Trickle-down did not work.

[kentuck]

It has been tried for 30 years. It has bankrupted our country.

We cannot have a civilized society without a tax base and a growing middle class. The conservatives have done great damage to both of them.

The trickle-down of George W Bush and the Republicans in the last decade was the straw that broke the camel's back. Our government and our people can no longer bear the burden.

Democrats knew the taxcuts were a bad idea when they were enacted in 2001 and expanded in 2003. Yet, here they are in late 2010 about to extend them once again.

They say they have no choice. And that is true if they ask no one to sacrifice. We have problems so serious that they could destroy our country but America is not willing to give up anything to save our country? Is that what they think?

We are victims of political extortion. If you do not extend the taxcuts, there will be no extension of unemployment benefits. What do you do?

Do you let the unemployed go hungry or do you give another taxcut to the wealthy?

This is where the President is standing? What would you do?

[kenny blankenship]

1. It's only been thirty years! GIVE IT A CHANCE TO WORK!

[DJ13]

2. This is where the President is standing?

Supplyside is like a religion in DC.

Obama is as much one of the faithful as any of the residents there making a living sucking on the corporate teat.

[emulatorloo]

3. Pretty sure Repubs are holding START treaty hostage too.

So do you let the unemployed go hungry and not monitor whether Russia's nuclear stockpiles are secured and safe?

It really is extortion.

I'm disgusted how vile they McConnell et al are, They don't care about governing -- all they care about is the Rich, and their mission to destroy Obama.

[8 track mind]

4. Trickle down AKA piss on the people....... N/t

[Desertrose]

16. I always referred to it as "tinkle down".

...cause that pretty much describes it.

[bigtree]

5. this isn't 2003

Middle-class taxpayers can't bear the brunt of the removal of the tax breaks which now benefit them. That's well over 95% of Americans affected. That should be the first consideration here.

It also should be noted that this President just achieved a record tax break for over 94% of taxpayers a year and a half or so ago. It makes no sense to expect him to let the total amount of tax relief they're now benefiting from fall so soon after piling them on top of the Bush cuts in 2008 as part of Pres. Obama's stimulus bill. It's fine in the abstract to talk about what you want to see Congress do. Right now, we're dealing with the political realities of the present balance of interests and motivation in this Congress (and the next) that won't support extending one with the other in some form.

Caught in the middle of the debate to remove the upper-class portion of Bush's tax cuts are tens of millions of Americans with incomes under $250,000 who can't afford it, and shouldn't have to bear a tax increase just because the republicans won't budge on the upper-class cuts. The majority of those taxpayers aren't volunteering their taxes go up in exchange for the upper-class taxes expiring. I question how 'civilized' the notion is of allowing those cuts to expire along with the others, right now, just to make an economic point, or, even to round off some economic strategy.

[kentuck]

7. Right.

Give them tax breaks and they never have to ask for a pay raise. Leaves more for the greedy. Give them credit cards and they will have money to spend and they won't ask for a raise either. Give them easy financing of their mortgages and they can pay off all their credit cards and will never have to ask their employer for a penny. Can you see how it works??

[bigtree]

9. you have a good economic philosophy

It just isn't going to be a part of the landscape right now. The republicans won't allow a progressive economic plan; certainly not before these tax cuts are due to expire. You're really just speaking in the abstract, so, in that sense you are mostly correct in your beliefs. However, you can't just take you philosophy and simply apply it to the present political standoff in a way that doesn't just walk away, in some principle, leaving tens of millions of Americans with higher taxes and nothing at all along the lines you proscribe in jobs or anything else. You are talking above the political realities that exist right now and assuming that can supplant the choices Democratic legislators and the President face in working to preserve those middle-class tax rates that affect so many. Your direction leaves middle-class taxpayers with even less in this present political standoff.

You want to move legislation in a more reasonable direction? You need a progressive majority in Congress. That's the only place any of what you want to see will gain a foothold and advance.

[kentuck]

10. You are talking surrender.

Pure and simple. That is a political reality also.

[bigtree]

13. bulldoggies

There are only a few options right now on the tax cuts with this Congress. You can puff up all you want with the talk about 'surrender' and 'caving' like you personally have some power to change the political balance of power in the legislature, but there isn't going to be a middle-class tax cut extension on its own.

You can shout, stamp your feet, call everyone who disagrees with you a coward when they point out the political realities the President and Democratic legislators are facing - but, you can't get to what you want from here. That's a fact. All of the bluster and rhetoric you can type out won't change that.

[kentuck]

15. Are you saying that the President doesn't have a veto pen?

Or that he doesn't have a backbone.

Still sounds like surrender to me.

[bigtree]

18. I'm saying that he's not willing to surrender the middle-class tax cuts

. . . just to make a political point about the upper-class breaks. A veto would effectively allow all the cuts to expire. There is no way there would be a way to recover them on their own; not in this Congress or the next, given the balance of power, interests, and motivations of legislators. The President is not willing to sacrifice his promise to not allow middle class taxes to rise in his term, just to end the cuts for the wealthy.

[kentuck]

20. then that would cut the deficit by $4 trillion dollars...

and we could send the Debt (Catfood) Commission home. After all, they came up with deficit reduction of $4 trillion dollars. Coincidence that it equals exactly the tax cut huh?

[bigtree]

24. you're back to ignoring the real world impact on the millions of families affected

. . . that average about $50,000 a year after taxes.

Part of the problem with these alternative strategies is there isn't a compliant Congress willing to follow through to the extent that these families don't just lose in the short run; hobbling them for the long term. Do you realize the effect on wage earners ( from child tax credits and the like to the payroll deductions) who would see their income drop if we let this expire. Where's the political path, right now, to the rest of what you envision to supplant these families?

[kentuck]

25. Why don't we just come out and say it?

We support more taxcuts. Are you saying that these folks that survived with the Clinton taxrates slipped so far behind in 10 years that they would go under if the Bush tax cuts are not extended for them? I have a difficult time buying that argument.

[bigtree]

26. you propose a change in economic policy

. . . with any regard at all for the folks who are least able to bear the brunt of any decrease in wages.

I know, kentuck, that you must have some idea how far most of us are over the edge financially.

[kentuck]

28. You are over the edge because the greedy....

refuse to pay their fair share for a civilized society and are now extorting the President of the United States to extend the taxcuts for the wealthy or else?

Because, otherwise, the middle class will not get their taxcuts, which some need in the worst way.

Yes, that is the decision that he must make. We know what you would do but what do you think the President should do? No good ever comes from going along with extortionists.

[bigtree]

30. all of that assumes that the present economic strategy is just wrapped around Bush policy

The President's negotiators have also included many of his own economic initiatives to be considered as part of any compromise. The President laid out, passed through Congress, and executed a recovery plan. The tax portion of that recovery plan he's focused on preserving now is considered necessary to buttress wage earners during this economic free-fall. It just so happens that it was laid on top of the Bush cuts. It's unfortunate and frustrating that he's been unable to get the cooperation from republicans to provide more revenue by making the wealthy pay more, but that doesn't release him from his initial responsibility to keep the Americans he has recognized as most vulnerable to the faltered economy safe from any government induced wage decrease.

I would do as the President is doing. I'd argue to preserve as much of his recovery plan as he's able and I'd resist doing anything that would cause those millions of wage earners to be forced to fork over more of their money. That's what I believe he's engaged in right now. Later, they may be some opportunity to address the upper-income cuts (hopefully they won't agree to more than a year extension for those so that he'll be able to force another vote and carry that issue into the election). Unfortunately, the politics that would accommodate Congress adopting a more progressive approach to the economy will not favor Democrats in the next two years - except, maybe as an election issue.

[kentuck]

31. I do understand that where you stand...

has a lot to do with where you are sitting...

[veganlush]

6. As you noted:

"Democrats knew the taxcuts were a bad idea when they were enacted in 2001 and expanded in 2003. Yet, here they are in late 2010 about to extend them once again"


Exactly right that's why they (the repugnants) had to push them through with reconciliation. The Democrats were so right to be opposed to the failed Bush tax cuts and history has vindicated them, but they are helpless now at getting that fact out to the people. They send weaklings like Wyden out to the Sunday morning talk shows when then should be having a prime-time breaking news conference like Reagan did when he wanted to get the people behind him.

[RandomThoughts]

8. Sophies choice.

If the unemployed go hungry, those rich with those tax breaks going to be in trouble, unless they can build prisons fast enough, and get people to staff them. hence why that is a big issue also.

And I know there are many that know the 'gleaning of the field' law. Since I knew that law when I did not know that I knew it, when confronting a shoplifter.

But that is his choice, but appeasement never works out well, things just get worse and worse. So is it better to submit to help someone, or not to submit to remove those doing those things from power, and in my view help more.

It is a great question, but what has to be seen, is the choice is given to him to make him think he is causing the problem to transfer the blame on him. That is how evil operates, and if they threaten to starve people to get power, what will they do with that power.

I would not let them starve people, and would not let imbalances in taxation continue.

And my best guess is fewer would suffer.

A Country Boy Can Survive
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4s0nzsU1Wg



I actually though a long time on that, and think it is about love, but that also includes my perception.



Interesting side note the date 123. :D

[RandomThoughts]

23. Ok got it figured out.

That is such a great song, it has massive correlation.

And is from a friend, although death has no meaning, so 43 dollars, taking a life, is probably about what was done years ago by '43' and a nice comment :loveya:


So I figure it is about many more that have taken up positions on the hill. Welcome aboard :)


Although we have to work on that confederate flag issue, but understand it was mentioned in silent running clip, but will clean that up.


Got it, makes complete sense, the ones that left from superman song, went to the woods with Tarzan, now they back in the fight, which makes up for leaving people behind, so many like 'Reese' are back on the hill taking up position. yea that's it. Roxy on the hill again, after previously being scooped up by Tarzan.

Makes complete sense and why the other song, like this song listed so many places, since there were so many being held hostage. As shown in the other clip also.

We say grace, we don't give a curse. Makes complete sense.


For those that think images then wine was about trade, you still don't understand.
Images were connection, wine is given as part of heal the land. That was explained in an earlier post.

[Skidmore]

11. There are a whole lot of the citizenry who don't mind being trickled on

if they can have their toys and trinkets.

[Kablooie]

12. If they get Obama to extend rich tax cuts they know they've won. Obama will be gone 2012.

They are close to succeeding in their primary goal to destroy Obama by 2012.

If Obama gives in to the "temporary" tax cut extensions also gives away his chances of winning another term.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

14. A K A THEY WILL PISS ON YOU

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[unblock]

17. sure it did. it worked exactly as planned.

it has been an extraordinarily successful fig leaf in a long-running series of fig leaves created for the sole purpose of covering up otherwise naked greed by the ultra-rich.

it has worked so brilliantly that to this day, inspite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, millions of its victims still insist that it has worked, is working, and will work in the future.

[jotsy]

19. Not for us everyday Americans it didn't.

For those both monetarily exceptional on their parents' accord and the ruthless fueled on envy to reach those coveted higher heights did quite well, tyvm.

What we can or can not have is for us to determine as well as design. The model we've operated on has been revealed as a sieve. We fill and fill the bucket, but it has holes and the hyper rich own the rain barrel below it. They also happen to be the swarm of scamps who provided the people's receptacle with its...religious component, shall we say? The burden we see the public being asked to bear doesn't really exist, the coffers we stock are continually raided by those that legislate and militarily dictate. When it all boils down, the reflection of wealth is but numbers in a computer bank and the establishment's word that all the coins are in the proper drawers. Well I say to you Sir Tuck, I'm not having much faith in whatever formula is being applied, doesn't sound like you are either.

Political extortion? Hmmm. Try song and dance, smoke and mirrors. The modern political process here in the United States is a contest of the deepest wallet as is the result when you drive society through a shallow channel, bathe them in baubles and remind them constantly how exceptional they are to pad the complacency. And did we ever stop for a second to think about how much we should have felt like the victims in Hansel and Gretel? We let them fatten us up never anticipating what purpose it served until we were virtually anemic. Don't accept their protocol, or for a second believe that the house they've built is the only kind that will stand. Imagine yourself waking up and knowing nothing about nothing, and ask where and how you would address what when. We have to find the courage to build from scratch and denounce the idea that we should be forced to start from less than level ground.

Me? The first order of business would be the EQUAL enforcement of the rule of law. Which would empty out Wall Street, DC and likely large pockets of Texas and Delaware. That should help unemployment some. Next...I believe all the big corporations that got tax breaks from municipalities and later shipped jobs overseas should retroactively reimburse the value of said breaks to the cities who can then address some of the communities needs. After that, I'd seize the assets of the bulk of health insurance giants and charge their boards of directors with multiple counts of murder by disregard. Lastly, the central bank system aka the FED and the way it works is designed to bilk a public, whether on the long or short haul, its always going to be a hole. Put in place by the those that have purchased the halls of governance. If possession is nine tenths of the law, which at the moment is fluid due to interpretation and exclusivity, then I see nothing wrong with taking back what was already ours all along.

Went looking for a piece about the MO of the FED, found this along the way. Taking in the visuals I found a little challenging what with the head banging and air guitar and all. I'm such an over aged adolescent!
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTypV_LPiYI&feature=fvw>

Found this about a week ago, thought it a hoot. About the quantitative easing sequel.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k>

Good Sunday to you sir; a wordy rec it was.

[kentuck]

22. Thanks for the visuals.Very informative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTypV_LPiYI&feature=fvw

[jotsy]

27. Hope it was worth enduring the rest.

Don't know what it is about the way you ask things, just makes my fingers wanna dance over the keys recklessly.

:hide:

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

21. WRONG! It worked.

It did exactly what it was intended to do.

Trickle Down = Fast Flowing Stream Up

Doublespeak

[TheKentuckian]

29. Extortion, my ass. This is willful. A dance.