http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show#40463734

"REPUBLICANS TO FILIBUSTER TAX CUTS FOR **98%** OF AMERICANS (unless the top 2% of America's wealthiest people also get tax cuts - adding another USD70 BILLION to the annual deficit"

Pretty interesting that we can't extend unemployment for people because OH MY GOD THE DEFICIT WILL GET US ALL! But then those same Republicans are fine with blocking TAX CUTS for most of the country because the super rich will have to pay a bit more.

Why can't the Republicans filibuster Zorn?

Question really should be why we want to borrow more money from China in order to continue a tax break for those making more than $250,000 a year? Or make it more than $1,000,000 a year. My point is that people with that level of income don't need a tax break (I think I could get by on $250,000 a year without much of a problem even if I had to pay a few thousand more in taxes). There's no evidence that tax breaks for individuals at that level really produce more jobs -- otherwise how does one account for all the jobs lost while those tax breaks were in effect from 2001 to 2008? And please don't say I'm blaming Bush -- just stating the fact.

Lets not forget that the rich would be getting the break on the first $250,000 too.

This is such a joke. I agree with all you said City Dog. Why would any average American support giving millionaires and billionaires tax breaks??? Based on reading some of the statements it's just because the don't like the president. How silly this was to listen to on the morning news - unemployment benefits are running out for people who can't find jobs and we want to continue tax cuts for the richest. Tax breaks for them have worked so well up to this point, haven't they? Now with unemployment running out more of these people will be turning to other "social" services such as a food pantry. I guess if you listen to enough black friday shopping stories on the news you'll believe that we're all doing much better now.

C'mon CWJGA, explain to these people how those tax breaks will all trickle down and really don't add to the deficit. They missed our first debate.

I thought the Bush tax cuts were only for millionaires and billionaires. Now you are saying they were tax cuts for 98% of Americans?

It's call the making work pay credit. You should have seen a tiny bit less tax deducted on your paystub beginning this year. I spent mine on the increase in my health care donation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/15/tax-day-2010-protesters-i_n_538556.html

"Obama passed 25 separate tax cuts," Sheryl Stein, founding member of "The Other 95%" said in a statement announcing the group's plans, "including $300 billion in middle class tax cuts -- one of the largest in history - as part of the stimulus package. Unlike President Bush's 2001 tax cuts, which went to the wealthiest 2.2%, President Obama's tax cuts overwhelmingly benefit working and middle class families -- in fact, 95% of all Americans."

I know Maddow can be a bit hard to handle, but you should go through the video I linked to.

The Democrats want to keep tax cuts for people making under $250K, but let the cuts expire for those over $250K.

the republicans are threatening to filibuster everything, every bill, everything, until the rich get their tax cuts.

So the republicans are willing to add more debt, to make sure the top 2% of the country keeps their (fairly small, iirc) tax cuts.

Just watch the video, once Obama got into office, the republicans started filibustering everything. I wasnt aware how this worked, or that Reps were doing it all the time already.

This is your party. Congratulations.

But everyone said the Bush tax cuts were only for millionaires and billionaires. Now you are admitting people making under $250K got tax cuts?

Actually, the Bush tax cuts are called the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 .

Gee... I'll bet they wish they had picked different names for those "relief" acts in view of what actually happened

I'd be a bit more concerned with the Fed bailing out Europe to the tune 3.3 trillion

3.3 Trillion Bail Out to Europe...


It is sad that there are news stories about the bail out mega bucks going to European banks. Sad because that was common knowledge at the time and most paid little attention to it in the glow of the election of the messiah to office as President. All people saw was a free ride for everyone with bail outs galore. It was not so then, it will not be so now. People need to be aware!




A major chunk of the bail out money went overseas to keep European banks afloat and while some argue this helps America, it is just not the truth.
The USA provided, 3.3 TRILLION in credit to those banks from the Federal Reserve, which some people STILL fail to realize is a NOT a federal agency at all but a private institution controlling much of the US money policies.
The bailed out institutions of Wall Street, big banks and European banks are the ones who caused the financial crisis. Americans were not bailed out of anything and lost much as a result. The American public will shoulder this debt that benefited them not at all.
The "too big to fail" idea is one foisted on the public by the Federal Reserve.


A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men ... We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men. (Woodrow Wilson)

Wilson signed the Fed into existence in 1913 and they have "debauched" the currency of the US on a steady ongoing basis.
As John Maynard Keynes stated,

“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic laws on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one in a million is able to diagnose.”


One can note that men like Soros and the Wall street boys have actually changed our society. In fact Soros himself has brought down a few nations in just that way!
Our founding fathers all warned of the dangers of a central private bank creating money by fiat. It would lead to the downfall of the nation. Money talks my friends and those who control the money , control the nations.
Wilson was right, the creation of the Federal Reserve was a huge mistake.
The fact is these private bankers are not concerned with the welfare of the nations to any extent at all except as those nations make money for them. They, like George Soros etc, view nations and their populations as get rich quick schemes. It is all about lining the pockets and line them is exactly what these men do. They live off the people who are left lean and starving while they live sumptuous lives of greed.

You can read more about these massive amounts given away at the Financial Times.

And more about this colossal rip off of the American people at the Washington Post and HERE

Always look at what the other hand is doing while they keep you occupied with some other nonsense.

personally I have said that the Bush tax cuts benefitted the rich more than the average joe.

Why aren't the republicans in this thread facing the real issue here (sure the 3.2 trillion loans are a larger story, but not what this thread is about, quit trying to change the subject, typical republican)

Why are you ok with your party adding to the debt, if that is what it takes to make sure rich people save a bit on their taxes?

also found this on the $3 trillion in loans.

"They are overnight loans that were rolled over so each loan may have been counted multiple times. Its like me lending you 10 dollars at 9 am you paying me back at 5pm everyday over the course of the year and then me saying I lent you 3650 dollars. It isn't technically wrong but it is fairly misleading to the general public. I never needed 3650 to loan you that amount and I never had more than 10 dollars loaned out at any period in time so my exposure was never more than 10 dollars.
One of the problems with the banking crisis is a lot of the investment banks were using overnight repo to bankroll investments. This is money that is lent out on a daily basis so if all the sudden the people running money markets don't want to loan you money you have a VERY VERY short time period to fill that hole. The reserve was essentially plugging that hole to prevent firesales and provided liquidity needed to complete transactions."

Problem is that it has nothing to do with trickle down.

Let me try this a different way.

What makes these tax breaks? For the rich or any one else? Because the government is not going to take all your money, You get a tax break?

How does not taxing one group of people more than another group add to the deficit?

The only thing Washington can do is tax you more or less. They can not give tax breaks. Let me rephrase that, the only way they can give tax breaks is if you assume that the money you earn is yours to take and they are letting you keep some. The only way to give you a tax break is to assume the money belongs in Washington and that out of the goodness of their little hearts they are going to let you keep some.

Not taxing someone more does not add to the deficit. Only spending more adds to the deficit. Problem is that while everyone is fighting over who should pay, they will just keep on spending and blaming it on someone for not paying enough taxes.

Why should the average American oppose taxing the rich more? Because every American has the ability, possibility of being rich. Because when the government is done taxing the rich and that is not enough they will tax everyone else more. Because as much as we want to blame the deficit on people not paying enough taxes, the real problem is the government spending to much money.

Not really,considering the country had about 6% growth for about 6 years.

80% of the Bush tax cuts went to the Middle class and lower.

While it's true that the Bush Tax cuts lowered everyone's taxes they benefit the rich at a higher percentage than the middle and lower class. They were purposely skewed to do that. This year alone, more than 50% of the total benefit of the tax cuts went to 5% of the wealthiest Americans. 98% of Americans make less than $250,000 per year. The amount of taxes they pay doesn't add up the what the rich pay.

The figures I read say that extending the Bush tax cuts to the rich alone will cost about $80 billion over the next two years BUT it is going to cost a lot more than that over the next ten years unless we raise taxes for everybody else. Do you all get that? Because the lost revenue is only going to add to the debt UNLESS we cut spending. And if you are not paying on the debt you have increased interest. And where are we going to cut spending? Who will suffer there? If they cut Social Security it will be the elderly. We can raise the retirement age, but there are not enough jobs now for younger people how the heck do the older people keep their jobs? Do we cut military spending? Most conservatives will say no way!

So we are supposed to hold the middle/lower class hostage and not give them tax cuts if the rich can't have theirs? We are supposed to let the poor suffer and the unemployed lose everything?

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to boost the economy, increase jobs and lower the deficit. They failed miserably. Job growth was only about 1-2% and the deficit increased by trillions of dollars. And we all know the economy wasn't boosted over the last 10 years.

It is a joke to make the comment that all Americans have the potential to become rich. In this economy? Please. People that say that crap must think the rest of us are idiots. The truth is the rich became rich off of the backs of the rest of us between gambling on Wall Street and shipping jobs offshore.

Then there is the whole excuse of inhibiting small businesses. The majority of small businesses don't make over $250,000. What reasonable person considers S corps and partnerships making millions of dollars a year small? The Republicans/conservatives apparently do or are they trying to confuse the public by these claims.

To the people reading this, who don't completely understand what is going on...don't believe those that tell you that this is a class war against the rich. It is a class war against YOU...the middle or lower class. It think it is despicable that people would even take up for the case against tax increases for the wealthiest of Americans.

How can anyone argue with this logic? I can't.