Pelosi, Reid ask Bush to meet on economy

Do you really think these 2 parties can work together for the good of the country?
Na..........

How dare the administration try to run the country without Harry and Nance's okay!

Prez 26% and his Republican lapdogs ran up an 11 Trillion dollar debt from 2001 - 2006, which makes it almost laughable that now that the Dems are in charge they're complaining about spending and the crappy economy.

China's economy is doing great thanks to the Republic Parties war on Iraq.

Conservatives....my arse!!!

The Democrats have the same answer for a fragile economy that Herbert Hoover had in 1932: Raise taxes. In 1932, it drove the country further into depression. And now Reid and Pelosi want to do the same thing, raise taxes, take more money out of consumer pockets and place it in the hands of an irresponsible Congress with all of its pork-barrel earmarks. Bridge to nowhere anyone? No thank you. I don't know about you but I trust myself to spend my money more than a bunch of politicians.

Jeff,

Sometimes the parents have to step in.

Wow, another slap at the US and a promo for Communism.

If things are going that bad (US), ever thought about moving.

Personally, I like the fact I have free speech.

欢呼 cheers,

George W Bush - Record Budget Deficit

History of U.S. Budget Surplus/Deficit:

http://s28.photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi28.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc241%2Ftsamshara%2Falbum4%2F657e.jpg&searchTerm=deficit&pageOffset=11

If we keep electing "conservatives" to the highest office we're going to go broke.

Reid and Pelosi wanted America's military to fail in Iraq and now they have egg on their faces with 'The Surge' being a success.

Now they want to give advice on the economy?...uh, No Thanks!

Paulo

Enjoy;

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Note the 96-2000 time frame.

Good point, Bubba, with an approval rating of 18%, the congressional leadership certainly needs some adult supervision. Here's to hoping that Bush and the GOP leaders can provide some. I'm not holding my breath with any of this bunch.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/103675/Improvement-Job-Scores-Bush-Congress.aspx

Here's to hoping that Bush and the GOP leaders can provide some. I'm not holding my breath with any of this bunch.

Posted by: Jeff | January 11, 2008 5:59 PM

Don't worry Jeff, after 08 there won't be very many Republic Party Congress members left to block the progress that the American people are asking for.

Reid and Pelosi wanted America's military to fail in Iraq and now they have egg on their faces with 'The Surge' being a success.

Now they want to give advice on the economy?...uh, No Thanks!

Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | January 11, 2008 5:48 PM

I won't even address the pansy ass attack about wanting failure....but if you want to say Bushs' "fine" handling of the Iraq war as insight on his abilities......no thanks.

Reid and Pelosi wanted America's military to fail in Iraq and now they have egg on their faces with 'The Surge' being a success.
_____________________________
Please define "success" rather than dealing in your usual vague platitudes. I'm guessing this is similar to your 95% of mortgages can be paid on time argument, completely ignoring the fact that when prices go up, paying for things gets more difficult.

Jeff,

The perfect storm:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/12/19/notes121907.DTL

Paulo,

With TeamBush!

failure = success

Note to WJC, you need to raise your standards next time:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=507506&in_page_id=1811

Anybody notice that since Jeff started posting again, Terry has disappeared?

dt,

I hope John D doesn't see that! He might abandon the log cabin and move to France!!

Paulo,

You were the cheerleader for the state of the US economy recently. Guess you're looking for new ☁ to shovel.

That ain't egg on YOUR face.

Jeff,

Let's talk next year when the Dems actually have the Oval Office and a plurality in both houses.

Oh wait, the republics had that opportunity for five years.....and the judiciary......and nothing!

To cast Congress as Dem, with a 51 majority in Senate, is more than a stretch. The approval rating is more of an indictment to your camp.

Just wait until 60+ in the Senate are the good guys.

BillR,

Here comes Nancy and Harry will be bringing a bunch of Kenseyian crap with them and more gov't spending.

Trickled On,

Try 50% higher than your number - if you need help with the math let me know.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/president_bush_job_approval

CMOrris,

96-2000 back when Conservative Republicans were in charge of the purse strings.

FlowerPower,

Someone has to work - i'm part of the 95% employed, not the 5% unemployed that can sit in on their brains all day.

The soultion is to lower corporate tax rates like all of Europe is doing. The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the western world. Lower taxes means increased ROIs, which means more porjects done by corporate America, whic means higher employment, which leads to more tax revenues - both from the individual and the corporateion.

The Democrats have the same answer for a fragile economy that Herbert Hoover had in 1932..._____________________
And Hoover was a REPUBLICAN. So are you saying republicrites like to raise taxes? Or are you saying a REPUBLICAN was WRONG? Take your pick.

I just wish that terry would come back and tell us how trickle down economics actually work.

Gosh, if only W's admin had the advantage of some kind of crazy technological invention like the computer!

That would fix it! Spend, borrow, spend more, veto nothing, spend some more, borrow, borrow, borrow, spend, spend, veto nothing.......inflation?...no way... won't happen.... borrow some more.....spend more, borrow more, spend more..... oh, poor terry, he just won't get it.

terry, are you jeff?

jeff, are you terry?

bill, are you terryjeff?

Bridge to nowhere anyone?
Posted by: Zane | January 11, 2008 5:14 PM

Dead on....exept, that bridge to nowhere was approved by the republican lead congress to a republican in Alaska who is now under investigation. But go ahead and whine about the democrats if you want...your just plain WRONG!

Bridge to nowhere anyone?
Posted by: Zane | January 11, 2008 5:14 PM

Dead on....exept, that bridge to nowhere was approved by the republican lead congress to a republican in Alaska who is now under investigation. But go ahead and whine about the democrats if you want...your just plain WRONG!

The soultion is to lower corporate tax rates like all of Europe is doing.
Posted by: Terry | January 11, 2008 10:54 PM

Thats right...so CEOs like the one who will be getting 115million dollar severance pay from countrywide mortgage? Sorry..you may want to put the money into the companies but the average person will see very little of it. It's called greed Terry.

terry wants to credit the repugnant congress in the 90's for the fiscal discipline and reponsibility espoused by the great Bill Clinton.

I remember when terry tried to credit the repug congress for the greatest economic expansion in history. Unfortunately it was the direct result of sound fiscal policy that Mr. Clinton was preaching and enacting in 1993. But terry likes to credit the repug congress that didn't actually take over until 1994. And, of course, vc free market corporate geniuses riding the tech wave. It's easy to be like terry. The world is simply black and white. Credit the repugs for everything good and blame the democrats for everything bad. Life is just so much easier that way. And you feel better about yourself....if you're terry.

Neal, look up you Kenseyian dimwit

Terry,

I think you meant KEYNESIAN after John Maynard Keynes, the British economist.
Your "Kenseyian" may be a Freudian reference to the male dolls you play with in the basement.

Who's the "dimwit?"

Terry,

Are you finally insane?

The Republics were in charge of the purse strings until Jan 07, with the addition of GWB in charge.

It's going to take another 4 years to reverse the trend, just as it did with President Clinton at the helm.

KB,

I wasn't aware of your toy collection, but I'm glad the spelling police corrected me.

CM,

I won't defend the spending habots of the GOP for 2001-06. Isn't it ironic that all the dems are calling for more spending to spur the economy?

Terry,

They, the Dems, are also calling for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts to pay for it all.

They get the tax side of the equation.

If you remember, a large majority, 60 to 70% of Americans opposed ALL of GWB's tax cuts.

It was a historic opportunity to pay down the national debt, actual citizen support to maintain current tax levels.

But Bush went with ideology and destroyed any hope of reducing the debt for a generation at least.

Why Tickle Down Economics violates basic human behavior, and common sense:

The premise that giving the uber wealthy bigger tax breaks in hope that they will therefore invest more of that "found" income into the economy by purchasing more goods and services thereby increasing demand for them, thus increasing the labor market and wages, falls flat on it's face when confronted with the reality of how the uber wealthy got where they are.

The upper ten percent of wealth in America consists of extremely smart, hard-working, savvy and disciplined folk. They recognize the value of the dollar, invest wisely and are typically tight with their money, philanthropy aside. They are disciplined investors that leverage their positions by being ahead of market fluctuations. Another common characteristic, as unflattering as it may be, is their profound level of greed. Other admirable traits aside, the typical benefactor of most upper bracket tax relief would sooner sell off a family member than suffer a drop in personal fortune.

So how does a sudden windfall in net worth via tax relief turn these fiscally responsible folk into spend-thrift fools?

Plain and simple, it doesn't. The majority of money gained from tax relief is quickly reinvested into their own portfolios. Saved for a rainy day.

The premise that this money is pushed into the economy via luxury purchases, yachts, cars, second or third homes, etc. is nothing more than a trickle down fairy tale. Surely, a small increase in durable goods can be expected but nowhere near the level that most trickle down proponents argue. Not to mention that the supposed back lash of job and wage increases is neither realistic nor sustainable.

Educated, fiscally responsible, greed-oriented people do not take on a first time lottery winner's mentality.

It's against their nature.

CM,

Assuming your statement is true about the % of Americans opposing the Bush Tax Cuts, - The reason why they opposed the tax cuts is because they don't pay a lot of income tax in the first place and therefore they didn't directly benefitted. However, they did benefit from have other's income taxes cut becuase that money generated investment which created jobs. Most people don't understand the indirect effect.

Econochild,

When you are speaking of the wealthy (I'll assume you are talking about high income people and not high wealth people, since we have an income tax in this country and not a wealth tax) you mention "The majority of money gained from tax relief is quickly reinvested into their own portfolios".

What do you think happens to that capital once it is invested in their portfolio? Do you think it sits in a vault at Merril Lynch? No, that increase the amount of capital in the economy, and therefore lwoers the cost of capital. A lower cost of capital allows corporations to expand more. More corporate expansion creates job. Job createion creates more consumer spending and more tax revenue for the gov't.

"The reason why they opposed the tax cuts is because they don't pay a lot of income tax in the first place and therefore they didn't directly benefitted. However, they did benefit from have other's income taxes cut becuase that money generated investment which created jobs. Most people don't understand the indirect effect."

Terry,

Following your "logic," it's OK to litter because you're providing jobs to the people who have to clean up after you.

KB,

Obviously, you don't follow the logic.

Don't put a match near that statement because that strawman will disappear.

Let me give an example so that you MAY have an opportunity to follow:

A family of four has AGI of $40,000 doing a very simple federal income tax return, they would pay at most (because I did not factor in any credits)$1569 or under 4% of their income in Federal Income Taxes.

Double that famiy's income and their tax goes to $7,569 or almost five times higher or 9.5% of their income.

Double that amount to an AGI of $160,000 and they pay an income tax of $26,988 or almost 17% of their income.

Therefore, if you are going to income tax cuts, it is going to those that pay income taxes. If that family of four that make $40,000 hears that income taxes are going to be cut, they aren't that excited because it only means $157 since they don't pay that much to begin with. But the family that makes $160K will get a $2699 tax cut which they will be able to spend/invest which will grow the economy.

Terry,

In all your years of beancounting, when was the last time you were paid to find a loophole for the guy who makes $40K. Thought so.

But since you're a "last worder" I'm sure you'll continue to justify the lack of tax equity. Keep littering.

Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | January 13, 2008 2:55 PM

Kenny B,

Let TrickleDown Boy have the last word, he's like all the other Wingnuts (Bush), it doesn't matter if the truth is smacking him in the face like a piece of raw meat, he'll ALWAYS claim that he's right.

KB,

I give the last word to try make a point to "dead brainers". In my example above, I forgot the simple Child Tax Credit of $1000 per child, so that family making $40K would only pay nothing since they would have a $2000 child tax credit. Why would I have to find a loophole for a taxpayer that owes nothing?

When it comes to economic/tax policy, do you trust a CPA or an everyday mope such as yourself.

If you have an intellgent last word, I would love to hear it.

Terry,

Keep calling us "dead brainers" and "everyday mopes" and you'll find yourself back in the $40K bracket in no time. But maybe your handlers don't let you speak to clients, in which case I understand why THE SWAMP is such an important outlet for you.

Ah Bartleby! Ah humanity!

Terry,

....but someone making 40K, depending on lots of rules, may not pay as much Income tax, but they pay FICA on all of their income.

Let's level the field and have people making 90k plus pay FICA on all their income.

Also, us po folk pay a larger percentage of our meagre earnings for property tax, sales tax.

You sound more and more like some kind of effete elitist aristocrat ginning up the class war.

KB,

Lets see, you can call us conservatives - nazis, facists, wingnuts, deadenders,....; but as soon as something gets thrown back at you, you throw a hissy fit.

The $40K tax bracket is something I haven't seen since the 80's.

CM,

Yes someone making $40K does pay 12.4% (includes employer match) into the gov't run generational ponzi scheme and that is a crime. Could you imagine the future financial security that family could have if they were allowed to save/invest that $4800 annual amount?

The cap on FICA is $102K this year. Yes you poor folk do pay a disproportionate share of your income in sales tax (that is why you won't find me backing the "fair tax"). As far as property taxes, that correlates income to some extent but also has the variable of how long one has lived in the house.

Conservatives are last to gin up class warfare - listen to Edwards and Obama if you want to hear class warfare.

Last Worder Terry,

I've never used any of the terms you cite, but I guess your world is painted with a very broad brush in hues of black and white.

KB,

If you have never called me one of those terms, I apologize. But, most of your ilk (think John E) has called me at least one of those derogatory terms.