Reply #2: Permanent tax cuts. [View All]

[cosmicaug]

no_hypocrisy wrote:

But if you remember when he was campaigning and right after he took office, the economy was fine, there was a surplus, and therefore, no reason for the government to keep "your money". And we all got checks in the mail and the tax cuts went forth.

Now c'mon! Which is it? It doesn't matter because he lied in order to get those tax cuts.

And he's still lying and he wants those tax cuts to be permanent (although I don't see HOW, as a subsequent Congress could modify or abolish them altogether).

And, if you remember, those tax cuts only passed because they had expiration dates attached (why doesn't anyone in the "liberal media" bring this up?). Because, when they looked at those tax cuts over the years it was obvious, even to republicans, that the effects on the federal budget were simply insane and unsustainable and thus the expirations feature was inserted so that they could pretend that it wasn't such a bad idea.

The funny thing is, these same people will now undoubtedly vote to make them permanent when nothing has changed to make the fiscal implications of these tax cuts change in any way. I suppose that if they don't do this, someone like Grover Norquist can spin no making the tax cuts permanent as a tax raise and all politicians fear that characterization nowadays (whether it happens to be true or not).