining about someone not paying enough tax, you can be sure of two things: one, they’re not talking about corporations and two, they’re not talking about the wealthy. If you’re not a member of either of those two groups, hold onto your wallet. The Republican hatred of increasing taxes doesn’t apply to everyone’s taxes, just those who can afford to them get re-elected.

A report from the Tax Policy Center examines the facts. Here’s an overview:

• 23% pay nothing because they’re poor. For example, a couple with two children earning less than $26,400 will pay no federal income tax this year because their $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions of $3,700 each reduce their taxable income to zero.
• 10% are elderly and pay nothing because their Social Security benefits are exempt from federal income taxes.
• 7% pay nothing thanks to provisions in the tax code designed to benefit low-income families: the earned income tax credit, the child credit, and the childcare credit account.

The other 6% benefit from tax-exempt interest, itemized deductions, education credits, other credits; and reduced rates on capital gains and dividends.

That’s whom the Republicans want to tax: poor families and the elderly, those least able to afford the tax increases. The shocking aspect of these facts is the existence of such a huge number of people that are so poor, they balloon the percentage up to 46%.

H/T: Kevin Drum, Roberton Williams, Donald Marron

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/07/29/half-of-americans-dont-pay-any-taxes/

Mt.Mike -- A few more things to ponder.

In 2000 32.6 million people paid no federal tax. In 2008 that figured had jumped to 51.6 million due to the tax breaks Bush and company, i.e. all Republicans, put in place. An increase of almost 60%.

BTW Republicans want to tax your employer sponsored healthcare to pay for the freeloaders that refuse to get insurance. Where's your outrage?

Especially when, in this society the numbers of people that DO NOT PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES are 50% (and growing) and are given a standard of living waay beyond their work ethics and effort!

First of all, only 47% of Americans don't pay the income tax. And most of them pay the payroll tax, the rest, as you shall see, are not eligible for the income tax.

The government should require the people who do not pay Federal taxes and are drawing government entitlements to do some "government work" (clean along roadways, pick up garbage, work on keeping America Green) and require those "entiltees" to pay in a portion of that income in taxes, as others do.

That would mean only 18.1% of taxable Americans will do the work, as only that amount fail to pay either the income tax or the payroll tax. About 6.9% are people who are below the poverty line (lower than about $20,000); 10.3% are elderly people who are retired (doesn't seem fair for them to spend their last days digging ditches), and only about 0.9% are people who are eligible for one or both taxes yet fail to pay. So technically, only 0.9% of Americans are skipping out on the government (and on the rest of us). So essentially, only 1 in 20 people who don't pay federal taxes are really defrauding the government, and the remaining 19 are either old and retired or younger but in poverty. What say you???

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

J R Browenstein

Why is it I get the feeling yours isn't an 'innocent' typo? Perhaps you should THINK and then QUESTION yourself,...

The word is renegued. Educate yourself, you rascist ass!

ROY WILSON-336103

Houston! Here's the link to the NBC (msnbc) story about Obama increasing the federal workforce by 240,000 compared with the beginning of the recession.

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/06/12600616-building-buying-and-governing-fridays-data-adds-to-debate-over-where-the-jobs-are

Geez. There's NO mention of 240,000 jobs anywhere in that article you've link to, except in a comment made by YOU. I posted the table from the government Office of Personnel Management showing that the size of the civilian work force increased by only 84,000 since he became president.

http://www.opm.gov/feddata/HistoricalTables/TotalGovernmentSince1962.asp

There were 2.692 million federal workers in 2008 and 2.776 million in 2010. You subtract the first number from the second and you get 84,000 workers added while Obama has been president. Don't you even know simple arithmetic?

However, the workforce DID increase by nearly 240,000 if you count the 152,000 MILITARY personnel that have been added during Obama's presidency according to the government table. And here I thought you phony super patriotic jingos would never dare imply that U.S. soldiers were just more useless government employees to be lumped together with all those other useless government employees.

@ Dont_carry_it_all

My "outrage" lies with the stupidity of American Voters and those voters "buying into" the 2 party political system which is offering no solutions to the problems facing America.

Individual tax payers must live within their earnings, why not government?!

The Government should cut the Military Industrial Complex, Cut the Federal Government, re-write the tax code or implement a fair consumer tax, bring our troops home from around the globe, protect our borders and rebuild America's infrastructure, like we are capable.

The US Voter is simply playing "kick the fiscal can" down the road and watching America collapse, while arguing over which form of death is best.

2-28/ Actually you are correct,it is President Obama continuing of Bush's tax cut to the rich,but if you wanted to be fair you would say that it was the Republicans blackmail strategy of ,keep the tax hike for the super-rich if you want us to continue paying the unemployment benefit that has run-out for a large percent of the working classes. So yes he agreed to the paying off of Republican blackmail. That is one of the main issues that you Rep/Tea P. dislike of your President.His job background gives him understanding and sympathy for our underprivileged citizens

listoire, well stated. The Republicans would like the people to think the President has over spent but all the while it was already spent or promised before he took office. Taking from Peter (federal agencies) to pay Paul (Military Industrial Complex) must be paid back to put us on even keel again not considering the banking fiasco, Wall Street hedging on a bubble and the energy prices that have been subsidized for decades. It all takes money and paying back in cheaper dollars as long as we maintain the industrial and technical edge. We haven't for various reasons not to mention the cost of higher education and "No Child Left Behind" dumbing down of our public educational system. I have only skimmed the top of it without providing a primer on non-competitive contracts to support the war effort namely Haliburton, Chaney's company.

It seems that even with the nasty, mean, "unfair" Bush tax cuts revenues (in constant FY 2005 dollars) grew from a low of 1,901.1 in 2003 (after the dot-com recession and 9/11) to a high of 2,414.0 in 2007 before the economy collapsed. They even surpassed the highest revenue year under the Clinton administration (2000).

Time to wake up Libbies, austerity is the ONLY economic principle that will work. Our decade long fiscal insanity of spending our way out of debt will never work. Keynesianism didn't work in the Depression and it won't work now!

Decades of fiscal malinvestment into unconstitutional entitlements and social programs, monetary malfeasance and elimination of a commodity based standard have created this mess we are in.

Jim, your comments were cogent, well thought out, well reasoned, and supported by the facts. I predict, therefore, that liberal posters here will completely disagree with you. I have been trying unsuccessfully for years to explain this exact thing to people here. You can lead a horse to water.... you know how the rest goes. How sad that come November there will be people who will vote for Obama, and other democrats, without appreciating the effect that vote will have on this country or our economy. I just find that sad.

Keep up the good work Roy!

Zero we were force fed Dubya with disastrous results and he got his legacy, the Great Depression. Do you believe for one moment we would give another corporate raider another chance? Yes, I know Bush II was not smart enough to be a corporate raider he couldn't keep cash flow on any of his ill fated business ventures. Dubya couldn't keep America afloat with an endless bank account that we are now paying back. As for the tax cuts any good accounting major can spin anything they want with numbers. Now with Romney running as a presidential contender with a mere corporate raider background and a lousy record as governor of MA it would really be hard for a blue collar to vote for him, GOP or DNC affiliation. The thought of a person raiding a company and people losing jobs so the raiders can fill their offshore bank accounts just doesn't seem to be American like the notion of voting for a Mormon, which by the way will play a big part of opinions on voting for Romney. Stop and think about what you and your buddy are espousing and look where we are today before you claim trickle down economics work. They don't and never have by any economics standards that are taught in any reputable college or university. Not a fool here but well enough educated and with good enough smelling powers to detect BS when I smell it. Enough said.

The Washington Post (a definitively leftist rag) has already called Obama's campaign commercial a lie - Glen Kessler gave it 4 Pinnochios. Next.

and, after i drain them of their last penny, we'll sell the country to china!

Heaven help us, but Romney could be the second coming of George W. Bush (Mr. Bush, I would remind people, was the president before Barack Obama, but has been airbrushed out of all the Republican May Day pictures at the GOP Kremlin).

Surly you can't be attempting to confuse these poor Progressives with facts can you Go USA ? They simply can't handle that!

Who in the Blue Hell is Glen Kessler and why do you think I even care?

There are plenty of states with plenty of political ads to which I happen to live in a state that is not even airing ads... so I have no clue what commercial you are referring to. Next.

Unlike all them Solyndra jobs.

Bottom line gang - Obama's job creation numbers are horrid.

And he's the boss.

Do you even read what you copy and paste? Do you have your own commentary? What is your point? Is it that you only believe what you read and do not have an independent thought? Great.

President Obama has maintained a record of providing jobs for Americans for over 2 years. That's fact.. deal with it. Republican led House on jobs legislation... 0.

Next.

Obama has laid down the gauntlet on the Bush tax cuts. He wants to repeal them for the wealthy which would contribute to reducing the deficit.

So far, Romney has only said he will repeal the ACA, and that repeal would contribute many billions to the national debt. The Congressional Republicans are trying to beat him to the punch.

There's an example of the difference between the two on the issue of deficit spending.

Obama's job numbers are not even toilet worthy.

Millions less employed now. Real rate is at 15%. Plus the GDP is terrible.

But yeah, it's all the House. Certainly not the Pres. or the Senate.

Say, anyone hear what Reid's doing with this year's budget?

If Romney has so many ideas about job creation then why didn't he come forward over the last 3 years and make suggestions. President Obama asked the American people for their thoughts and ideas about job creation and Mitt never showed up. So instead of sharing his ideas over the last 3 years he waits and runs for President and now says I have a plan.

Kinda reminds you of the last GOP Presidential candidate, McCain. When asked about Osama Bin Laden he responded that he new where he was and would get him if we just elected HIM PRESIDENT.

Whats with the GOP presidential candidates? Are these people so un-American that they are willing to withhold vital information or ideas just so that they can achieve political office? And let's not forget how the republican establishment made a deal with Iran during the Carter era re-election to hold on to the American hostages UNTIL AFTER THE AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.

The GOP, hell bent on keeping America backwards in order to remain in political power. And they have the nerve to label Democrats and liberal thinking Americans as unpatriotic.

ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Under $250,000-A-Year Earners

Obama’s pledge against any form of tax increase on Americans making less than $250,000 a year “was thrown out the window” when he signed the healthcare law.

Why did Obama Lie to us?

ObamaCare's Individual Mandate Will Raise, Not Lower Costs

Like so much of ObamaCare, the individual mandate does more harm than good. It’s a net loser – for American pocketbooks and the Constitution.

The facts on the Bush tax cuts passed Jun 2001.... 11 million jobs created after the first tax cut implemented in Jan 2002 until the democrats took Congress. Since the democrats have ruled Congress, Jan 2007-Jan 2011 7 million jobs lost.

Fact 1: Jan 2002 135, 701,000 employed tax cuts implemented
Fact 2: Jan 2007 146,033,000 employed Dems seize Congress
Fact 3: Jan 2008 146,407,000 employed recession starts
Fact 4: Jan 2011 139,330,000 employed. Dems kicked out of house.

These are the facts published by the bureau of labor statistics.

Harley Chic - keep posting the GOP talking points. It shows you don't know anything but will spout the lies of the far right.

Bush tax cuts and his outrageous spending - including the 2 wars he didn't put in the budget - are part of what got us into this mess.

We are lucky we have Obama who is working - without any attempts at support by the obstructionists in the GOP - to keep us out of a depression.

And, when we vote out a number of the congressional GOP in November, Obama will get more done in the next 4 years!

Obama/Biden 2012

Actually, Michael, Romney hasn't outlined a plan,...he just SAYS he knows what to do. He SAYS a lot of things. We all need to be good little sheep and just bend over and "Trust" him!

In this context, "Trust" should be a four-letter word!

Harley,

Everybody knows the economic downturn started with the housing crisis in 2006. Republican policies of deregulating banks and taking away the right of the average American to escape debt through bankruptcy protection (while leaving it in place for mega-corporations and the super wealthy) caused this mess and polls show the majority of Americans understand this.

Democrats are the best at playing the "blame game"....Democrats have had 2/3rds of the power in Washington since 2006.....100% of the power from 2008-2010......yet everything is always somebody or something else's fault. It's never their fault or their failed policies....it's always the Republicans fault or the blame is laid on some uncontrollable circumstance. Will Democrats ever step up and accept responsibility for anything.....other than the good they can spin out of the bad?

Seriously, are Democrats so weak and pathetic that they can't accomplish what they want with 2/3rds or 100% control of the government? If so....perhaps 2012 is the year to make the donkey obsolete!! :-)

Go USA-851295

The Washington Post (a definitively leftist rag) has already called Obama's campaign commercial a lie - Glen Kessler gave it 4 Pinnochios. Next.

Glenn Kessler gives out Pinocchio's based on some unwritten rule he has that Republicans and Democrats must get an equal share of them, despite the fact that Republicans tell the overwhelming majority of outrageous lies. Tom Hamburger, another Washington Post reporter, made a fool out of Kessler with a REAL investigative report about Romney's very real history of investing in companies that outsource jobs. The Democrats' campaign commercial was accurate.

Harley,

Incorrect, the balance of power is pretty much a 50/50 split right now. Democrats control the Executive branch and one house of Congress, Republicans control the Judicial branch and the other house of Congress.

Bottom line gang - Obama's job creation numbers are horrid.

As compared to who - Bush? Wow, that was spectacular. He left office losing 500-600k jobs per month. Obama is definitely an improvement over those numbers. Of course, the right wing freaks aren't to smart. They look at the biggest number and proclaim a winner. Doesn't matter if the number is negative or positive - they only focus on the number of zeros.

OK MSN, "Bush era tax cuts". When you are in office for 3.5 years and you sign those same tax cuts every year you are in office they become OBAMA ERA TAX CUTS! At least have some sense of reality, we all aren't that stupid, well maybe we are after reading these nutcase diatribes on this thread.

As compared to who - Bush? Wow, that was spectacular. He left office losing 500-600k jobs per month. Obama is definitely an improvement over those numbers. Of course, the right wing freaks aren't to smart. They look at the biggest number and proclaim a winner

If you compare it to Jimmy Carter Obama is a Bush. Carter one of Americas greatest jobs creators had over 10 million jobs in 4 years that beats Regan's 16 million in 8 years. I wish we had Jimmy's economy that way all would have a job. That would enter us into the next Golden age of America. There would be No hungry in America.

FeistyRedHeads quote "To date, the 112^th Congressional Republicans have introduced;

46 Bills on Abortion

113 Bills on Religion

73 Bills on Family Relationships

36 Bill on Marriage

72 Bills on Firearms

604 Bills on Taxation

467 Bills on Government Investigation"

Lady, your pants are on fire. I just checked you got that exact quote from Daily KOS, the biggest pants on fire lying liberal blog on the web. Politifact says those are all lies. Lady at least try a little harder to Shepard your ignorant sheep, you are pathetic!

Say, anyone hear what Reid's doing with this year's budget?

Say, anyone hear if the Republican House managed to submit a budget bill that was not overloaded with amendments for abortion, or marriage, or voter registration, or countless other unrelated topics?

Say, anyone hear if the Republican House managed to submit a budget bill

I think they did submit one of those - it ended Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Unemployment, Food Stamps, and funneled that money to the wealthy in the form of direct deposit.

JCB-1236504

OK MSN, "Bush era tax cuts". When you are in office for 3.5 years and you sign those same tax cuts every year you are in office they become OBAMA ERA TAX CUTS! At least have some sense of reality, we all aren't that stupid, well maybe we are after reading these nutcase diatribes on this thread.

No, they are still the Bush tax cuts. We name things after people who create the bills, not after those who pass them. If we did, the Monroe Doctrine would also be known as the Adams Doctrine, the Jackson Doctrine, the Van Buren Doctrine, etc. And the Truman Doctrine would also be known as the Eisenhower Doctrine, while the Kennedy Doctrine would be the LBJ and Nixon doctrines. Do you remember learning about the Van Buren Doctrine in history class??? I think not.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Freshie, go back to school and learn civics again. A doctrine is not a bill kook. A doctrine is a precept or principal, a bill is a legislative edit. You failed history I see.

JCB-1236504

Freshie, go back to school and learn civics again. A doctrine is not a bill kook. A doctrine is a precept or principal, a bill is a legislative edit. You failed history I see.

Actually, I graduated with flying colors, especially in history. But moreover, I was trying to use an example to show that something (a bill or doctrine) is named after the person who originally conceived it, not the person who extends it. If you want a better example, lets talk about the fact that we don't call the Kennedy tax cuts the LBJ tax cuts just because LBJ accepted them. Therefore, the Bush tax cuts are, and will forever be, the Bush tax cuts. And next time, try sticking to the point instead of insulting others; that doesn't help get your message across...

Not to mention Congress would not vote for any Bush continuation of tax cuts unless everyone was included. Which meant they were still on the notion of trickle down voodoo economics. JCB you can do better than that or I hope so. Maybe you cannot since you are blinded by the hope of being uber rich mythology that the GOP spins to every person alive and who will listen to their BS. Reality is reality and those who have the 2% of the wealth will not make it possible for others to obtain government contracts to rise to the same level of wealth. Why do we have wars? Come on JCB you really know the answer to this question.

Before Lunch on my first day in Offfice I will eliminate Health Care for the Needy. Before DInnner I willl give the very wealthy the gift they so the've earned by sucking the juice out of the AMericna economy. After DInnner I willl lower the minimum wagew to something that doesn't killl jobs - something around 50c a day. If I stilll have time I will then repeal allll environmental regulations and remove the words "Global warming from alll dictionaries. Make your donation checks payable to "ROmney for President" A man who stands for eveything.

He has complied with the law. Don't you think that if he was hiding something the IRS, under the direction of his opponent, would have already audited his returns?

Go USA,

It is about being transparent. What is he hiding from the voters and why?

He is refusing to release information that every other modern President has released – Why??

Many complained about President Obama not being properly
vetted and now you are willing to give Governor Romney a pass – Why??

GoUSA,

Is that why Romney has not released his tax returns for the last 10 year?

He has been audited?

we all need to know.

The facts are there for any who are interested in the truth, while these are off-shore accounts they are not the tax exempt type of accounts. All taxes were paid just as if they were in the bank in New Hampshire ! This ad is as equally dishonest as their off-shoring ad is !

Jody, Iowa

Mitt's Very Big Wealth Problem. While I have no problem with Romney or anyone else making all the money they can, there is something about Mitt Romney that does not sit well. Hiding money in off-shore accounts to avoid paying taxes,

Heck Jody, with OBAMA as President I have hidden all my accounts under my mattress and a whole under the ground. I want some CHANGE back.

His off-shore accounts need to come out and they will, and so should the protected records from Obama. Fair is Fair.

Jody -- Nice post. It's pretty remarkable that at this point in the campaign season Romney still has not been forthright about taxes, accounts overseas and more importantly on where he stands on issues. Who would vote for someone that doesn't have a platform or is so secretive about his wealth? Unbelievable.

The media is failing to get the answers voters need. Regardless, when the debates come around Romney is going to look foolish. He stands for nothing.

Dennis, you mean transparent like posting a forged BC online? Or maybe transparent as in locking the doors to the Senate and House while passing the ACA? Maybe you meant transparent as in the people you claim you have very little social contact with who are anarchists...but then they are photographed with you in the white house theater room sitting next to you while eating popcorn and watching a movie. Please, preache to us about transparency more!

"Mitt's Very Big Wealth Problem. While I have no problem with Romney or anyone else making all the money they can, there is something about Mitt Romney that does not sit well."

OK you have no problems with the man making money, mighty kindly of you! I have to tell you I am not really that pleased with Romney either...but given the choice between Obama and Romney?? Romney wins hands down!!

"His attitude says that's what rich people do so what of it? There is something about it that just smells bad, hints at anti-American and unpatriot." You want to compare Obama's attitude to Romney's??? LMAO!! Man I thought Bush's attitude was arrogant!! Look up the words Arrogant, Arrogance, Anti-American and unPatriotic and you will find Obama's picture........

Romney is the better choice, is he the perfect choice? No! But give me anybody but Obama!

I am so tired of the lesser of 2 evils.....but this time the lesser of the 2 evils is Romney!

ANYBODY but Obama 2012!!

Go USA, second sentence in my post above, try reading it, it contains these words "even if legal". Doesn't matter if it is legal, no previous president or presidential candidate has ever stashed their cash off-shore; presidential candidates have always released multiple tax returns. Romney's own father released 12 years of tax returns and said that one year's can be a fluke. It smells rotten and if you chose to ignore it, fine, that's your right.

As DENNIS pointed out, it's about "transparency" and since conservatives scream loudly about transparency often, it is quite odd that on Mitt Romney, they give him a pass. What else will Romney keep under wraps? What else is he hiding besides his money? Obviously, according to conservatives, he's a republican, it doesn't matter!

And why should we care about his personal finances, especially when they are legal. Everyone says it is now a global economy and I am sure that Obama and every other rich democrat that is in government service uses every possible method to increase their personal wealth, whether onshore or off.

The real quetion is whether Romney or Obama has true leadership abilities. Romney has demonstrated his throughout the years in business, in government, and in non-government public service (rescuing the 2002 Olympics from economic disaster). Obama's trademark is passing on a major tax increase to the sick and downtrodden. Taxes on medical devices for those that need them, taxes on the health insurance industry, taxes on everyone to support OBAMA care ( it will happen) because he wants and thinks that the government has to take care of everyone. Who thinks they know better than everyone else? OBAMA???

The added taxes that are part of OBAMA care will cause all of our costs to inflate. The medical insurance business and delivery system will paass these additional costs on to everyone in increased premiums. The Affordable CARE ACT (OBAMA CARE) makes all aAmericans puppets on the Health Insurance industries strings. They will tell which doctors to see, what procedures we can receive, and then tell he doctors how much they will pay them. It becomes like the system for farmers, they don't set there prices but have to accept what ever the system demands, or get out of the business.

Actually Mitt has a much bigger problem than his wealth or his Koch friends, in the south it is the fact that he is a Morman, and Bubba and the SBC (Southern Baptist Convention) will never go to the polls to vote for him, I've lived in Bubbaland all my life, I know Bubba very well and I have several family members and friends in the Southern Baptist church - sorry Mitt, you dog just ain't gonna hunt down here. You see, we don't care what they do in the Hamptons, we do care where Mitt goes to church - None of the local republican candidates say one single word about the presidential election, none of them even mention him by name in the few ads they are running, because this is one election the GOP wants to leave religion out of, otherwise, the religious right in the south (who has always taught that Mormanism is a deamonistic cult) would have a "lot of splainin to do" (Lucy & Dezi).

The fact that Romney is able to legally have these secret Cayman Island accounts and Swiss bank accounts within the law shows how broken our tax system is. The main issue, as I see it, is that the next President is going to be tackling the tax system. Can we really trust Romney to eliminate the very loopholes that he is currently exploiting to avoid paying his fair share of income tax?

Ahh, poor Jody.

So to be straight your complaint is that Mitt has followed the law.

Laws you of course do not understand, and have never taken the time to even read.

How funny.

Meanwhile, how about those economic numbers Jody? How about Holders and his illegal adventures?

Romney's wealth shows us he's good at parlaying an expensive and excellent private school education into material success. Bully, bully!

But on the issue of the Bush tax cuts, the main thing I note is that the wealthy are taxed at a much lower overall rate than the middle class because much of their income it investment and capital gains. Investors' money is alive and well and taxed at less the half the rate of wages - and wages are going downhill.

Taxes are used not only to raise revenue, but also to create winners and losers. Investment income has had a good ride over the last 50 years or so, being taxed at a much lower rate than wages earned by honest labor.

I think it is time to either give wage earnings a chance to catch up to investment income by doubling the rate of investment and cap gains, or by doubling the rate of wealthy incomes - or maybe even both.

Ain't nobody gonna stop earning money on investments just because a couple more dollars of taxes are levied. It's still making money.

UBT -- It is your made up story and dog that won't hunt. There is a growing and ever supportive group of Gov. Romney known now as the TeaEvangelists. You see I am a Southern Baptist and I know what has been said in the past. But with all of that said, the southern religious groups will strongly support a man of family and moral values like Gov. Romney over a man who doesn't even go to church. Nice try though and you should also try not to be so bigoted when speaking of southern Americans.

Clotho and GreenTimer -- Spot on. Nice posts.

Jody has no problem with Romney being wealthy- she has a problem with Romney being a republican.

She has no problem with $38,500 a plate fundraisers for Obama- but a big problem with $25,000 a plate fundraisers for Romney- cause, ya know, little people like George Clooney are the ones hosting the Obama events.

Say, Jody- have you sent in $3 bucks to enter the raffles? Ever see even a clue about who wins them? You'd think the Clooney feat winner would have been named, at least.

You don't suppose it's a scam, do you? Like, send in the money, hope for the best- then find out there really are no winners?

Cause I do.

And the Koch Brothers had a $50,000 a plate or $75,000 a couple fund raiser yesterday for Romney.

I do believe that outpaces Obamas $38,500 a plate fund raiser.

Can I buy a vote, please?

Barack Obama 7/9/2012

Romney's offshore bank accounts say a great deal about the man the GOP has running for President. It says he doesn't believe in the country; doesn't have any faith in our systems; and frankly doesn't give a damn about the US. The Swiss bank account is the most troublesome and will require a great deal of explanation, as anyone with a brain and an understanding of these matters well knows.

AK Sabin - your post just shows your ignorance and is so typical of low information Republicans.

Go USA - it is very troublesome that Romney won't release his taxes. Every candidate for President in our lifetime has released years of taxes. Mitt's father released 10 years but Mitt refuses. There is legitimate reason for questions and concerns here.

President Obama has released all documents every other President has released.

Obama/Biden 2012