Lalo Alcaraz for November 17, 2010

Right on, CK! Then you can stay on welfare/unemployment for another 100 years living off the middle class workers.

That’s on the assumption that the rich you so denigrate will still be handing out the jobs after you tax them out of business.

Have you ever gotten a job from a hobo?

Check your permeses, sir!

^The assumption that they were handing out jobs at all - after we the middle class gave them so much money already - is clueless.

Giving the rich more money does not help! They will simply demand more. It’s like the pro sports teams who demand bigger and bigger stadiums paid for by the community - and then they leave for another city, dumping their old fans with the bill.

This country has been at its most economically vibrant when the gab between rich and middle class has been smallest.

^^Which team left town after the community built a new stadium for them? And how is that the same as extending tax cuts for everybody. Personally, I would like to see tax cuts expire for the wealthy individual but extended for businesses. Businesses hire people, not individuals. Problem is, right now, there is no distinction, since most small businesses are actually people – the owner.

@Bill Ewing, if the rich were actually creating jobs in America, then maybe. But they’re not.

You don’t have to denigrate the rich to see that a very few of the elite are rapidly sucking up all the resources while the middle class is circling the drain. Without discussing what’s fair, that is clearly bad for the economy and society.

People in the top tax bracket, “these so-called wealthy, most of them are small-business owners.” http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/27/stephen-hayes/so-called-wealthy-are-actually-small-business-owne/

75% though, isn’t a fair suggestion, regardless of how much wealth redistribution upwards we’ve endured.

mindless robots, posting nonsense.

the IRS rates since 2001 have left the Bush tax cuts money in the Economy, in private hands, to be saved, or invested, or spent.

If the current IRS rates are extended, the federal treasury will not lose a single dollar, since it did not receive tax revenue that was reduced in 2001…!!!! How hard is that to understand???????????

no one in congress or the white house has proposed any “tax cut”….(a tax cut would reduce the IRS rates now in force, that end 12/31/10)…..

the GOP and wise Dems want to prevent the 1/01/11 pending TAX HIKE….!!!

*successful “rich” in business are American’s JOB PROVIDERS. (how many homeless street people have you worked for and been paid for a good long-term job????)

Liars can “figure” and their “figures” certainly Lie, as even government auditors are publishing nowadays the WHOPPER LIES used to promote ObamaCare….no wonder most voters Nov. 2010 hold congress in contempt at 17% approval rating!!!

^ I read the article. There are lies, d@mn lies and statistics.

Disgusting - You are a liar when you call letting the cuts expire a “tax hike.” The Bush administration put in the 10 year expiration date because the impact on the deficit in 2001 was too large to get passed even by the Republican Congress at the time. The tax rate after the cuts expire will still be less than it was during Reagan or Bush ‘41’s terms.

Churchill, the fact that it’s 2 to 3 percent of businesses, and one-third of the revenue, is perfectly consistent. The top 2 percent of small businesses are legal firms and hedge funds, so they bring in a huge amount of money. They also hire almost no one, and no one is arguing with a straight face that they’ll bring back any jobs if we end their tax cuts. They’ve had these exact same tax cuts for ten years. How is the economy doing?

The CBO, a nonpartisan research group working for congress, that says reducing tax cuts on the rich is the worst of 11 options for spending 700 billion dollars when it comes to creating jobs. If you can find any serious economist who disagrees, I’d be glad to hear it.

The only effect of extending the Bush tax cuts is that rich people will keep more of their money, and the deficit will never be under control. There won’t be any more or fewer jobs than there are now, only perhaps the government won’t have its hands quite so tied up when it comes to measure that will actually make some progress.

“They’ve had these exact same tax cuts for ten years. How is the economy doing?”

Twenty-two million jobs were created during Clinton’s two terms but only 3 million during Bush’s http://politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/jul/25/sherrod-brown/sherrod-brown-touts-job-grown-during-clinton-presi/

Obviously they’ve caused economic boons. 3,000,000 > 22,000,000, obviously.

As stated, that information you post doesn’t dispute the information found by PolitiFact. It’s the same as the population, do you dispute the fact that 2% of the population make a disproportionately large amount of the income when compared to the other 98% ? It’s the same with businesses. Revenue Distribution and Population are not the same thing. There’s nothing contradictory in your quotes that dispute the NUMBER of small businesses.

beenthere said;

“Which team left town after the community built a new stadium for them?”

Quebec city Nordiques, Winnipeg Jets. Not to mention the Montreal Expos, but the stadium wasn’t built for them. It was built for the olympics.

and that’s EXACTLY why we think you’re an idiot Tigger.

So y’all think George Soros can’t afford a measly 3% increase? How many jobs does he create as a hedge funder? How many jobs does Bill Gates create? I’d listen to you argue that Microsoft creates jobs… but not Bill.

Why is it so hard to understand that IT’S NOT THE GOVERNMENT’S MONEY!!! The “Rich” who the lefties think need to be punished earned that money. Don’t be jealous, get your A$$ out there and get a job or provide a service that people will pay for. A 15-20% flat tax on everyone would be more fair and generate much more revenue than the current system.

“I know for a fact if Obama wanted to give a Huge Tax to the Top 1%, every Liberal on this message boaerd would support it 1000%”

I laughed. A lot.

@ Jade - don’t worry, Tigger is still thinking of the JFK tax cut, and how low it set the max tax rate.

Hint: it was over twice the current percentage.

Fun fact: It wasn’t JFK whose signature is on the bill, but LBJ’s. Well, LBJ cut the income tax twice, I believe, and had a major war going on - and we know how well that worked out for him.

Rich people are still getting tax cuts, it isn’t only a republican thing, that’s a corrupted thing by weak puny selfish folks.

Neither democrat nor republican deserve a seat in that white house, those that disagree, don’t matter.

Ignorance sides with one side or the other when it comes to democrat or republican as “the bad guys”.

When you pick a political party, you’ve already betrayed America.

No tax increase, Bruce, merely a tax restoration, and no one has an substantial argument for halting the restoration on the wealthy.

Thanks, Jade & Rodney, for your sensible remarks.

4UK4ata I gave up explaining to TEAGGER that he dropped the tax rate so that he could collect more taxes, but he, being a real toon, thinks he’s right. He doesn’t know that the old income rate was loaded with loop holes.