Clarification, please: who was President for the largest tax cut in American history?

Search

RDWHAHB
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
1,629
Tokens
I read somewhere it was Barack Obama. And that every Republican in the Congress voted against the largest tax cut in American history. And that about 95% of working Americans get a tax cut. And that the average working family will see an increase of about $65 per month in their paychecks starting in a few weeks.

Anybody else read about this?
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
Your source? Do you know the details? Does anybody know the details?

If true, is that change? or more of the same?
 

RDWHAHB
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
1,629
Tokens
Your source? Do you know the details? Does anybody know the details?

If true, is that change? or more of the same?

I only asked if anybody else had read about it. Check the Google if you'd like. No need for me to make things up.

You seem a bit testy today. Problems with Mrs. 99? Well, I'm sorry to hear about it.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
I thought it was common knowledge. I had cut and pasted where virtually unanymously republicans in congress voted against the largest tax cut in history.

$282,000,000,000.00 for those who cant read.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
I only asked if anybody else had read about it. Check the Google if you'd like. No need for me to make things up.

You seem a bit testy today. Problems with Mrs. 99? Well, I'm sorry to hear about it.

All is well, thank you. And her name is Huskygal.

I don't have my usual patience during tax season, but I was asking serious questions in this thread.

I don't know the details, and I'm very interested in them, especially pertaining to tax and business policy. When I found the entire text on-line, I found it was worded vaguely. It appears the bill is a road map, with policy specifics to follow.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,149
Tokens
I thought it was common knowledge. I had cut and pasted where virtually unanymously republicans in congress voted against the largest tax cut in history.

$282,000,000,000.00 for those who cant read.

LOL, punter thinks press releases offer details. Punter, I don't look for tax policy in the likes of Ebony & Life.

If one doesn't like the largest expansion of federal government in our history, why should one vote for it? I'm thinking everybody might like something in the bill, that doesn't mean they like the bill.

Thinking for those who can't think.
 

I'm from the government and I'm here to help
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,544
Tokens
since much of this forum have no minds of their own and are gravitating to a strictly cut and paste model, let me join the flock

btw, i love tax cuts for folks that don't pay taxes :)

Morning Bell: The Largest Wasted Tax Cut in History

  • category_199.gif
    Posted February 18th, 2009 at 8.52am in Ongoing Priorities.
<!-- sphereit start -->Apparently the Obama Administration is not happy about how a major portion of their economic stimulus package is being covered. The Atlantic reports that the White House has been pointing out to journalists that President Barack Obama signed “one of the largest tax cuts in history.” But just because the Obama Administration calls something a tax cut, doesn’t make it so. More than a third of Obama’s “Making Work Pay” tax plan goes to people who do not pay income taxes. That makes it a welfare income redistribution plan, not a tax cut. That is why, after President Obama told House Republicans he would not compromise in any way on his tax plan, he lost the entire caucus.
But let’s set aside the fact that a third of Obama’s ‘tax cut’ is really just welfare by another name. Even the parts of it that do actually cut the income taxes of tax paying Americans are destined to fail. This is because the Obama tax cut repeats the exact same mistakes that President George Bush made. Just like Bush’s 2001 and 2008 tax cuts, Obama’s tax cut is a purely temporary cut designed to boost consumer spending. Both the 2001 and 2008 temporary Bush tax cuts failed to stimulate the economy. Heritage Foundation Vice President of Domestic and Economic Policy Studies, Stuart Butler explains why:
There are several factors behind the failure of temporary tax holidays to stimulate economic recovery. One reason is that even if the key to future growth was to increase household spending, a tax holiday will not prompt the necessary splurge.

Another reason … is that a family considering a significant increase in spending, or an investor contemplating a new business venture or expansion, thinks about the long term, not the next few months.

The only way fiscal policy can change this spending or investing inertia is to improve the prospects for future after-tax income from earnings or from capital investment. The kinds of tax reductions that do that are not short-term rebates or holidays but long-term tax rate reductions that are, as former Treasury official John Taylor recently wrote, “permanent, pervasive and predictable.
The $116 billion wasted by Obama’s “Making Work Pay” tax cuts are neither permanent, pervasive, nor predictable. American workers will only receive between $8 to $14 a week more in each paycheck, and the actual size of the boost will not be known until the Internal Revenue Service releases new tax tables for employers to adjust their payrolls. Worse, since the tax rebates are phased out at higher incomes levels, the plan also raises marginal tax rates on some of the most-productive people in the world.
With about a third of the $787 billion economic stimulus package devoted to tax cuts that have no hope of stimulating the economy, it should come as no surprise that White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said he “wouldn’t foreclose” on the possibility that the Obama Administration would come back to Congress asking for yet more deficit spending stimulus in the near future.
Quick Hits:
  • After more than doubling the size of the deficit in just one month, President Barack Obama will host a “fiscal responsibility summit” some time next week.
  • President Obama will announce a $50 billion foreclosure prevention program in Arizona today.
  • General Motors Corp. and Chrysler said Tuesday that they needed nearly $22 billion more in government loans to avoid financial ruin.
  • The Texas financier accused by the Securities and Exchange Commission Tuesday of “massive ongoing fraud” was a generous political donor who gave mostly to Democrats.
  • Three Democrats; Reps. Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-FL) gave back campaign donations listed as coming from employees of a major lobbying firm that is under federal investigation.
 

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
1,450
Tokens
My math: If you don't have a pie and cut it you get zero slices....

Obama's Math: If you don't have a pie and cut it you get pieces of the pie back????

Tax cut my ass
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
AS usual with you rat wangers its who gets the cut. Rich people deserve it but the middle class needs to keep going without.
 

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
7,168
Tokens
Since the tax cut is not going straight to the rich, the rich would rather vote against it^<<^
 

bushman
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
14,457
Tokens
The middle classes need to sacrifice themselves so that the American Aristocracy can continue to lead America to victory.

The British Empire was built on the philantrophy of the middle and lower orders.

Nice to see you guys keeping up the side.

Orwells "animal farm" might be worth a read.
 

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
1,450
Tokens
If all the money in the US was divided up evenly between all people above the age of 18, the people who are the wealthest among us would STILL BE in wealthest among us in one year.
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Tokens
If all the money in the US was divided up evenly between all people above the age of 18, the people who are the wealthest among us would STILL BE in wealthest among us in one year.
So? You think some 90 year olds are going to out fox everyone and inherit billions again?
 

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
7,168
Tokens
If all the money in the US was divided up evenly between all people above the age of 18, the people who are the wealthest among us would STILL BE in wealthest among us in one year.


Maybe, maybe not.

A lot of the wealth is inherited and its a whole lot easier to make money once you have it
 

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
1,450
Tokens
Out fox??? LMAO. Your right every single person who makes more than a million per year inherited it. Geeez unbelievable
 

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
1,450
Tokens
So if you are worth a lot, you inherited it, therefore your lucky. If you don't have alot of money your just unlucky. LOL
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,884
Messages
13,574,712
Members
100,882
Latest member
topbettor24
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com