There should have never been a sale in the first place.

[Tennessee Gal]

Mike Barnicle made an excellent analogy regarding the Bush tax cuts. He compared it to a sale on shoes or milk or any other product. When a company has an excess of an item or gets a good deal on the product from the wholesaler, they may run a sale price for a short period of time. When the price goes back up to what it was before, that is not a price increase. It is a return to the regular price.

The same can be said of the Bush tax cuts. Clinton handed them a surplus. They saw it as excess income and put taxes on sale. When the surplus ran out, they should have returned taxes to the original price. Instead they continued the sales price and also increased spending, which ran up the national debt.

What about that is so hard to understand?

However, a more salient point is this: There should never have been a sale on taxes in the first place because of this nation's debt. The excess income should have been used to pay down the debt.


edit for spelling error

[Enthusiast]

1. Especially in light of

the two unnecessary wars of choice.

[Tennessee Gal]

2. Exactly.

And Republicans of all sorts - sane or insane - should be reminded of this.

[cordelia]

3. Wish I could rec your comment, too. n/t

[no_hypocrisy]

4. It wasn't because of a sale or inventory. The republicans wanted to burn down the store for

insurance.

By bankrupting this country, they can accomplish both dynamic change to government that helps less-than-rich citizens (Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security*) and destroying the middle class, thereby returning wealth to the rich and powerful.

* Clinton took care of welfare in the Nineties.

[Tennessee Gal]

5. Yes, their motives are less that honorable.

There is no question about that.