Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Today, as I do my income taxes, I think upon on the changes Bill Clinton made.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:39 PM
Original message
Today, as I do my income taxes, I think upon on the changes Bill Clinton made.
Back in 1992, I supported Harkin and was disappointed Bill took the nomination. But then he promised a child tax credit AND a way for my kids to work their way through college doing volunteer work, so I permitted myself to get a little enthusiastic.

I have six kids, and by the time the full child tax credit took hold, the older kids were no longer eligible.


I'm up to my wazoo in the loans I've taken out to send my kids to the state universities.

Meantime, I used to do my taxes in an hour with a pencil and calculator. Now I use a purchased computer program. The reason? Bill loaded up the tax code with dozens of credits and deductions, but each one comes with a separate worksheet to determine if I should take credit A or deduction B or whether I'm even eligible at all because this kid turned 17 last year or my husband got a bonus....



Thanks a lot for nothing, Bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yeah, those eight years of peace and prosperity really sucked.
Too bad George H. W. Bush wasn't re-elected. Then we could have had a President Quayle to follow.

Ah, what could have been.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Bush1 would've been impeached after BCCI report was released in Dec 1992.
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 12:52 PM by blm
The Dem running in 96 would've won anyway and NO GOP takeover could possibly occur after the public heard about the extent of the crimes and coverups that BushInc engaged in that put our country and its democracy in such peril.

There never would've been a Bush2 possible, no 9-11 event, no current Iraq war, and no future war with Iran if the honest Dems in Congress and Senate had their clear shot in 1993 and 1994 at fully revealing Poppy Bush and his cronies on the many outstanding matters of IranContra, Iraqgate, BCCI and CIA Drugrunning operations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Yep
Even if he wasn't keen on handling point, Clinton could've spared us this mess with little effort -- turn Walsh loose. That's all. Dumbass wouldn't do it and was rewarded with a decade of vilification and tumult for being a good "bipartisan." And like a whipped dog, he's still ingratiating himself to the lowlifes who thrashed him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. BCCI didn't even GET a Special Prosecutor because Clinton deep-sixed that report so fast.
And THAT protection of BushInc by Clinton is what led to nearly everything tragic we have been living thru as a nation since 1993.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. True, but SPs are free-ranging
and Walsh was thoroughly pissed off by what he was already sitting on. If Bill hadn't let his investigation lapse, who knows where Walsh would've gone? Bill could've let him carry on and credibly claimed respect for the prosecutor's independence. But of course, he didn't.

I'm with you, a decade and a half of Clinton's bizarre solicitous behavior doesn't leave me much room to think he can be anything other than complicit. I'm just noting how damning it was for him to let Walsh's investigation peter out. There are no provisions in the law for bygones for high crimes. Also, if Clinton's the smooth, savvy player he's reputed to be, he wouldn't have folded so quickly and left himself vulnerable. Like I said, he's a dumbass. And dirty as hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Clinton took office and openly CRITICIZED Walsh as a 'zealous' prosecutor
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 01:58 PM by blm
and Clinton didn't think IranContra operation deserved prosecution. Of course, now we also know that Mena Airport was the hub Poppy Bush used for the part of IranContra operation where they were running all that cheap IranContra cocaine they were dumping by the TONS into black communities, which triggered the crack epidemic of the 80s and 90s.

No small wonder the governor of Arkansas at the time wouldn't be keen on those matters of GHWBush's criminal operations being more fully revealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Yep
I agree. His cheery exhortations to "move on" made my jaw drop back then and were tired schtick by the time he was doing the same for Dubya's 16 Words in the SOTU. I'm just flummoxed by what a freakin' rube he is. Walsh was his last chance at insurance and he didn't take it. Those who regard Bill's desperate "triangulations" to fend off the Republican onslaught as some sort of progressive high water mark don't know what they really could've had. He's a timid lackey, and his wife is clearly the same, accomodating rightwing freakshows and only kicking leftward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. In fact, the OP mentioned one 1992 contender far more likely to have
done this - Tom Harkin.

He also would never have signed NAFTA unless it had the type of STRONG worker protections and environmental protections that could have made it a positive - setting a floor on how cheap labor could be - rather than - as they were - something that hurt workers on both ends. (Globalization already made the labor market global, diminishing the power of labor unions, because employers could move the work elsewhere. It may be that GOOD fair trade agreements could be part of the solution by fighting to raise the standard for workers everywhere - to avoid the race to the bottom.)

He would have likely changed US foreign policy. It was Harkin, who with Kerry in 1985, when both were brand new Senators, tried to get Reagan to not engage in his covert Central American actions to help the Contras defeat the elected Sandinista government. (Bill Clinton supported funding the Contras.)

Not to mention - we would never have heard of Monica!

GHWB was below 40% and Perot would have been less competitive had the Democrats had a progressive like Harkin. There is no way he would not have won. It's too bad that Americans didn't reject the very charming Clinton, after it was clear even in the primaries that he was very prone to lying and scapegoating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. I've long felt that Clinton's bimbo eruptions were the reason he was nominated.
They put his name out front above the rest of the pack and netted him priceless exposure on 60 Minutes. Most Americans considered his private life private, so little harm was done. In exchange, he received name recognition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #15
27. easier to control....imo. I'll bet the Bushes have the same leverage with McCain.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. That is interesting - it did give him a huge amount of visiibility
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. If I had known how close Clintons were to Bush and his powerful cronies like Jackson Stephens, I'd
have worked HARDER for another Dem nominee like Harkin and Tsongas. Neither would have let BushInc off the hook after the release of the BCCI report. And Walsh's NEW evidence of GHWBush's involvement in IranContra would also have had a fuller examination and revealed to the American people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. mmm...maybe. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Most certainly. You think he ran the worst campaign in history unintentionally?
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 02:35 PM by blm
You think the guy who was actually running the CIA for decades didn't KNOW how to run for re-election and win against a small state governor with MANY sexual encounters with women not his wife? Poppy was known for being the chief blackmailer of other Republicans to enforce 'party unity' under Nixon. You think he didn't KNOW about Bill's vulnerable areas, especially when he knew Bill pretty darn well as Poppy had been accessing Mena for his CIA drugrunning operations for years?

Arrangements like that just don't happen in a vacuum. Someone has to be told to look the other way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
25. Just a couple of things to add to that
NAFTA, DOMA, Welfare Reform, Telecommunications Act (Here's a present for you Rupert. Now go off and rape and pillage the airwaves with our blessing), DLC and more welfare for corporations with Bill's blessing.

It is increasingly evident that The Big Dog was more of a Lap Dog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
3. I prefer France's approach to college costs. They pay for their students. We don't.
Edited on Sat Apr-05-08 12:57 PM by Selatius
In America, you have to pay for it yourself, usually by taking on interest-bearing loans. If you are really smart, you can get a scholarship, but if you weren't the smartest, well, good luck.

Tuition for college students is paid for through the government's budget, which is funded by France's income taxes and so on. I look on France's method of dealing with tuition costs with sheer envy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_France#Tuition_Costs

Another characteristic is the low tuition costs. Since higher education is funded by the state, the fees are very low: the tuition varies from 150€ to 700€ depending on the university and the different levels of education. (licence, master, doctorat). One can therefore get a Master's degree (in 5 years) for about 750-3,500€. Additionally, students from low-income families can apply for scholarships, paying nominal sums for tuition or textbooks, and even getting a monthly stipend up to 450€/month.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. That's not too different from what my husband and I paid to go to
the state university back in the mid-70's. It was possible then to live at home, work a summer job and pay for books and tuition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yeah, but because of the massive military build-up in the 1980s, they cut education to the bone
And inflation also ate up the value of whatever aid was still being offered. In the 1960s they were ramping up spending on health care and education and infrastructure as apart of Johnson's "War On Poverty," but it ended when he destroyed himself with Viêt Nam. Then the country turned to shit, and the younger generation voted for Reagan and his dumb "supply-side economics" rubbish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
5. Thanks to Bill Clinton's Hope Credit & Lifetime Learning Credit we saved a ton of money
when my kids were going to college. We will always be grateful to him for his educational programs and you should try be grateful, too, instead of being vindicative for all the wrong reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrispyQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. You would enjoy the beginning of chapter 10 of "Stupid White Men."
The entire chapter is good, but the beginning is especially entertaining. If you're ever at the library, take a few minutes & read it. You'll know when to stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Child tax credit is super awesome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I love the part where it drops out when the kid turns 17.
Like, do I send the kid out to work for a living? Stop feeding him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Sell them and make more when they are ripe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
13. It's ALL Bill Clinton's fault!!! Tectonic drift is too! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. Turbo Tax is your friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. It is now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
24. Its Clinton's fault your kids were too old to qualify?
How?

And if you want to blame someone for having to document the deductions, start with the GOP Congress who imposed those forms and tests to keep all the low and middle income workers from "exploiting" the tax code. Start with Newt Gingrich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. How about start with WHY Gingrich COULD become Speaker of the House in 1995.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maddy McCall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
29. And this is Bill's fault how?
Ridiculous OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Didn't you know the Clintons are to blame for everything?--at least on DU they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-05-08 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
30. Bill made it possible for the Tax credits and you are whining about the
paperwork?

I hope you are joking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-06-08 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. The point is that after doing all kinds of paperwork and jumping through
all the hoops, the tax credit or deduction either doesn't amount ot much or else I'm ineligible entirely. I realize I'm in a wierd demographic, but still...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC