Rebutting the Repug Pelosi’s 100-Hour "Tax and Spend Spree"

[peanutbrittle]

I need ammo,,,

My Repug aquaintance started hammering this yesterday saying the Dems will destroy this "great" economy

"this economy is running better than it ever has in history. The stock market today is hitting new highs on real profits unlike the Clinton years of false profits and irrational exuberance, today it's solid."

----------

snip

What would the first 100 hours of a Nancy Pelosi Speakership look like? Unfortunately for America’s taxpayers, she’s beginning to tell us. Here’s a sampling.

· “Roll Back” the Bush Tax Cuts: What Democrats are really looking for is an excuse to “Roll Up” the date in which they can get more money from American families and businesses – a plan they’ve been dreaming up since Republicans lowered taxes in 2001.

· This “Roll Up” would cost American taxpayers $164 billion in 2011, and $1.5 trillion through 2015, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office .

· Further, based on a Treasury Department analysis, the Democrats’ tax increases would reduce economic growth by about $93 billion a year.

· Strangely, Democrat Leader Pelosi – who refuses to acknowledge these effects – still hasn’t laid out an exact Tax Increase Plan, saying details of their proposal would have to be worked out.

· Cut Student Loan Interest Rates in Half: While it may sound like a “free (or cut-rate) lunch,” this is just another call for feel-good legislation that will cost taxpayers billions in payments to lenders.

· Simply, the Federal Government, which already pays a premium to lenders for charging lower interest rates, would be forced to dramatically increase its subsidies to lenders to compensate for the reduced rates.

· This scheme would cost an additional $60 billion over five years, and $150 billion over 10 years.

· Raise the Minimum Wage to $7.25: Clearly, Democrat Leader Pelosi doesn’t get it – passing a federally mandated wage-increase would likely be most damaging to the very workers she’s claiming to help.

· Raising the Federal minimum wage would put up to 1.6 million American workers – or nearly 20% of minimum wage earners – in danger of losing their jobs because of the added costs on businesses, States, and local governments (according to Hoover Institution economist David Henderson). Job losses are likely to be concentrated among groups least able to absorb the shock.

· According to studies reviewed by Federal Reserve economists Daniel Aaronson and Eric French:

* As many as 1 million workers in the restaurant industry could lose their jobs.
* Unemployment among young African Americans and adults without a high school diploma could increase by 35%.

· CBO estimates that the increase would impose an unfunded mandate of about $5 billion to $7 billion per year on small businesses – as well as unfunded Federal mandates on State and local governments to the tune of $300 million to $400 million per year.

These likely economic repercussions of a stand-alone increase in the minimum wage are why the Republican House-passed minimum-wage increase was coupled with tax relief: to ensure an increase in required workers’ hourly wages didn’t have the unintended effect of costing workers their jobs.
photo, american flag graphic, seal for the speaker of the house with the year seventeen eighty nine

http://www.speaker.gov/library/econ/061025First100Hours.shtml

He firmly believes Dems will destroy his business by raising corp taxes and it will take this country to it's knees
I hit him back with the Iraq war and our debt to China: His answer was that the deficit doesn't matter

This is what we are up against



Rebut..thanks to Bigtree, Tennessee Gal!

Office of the House Minority Leader
Features statements and speeches.
http://democraticleader.house.gov


Pelosi: ‘Democrats Will Restore the Economic Security of America’s Working Families’
http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/articles.cfm?pr...

The Republican Congress’ fiscal irresponsibility has resulted in record budget deficits, driving our country deeper into debt while millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet. Democrats have an economic plan that will bring opportunity and fiscal security to all Americans, not just the wealthy few. Democrats fight for a higher minimum wage and fiscal responsibility in the Congress, and will pursue legislation that will make health care, energy, and education affordable for all Americans.

Click here to learn more: http://democraticleader.house.gov/issues/the_economy/nd...


The Republicans' proposed Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Resolution continues a pattern of misguided budget policies. In the face of record deficits and mounting debt, the budget actually makes the deficit worse, not better, and offers no plan to bring the budget back to balance. At the same time, the budget makes harmful cuts to critical services for working families – including health, education, veterans’ services, and environmental protection – and uses these cuts to partly pay for new tax cuts rather than to reduce the deficit.

Learn more: http://www.democraticleader.house.gov/Republican%20Fisc...

The Republican-controlled House passed a budget resolution with even deeper spending cuts. The proposal includes $45 billion in cuts to Medicaid even as the number of people without health insurance has increased for four years in a row.Republicans claim the cuts are needed to help offset the damage done by Hurricane Katrina. But the GOP budget also includes $70 billion in new tax cuts that will benefit primarily the wealthiest Americans. The Republican plan even increases the deficit by $20 billion.

Learn more about this flawed plan: http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/06amende...

Hurricanes Katrina has left millions of Americans in trouble and without homes, jobs or healthcare. But despite urging by Democrats to reconsider, Republicans have moved forward with their plans to cut spending through reconciliation, in some cases cutting funding for programs helping those who need assistance the most in the wake of Katrina. Under Republican plans, the $35 billion in savings expected to be generated from the reconciliation spending bill will not, in fact, be used to offset the costs of Hurricane Katrina, but rather will be used to pay for half the cost of the $70 billion in reconciliation tax cuts that are also planned. It is clear that the Republican proposals to cut programs that serve the vulnerable are wrong-headed and reflect misplaced priorities.

Learn more: (http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/06offset... )



Learn More About the Administration's Budget Proposal
http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/FY06budg...

Learn More About the Democratic Plan to Turn Our Economy Around
http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/FY06budg...

How the Republican Budget Impacts the Economy
http://housedemocrats.gov/news/librarydetail.cfm?librar...


October 25, 2006
Pelosi: Democrats Will Restore Fiscal Responsibility to Ensure a Vibrant and Growing Economy

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pres...


October 12, 2006
Pelosi and Senior Democrats Seek Solution to Intellectual Property Abuses

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pres...


October 12, 2006
Pelosi: Economists Agree, Democrats’ Policies Are Better for the Economy

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pres...


October 11, 2006
Pelosi: Bush’s Failed Economic Policies Are Mortgaging Our Children’s Future

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pres...


October 11, 2006
Pelosi: ‘Democrats Have Long Fought for Middle-Income Tax Cuts’

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pres...


--------

Surprise: Dems are better for rallies

http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvr... /

Do the Math

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29205-20...

Who's Better in the Driver's Seat?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/0...

Are you better off?

http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts....

DEMOCRATS v. REPUBLICANS on the issue of the U.S. ECONOMY

http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm

Bush economy nothing to broadcast

http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articlei...

[wakeme2008]

1. From Ozymandius Clinton's Number

Dow
19-Jan-01 close at 10,587.59

20-Jan-93 close at 3,241.95

Nasdaq
19-Jan-01 close at 2,770.38

20-Jan-93 close at 697.44

S&P
19-Jan-01 close at 1,342.54

20-Jan-93 close at 433.37


the Repugs can talk all they want of this 15% growth of the DOW after 6 years and calling it GREAT but it is shit.

[Atman]

2. Economy "better then it ever has been in history." - WTF!

Maybe the dude's own, personal economy, but a record stock market means absolutely nothing to a very large segment of the American population. The fact that the gamblers are on a winning streak right now means nothing to those who can no longer afford health care or to educate their children.

[peanutbrittle]

4. The stock market is only one of the issues

I'm more interested in the best way to combat the Tax issues that they are so scared of.

It's the "trickle down economics" corp welfare that he subscribes to

[peanutbrittle]

8. Yeah...he's a small business owner....

It all relates to his low corp taxes with him that he says he can't pass on to the consumer if Pelosi and the Dems get in. Or if they are it will raise the cost of the product to the consumer (new homes)

[OzarkDem]

13. IIRC Small Businesses didn't get much of a tax cut

Perhaps he's one of those billion dollar a year "small businesses".

[Atman]

17. My brother is one of them, too. "I have 18 employees to consider." Huh?

That's his reason for voting GOP. Unfortunately, when he made this comment to me, it was as we were both departing a family function, and there was no opportunity to challenge him and ask him exactly what he meant. What is he "considering" about his 18 employees? He has to consider that he won't have to offer them benefits? That he can pay them less because everyone is just thankful to have a job in his little corner of New Hampshire? Sure, it's been great for my brother. Hell, he just bought my mom two front section tickets to see Barbara Streisand - with a limo ride to the Fleet Center -- for her birthday. My 71 year old mother would surely have preferred some help with her own meds and bills than $1200 worth of concert tickets. She and her friend left halfway through the concert! Anyway, point being, the rich have just gotten richer, and they seem to think their own ability to piss away $1200 on frivolities like concert tickets means everyone is rolling in it, too.

Meanwhile, my brother is so "concerned" about his 18 employees, that he's going to vote GOP. And I'll bet virtually all of those 18 will be voting dem. I wonder if he asked THEM what their concerns were?

[Union Thug]

3. Historically, the economy has done better under dems.

Furthermore, during golden age of the american middle class, taxes were SIGNIFICANTLY higher than they are today. Wages were higher and benefits/retirement packages were stronger. I wish I had the numbers for you, but those better versed than I am will, I am sure, chime in.

Further, if its such a great economy, why are real wages down for the working person?

[peanutbrittle]

6. Of course he's saying that real wages are better for the working person n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

21. Then He's Hopeless

Because even the Commerce Department, WHO WORKS FOR SILVERSPOON, admits real wages are down.
The Professor

[Union Thug]

25. ask him about the color of the crack that he's smoking...

I'm sure he doesn't mean that real wages are up. He must be invoking some bizarro world variation of the conservative mantra "the less you earn, the better off you are!" - you know, the old "wage inflation" chestnut! :-)

But seriously, if he is this far gone, there's no point in wasting your breath.

[tsuki]

5. I used this with my girlfriend. "I understand that you are in the top

99.98% of earners in the country, a multi-millionaire, but it is unfair for you to shift the tax burden to those that work for a wage. We have boys coming back from a war that you wanted to boost a flat economy, and for that we need money. You are going to have to pay your fair share to help them, and quit demonizing them."

She tried to rebut, but I kept on about all the money she makes and property she has. It ended the discussion.

[KurtNYC]

7. Why refute lies from lying liars one by one?

Here what the first 100 hours under Pelosi will look like:

- the lying liars who said we would be greeted as liberators and that Iraq would take "3 weeks, I doubt 3 months" will be told to STFU

- the lying liars who put Mark Foley in charge of Missing and Exploited Children will be stopped from further pedophile-enabling

- the lying liars fail to see the burst of the housing bubble will lose their leadership positions

- etc

[Tanner_B.]

9. Here's A Little:

Pelosi ought to spend those 100 hours impeaching * for his tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of Americans, a business climate that allowed Halliburton to reincorporate offshore in order to avoid paying taxes, his sham prescription drug program to "help" the elderly, "free trade" agreements that have sent countless jobs offshore (resulting in less tax revenue coming in because the now unemployed and underemployed aren't paying as much in taxes), fewer exports and more imports but no tarriffs, turning the Clinton balanced budget into a multi-billion dollar deficit (did I mention his illegal invasion of Iraq?)...

...someome else pick it up here - there's a convincing rebuttal here, if someone can articulate it better than me.

[peanutbrittle]

14. thats a good start...yes,,,

"less tax revenue coming in"

I brought up outsourcing,,,He said the tax revenue base is more than it has ever been in history

need some ammo for that one

[bluerum]

10. The billions dumped into the Iraqi rat hole will pay for this a hundred

times over.

[bigtree]

11. this is nothing but republican propaganda

go find Pelosi's own views and put them above this tripe. It's really easy:

Office of the House Minority Leader
Features statements and speeches.
http://democraticleader.house.gov


Pelosi: ‘Democrats Will Restore the Economic Security of America’s Working Families’
http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/articles.cfm?pressReleaseID=1820

The Republican Congress’ fiscal irresponsibility has resulted in record budget deficits, driving our country deeper into debt while millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet. Democrats have an economic plan that will bring opportunity and fiscal security to all Americans, not just the wealthy few. Democrats fight for a higher minimum wage and fiscal responsibility in the Congress, and will pursue legislation that will make health care, energy, and education affordable for all Americans.

Click here to learn more: http://democraticleader.house.gov/issues/the_economy/ndeconomy.cfm


The Republicans' proposed Fiscal Year 2007 Budget Resolution continues a pattern of misguided budget policies. In the face of record deficits and mounting debt, the budget actually makes the deficit worse, not better, and offers no plan to bring the budget back to balance. At the same time, the budget makes harmful cuts to critical services for working families – including health, education, veterans’ services, and environmental protection – and uses these cuts to partly pay for new tax cuts rather than to reduce the deficit.

Learn more: http://www.democraticleader.house.gov/Republican%20Fiscal%20Year%202007%20Budget%20Resolution.pdf

The Republican-controlled House passed a budget resolution with even deeper spending cuts. The proposal includes $45 billion in cuts to Medicaid even as the number of people without health insurance has increased for four years in a row.Republicans claim the cuts are needed to help offset the damage done by Hurricane Katrina. But the GOP budget also includes $70 billion in new tax cuts that will benefit primarily the wealthiest Americans. The Republican plan even increases the deficit by $20 billion.

Learn more about this flawed plan: http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/06amended_budget_resolution.pdf

Hurricanes Katrina has left millions of Americans in trouble and without homes, jobs or healthcare. But despite urging by Democrats to reconsider, Republicans have moved forward with their plans to cut spending through reconciliation, in some cases cutting funding for programs helping those who need assistance the most in the wake of Katrina. Under Republican plans, the $35 billion in savings expected to be generated from the reconciliation spending bill will not, in fact, be used to offset the costs of Hurricane Katrina, but rather will be used to pay for half the cost of the $70 billion in reconciliation tax cuts that are also planned. It is clear that the Republican proposals to cut programs that serve the vulnerable are wrong-headed and reflect misplaced priorities.

Learn more: (http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/06offsets.pdf)



Learn More About the Administration's Budget Proposal
http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/FY06budget_analysis.pdf

Learn More About the Democratic Plan to Turn Our Economy Around
http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/FY06budget_analysis.pdf

How the Republican Budget Impacts the Economy
http://housedemocrats.gov/news/librarydetail.cfm?library_content_id=272


October 25, 2006
Pelosi: Democrats Will Restore Fiscal Responsibility to Ensure a Vibrant and Growing Economy

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pressReleaseID=1893


October 12, 2006
Pelosi and Senior Democrats Seek Solution to Intellectual Property Abuses

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pressReleaseID=1868


October 12, 2006
Pelosi: Economists Agree, Democrats’ Policies Are Better for the Economy

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pressReleaseID=1870


October 11, 2006
Pelosi: Bush’s Failed Economic Policies Are Mortgaging Our Children’s Future

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pressReleaseID=1864


October 11, 2006
Pelosi: ‘Democrats Have Long Fought for Middle-Income Tax Cuts’

http://democraticleader.house.gov/pressRelease.cfm?pressReleaseID=1865

[peanutbrittle]

15. Good! Thanks ! n/t

[bigtree]

18. now, what about that title??

[peanutbrittle]

19. Fixed ..and posted your info in the OP..Thanks Bigtree! n/t

[OzarkDem]

12. Cutting student loan rates in half

means the profits of the banks will be cut, no effect on taxpayers except their kids will have lower interest rates on student loans.

One of the first big corporate giveaways of the Bush administration was to take the highly lucrative student loan program away from the government and give it to private banks, so they could cash in by playing middleman, raising interest rates and fees.

Cutting out the middleman saves everyone money, except the banks.

[peanutbrittle]

23. good point ...thanks!

[Tennessee Gal]

16. Look!

Surprise: Dems are better for rallies

http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/

Do the Math

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29205-2004Jul30.html

Who's Better in the Driver's Seat?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/656gomgb.asp

Are you better off?

http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

DEMOCRATS v. REPUBLICANS on the issue of the U.S. ECONOMY

http://www.eriposte.com/economy/other/demovsrep.htm

Bush economy nothing to broadcast

http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=161760

[peanutbrittle]

22. Added and credited you into the OP.....thanks! n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

20. Make Him Prove It

Profitability in the 90's was not an illusion. In the tech sector, NOBODY was claiming profitability and cash flow, and the speculators bought the stock anyway. But, in the rest of the industrial sectors, the profits were higher on unit revenue than AT ANY TIME IN HISTORY! That can be confirmed from the Statistical Abstract Of The United States, which can be found in ANY library.

On top of that, there is no evidence that profitability is very good right now.

And the "market at all time highs" represents a 0.4% increase over where the Dow was in 2000. So, that would reflect a 1/16th of 1% annualized return. THAT IS HORRIBLE! So, he would be wrong about that, too.

And, if one were to deduct the change in spending as borrowed money, and the off-budget spending on Iraq, (since direct gov't spending is part of GDP), the GDP growth is lower than it was during 41's administration! In fact, it would be comparable to the dreadful performance of the Ford administration.

All of this is readily available information in any college library.
The Professor

[peanutbrittle]

24. Good facts Professor..thanks!

[Union Thug]

26. Just one other suggestion... Look for anything that Thom Hartmann

has written. He talks to these issues all the time.

[Union Thug]

27. and another suggestion... GREAT rebuttals to all of the right wing propaganda...

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/

Check out How to Defeat the Right in Three Minutes.

[peanutbrittle]

28. Thanks.... this is a good one from there:

Defeat the Right in Three Minutes

snip

* Cheap-labor conservatives don't like social spending or our "safety net". Why. Because when you're unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like – which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you "over a barrel" and in a position to "work cheap or starve".

* Cheap-labor conservatives don't like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why. These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you "over a barrel".

* Cheap-labor conservatives like "free trade", NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why. Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world, who are "over a barrel", and will work cheap.

* Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman's right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women "over a barrel", forcing them to work cheap.

* Cheap-labor conservatives don't like unions. Why. Because when labor "sticks together", wages go up. That's why workers unionize. Seems workers don't like being "over a barrel".

* Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about "morality", "virtue", "respect for authority", "hard work" and other "values". Why. So they can blame your being "over a barrel" on your own "immorality", lack of "values" and "poor choices".

* Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry among wage earners distracts them, and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.

more..... http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/showthread.php?id=103

[Union Thug]

29. HA! I just edited my post to recommend Defeat the Right! n/t

[peanutbrittle]

30. Great minds think alike! n/t

[Norquist Nemesis]

31. From CNN.Money: Economy Weakest in 3 years

http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/27/news/economy/gdp/index.htm

Economy weakest in three years
GDP grew at just a 1.6 percent rate in third quarter, down from 2.6 percent in the second; inflation gauge retreats as well.
By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
October 27 2006: 11:29 AM EDT


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Economic growth slowed to the weakest pace in more than three years in the third quarter, as the government's main gauge of the strength of the U.S. economy came in much lower than analysts had forecast.

Gross domestic product (GDP), the broadest measure of the nation's economy, grew at a 1.6 percent annual rate in the quarter, the Commerce Department said, down from the 2.6 percent rate in the second quarter.
<snip>
Weaker growth in the quarter was attributable in part to a rising trade gap, which subtracts from GDP, as well as a slump in the nation's housing market. Consumer spending also came in a bit weaker than expected. (Perhaps that trickle isn't the waterfall he thinks it is.)