Bad case of the mondays

So I give you teh stupid.

Who deserves a tax cut more: the top 2 percent — whose wages and benefits are higher than ever, and among whose ranks are the CEOs and Wall Street mavens whose antics have sliced jobs and wages and nearly destroyed the American economy — or the rest of us?

Not a bad issue for Democrats to run on this fall, or in 2012.

Oh, run with it. Please. Embrace completely Nancy and Obama’s redistributive plot to insure we don’t recover from the current economic crises.

epublicans are hell bent on demanding an extension of the Bush tax cut for their patrons at the top, or else they’ll pull the plug on tax cuts for the middle class. This is a gift for the Democrats.

But before this can be a defining election issue in the midterms, Democrats have to bring it to a vote. And they’ve got to do it in the next few weeks, not wait until a lame-duck session after Election Day.

Yes, now. Do it NOW. And, remember, those “at the top” are those making $250,001 a year. Small business owners. Government employees.

The rich spend a far smaller portion of their money than anyone else because, hey, they’re rich. That means continuing the Bush tax cut for them wouldn’t stimulate much demand or create many jobs.

And we HATE them. Let’s forget for a moment that they spend more, they tip more, employ more, buy more … and then let’s TOTALLY pretend for a moment that tax cuts won’t stimulate anything. Or that upping their rates will slow down their consumption or hiring.

But it would blow a giant hole in the budget — $36 billion next year, $700 billion over ten years. Millionaire households would get a windfall of $31 billion next year alone.

Because we can’t cut shit from the budget. No, that would just be kookie talk. And that millionaire “windfall”? That’s they OWN MONEY. It’s not the lotto. The government won’t be writing them a check.

These figures don’t even count in taxes. The $1.3 trillion Bush tax cut of 2001 was a huge windfall for people earning over $500,000 a year. They got about 40 percent of its benefits. The Bush tax cut of 2003 was even better for high rollers. Those with net incomes of about $1 million got an average tax cut of $90,000 a year. Yet taxes on the typical middle-income family dropped just $217. Many lower-income families, who still paid payroll taxes, got nothing back at all.

baha haa haaa haa … Robert Reich thinks we’re all stupid. Problem is, too many people do NOT understand this shit.

In other words, this is the right issue. It’s the right time. It allows Democrats to explain what the Bush tax cuts really did, why supply-side economics is bogus, and the economic challenge ahead.

Go for it Democrats. Go. For. It.

Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized

17 Comments on “Bad case of the mondays”

  1. agiledog Says:

    I take it he is down with giving tax cuts to those people who don’t already pay taxes, like the “poor”?

    In business, that would be called a bribe.

  2. Car in Says:

    They are the most needing of a tax cut, Agile.

  3. Svenster Says:

    What does Reich think the wealthy do with the money they don’t spend on consumption, bury it in the backyard? They invest it in things that create jobs—unless the government takes it away first.

  4. Car in Says:

    In Reich’s simple mind, the poor spend up to 100% of their income on their expenses. Since “the rich” don’t spend that 100% … well, see they just aren’t giving 100% back into the economy.

  5. OceanCat Says:

    The “rich” have had this tax cut for TEN YEARS. Where are the jobs they supposedly created?

  6. agiledog Says:

    Where are the jobs they supposedly created?

    Well, I’ve had at least two of them. I’ve worked for two start-ups funded by venture captialists. And so didn’t everybody else who worked with me. There is 200 at least…

    Wait. You didn’t think start-ups just made money from the start, did you? Or got money from the goverment?

  7. OceanCat Says:

    Two whole jobs. Wow.

  8. TGSG Says:

    The “rich” have had this tax cut for TEN YEARS. Where are the jobs they supposedly created?

    You aren’t that stupid OC, but you pretend to be on the webtubes. Where do ANY private sector jobs come from? Beuller? I’ll answer my own question in case you forgot. Private sector jobs usually come from private sector wealth. You take away that wealth and there are fewer jobs. ok? simple enough for you?

  9. Car in Says:

    Up until 2008, the unemployment numbers were excellent OC. That makes 8 years of pretty good job creation.

  10. OceanCat Says:

    Unemployment numbers? I thought we were talking about creating jobs? No jobs were created under Bush. His creation numbers were stagnant for 8 years.

    So, I ask again, where are the jobs created with the tax cut given 10 years ago? Bueller?

  11. Hotspur Says:

    No jobs were created under Bush. His creation numbers were stagnant for 8 years.


    You are so easy. Think of all of the jobs he saved. That’s the new yardstick we use under Obama, so that is the yardstick we shall apply to Bush. If job creation was stagnant under him (and it wasn’t) he saved more jobs than President Training Wheels.

  12. Car in Says:

    Jobs saved and lives touched.

  13. agiledog Says:

    Two whole jobs. Wow.

    That reply proves you are acting willfully ignorant (or are you really that stupid?) I gave you a clear example of 200 jobs in just two companies – you ignored it or are clueless. Which is it? Hack or dunce? My money’s on hack.

  14. OceanCat Says:

    2 or 200. Still not enough. Bush-politics created virtually no jobs in his 2 term tenure. That tax-cut-for-the-rich 10 years ago didn’t help our economy. It didn’t trickle down. Why should we continue the same old shit that got us in the same old shit storm. No thanks.

  15. agiledog Says:

    So how many is enough, hack? Every start-up company job is funded by the “rich” – that’s been thousands of jobs over the last ten years.

    You are a lying hack, at that. As Car in pointed out, the employment numbers were good until the D-rats took over Congress in 2008.

  16. Car in Says:

    He created virtually no jobs, yet the unemployment rate was the envy of the world.

    Got it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: