• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

White House moves to make Bush tax cut permanent

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
White House considering 'decoupling' top-tier tax cut

This is the best thing I've heard from the White House in 2 years. The plan is to make the Bush tax cuts permanent below $250K and extend the $250K+ cuts for 2 years. I'm surprised they would consider this, but the decision definitely deserves props if true.
But, I am curious what liberals think of the plan. Two things really: Obama is breaking his campaign promise and it goes against the "make the wealthy pay" attitude that is prevalent in liberal groups. If you're a liberal, would this be a watershed moment for you? A decision that you cannot support they guy anymore after. Prescription Drug under George Bush was a watershed for a lot of conservatives. Curious if this carries the same weight.
 
Last edited:

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
It's surprising to say the least if true and I hope that it is. I don't expect a lot of support from his liberal base if this passes and it will be interesting what the fallout will be like politically.
 

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
I've read some opinions that more fiscal stimulus is needed to ensure the economy recovers in a timely fashion, and extending the tax cuts is one way to do that. It's not the best approach to fiscal stimulus imho, and if we're going to do something about shoring up the budget deficit sooner rather than later, ensuring the extremely wealthy aren't paying less in taxes than the fairly wealthy is a good way of making progress towards that; but I'm divided on whether we should be gunning for more stimulus vs. just riding the current wave, since things do seem to be on the up-and-up on the gdp front, and so jobs are sure to follow.
 

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
LOL! Democrat trick to kick the class warfare can down the road for two years in order to bring it up again for the 2012 elections. Then they can once again demonize those making more than $250k as the evil rich that don't pay their fair share and are in bed with republicans. Don't fall for their bait.

The only compromise that should be accepted by a republican congress is total capitulation by the democrats and the Obama admin. Working with democrats and acting more like them has been the downfall of the republican party. They better not repeat that mistake.
 

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
SmilinSilhouette said:
LOL! Democrat trick to kick the class warfare can down the road for two years in order to bring it up again for the 2012 elections.
I disagree. If nothing else, the Obama Administration has shown itself willing to listen to economists, and there have been a lot of arguments made by some of them that more fiscal stimulus may be required, and stimulus of this sort is probably the most politically tenable at the moment. If anything, we can say this is a cynical trick by the President to improve the American economy and thereby make him look better when 2012 rolls around. Fairly fiendish, I suppose.

Also, I think having a lackluster economy during the Bush presidency as compared to at the end of the Clinton presidency, and demographic changes that don't fall in their favor (i.e. the decline of rural America and growth of urban America), have been the "downfall of the republican party". The current trend of appealing to a certain type of conservative is just changing the GOP: picking up some voters and flinging away others. Though, I doubt I can change any deeply held convictions by strong conservatives that they compose a sizable majority in America, and have simply been kept away from the polls because Republicans have been too compromising and moderate. So it goes, I guess.
 

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
I disagree. If nothing else, the Obama Administration has shown itself willing to listen to economists, and there have been a lot of arguments made by some of them that more fiscal stimulus may be required, and stimulus of this sort is probably the most politically tenable at the moment. If anything, we can say this is a cynical trick by the President to improve the American economy and thereby make him look better when 2012 rolls around. Fairly fiendish, I suppose.
:lol: Yea, the administration is willing to listen to economists, as long as they are followers of Keynes. Like this guy: Economics and Politics - Paul Krugman Blog - NYTimes.com

Will someone please shut Krugman up – Telegraph Blogs

yes, Krugman please shut up you ignor-anus (not misspelled)!

Also, I think having a lackluster economy during the Bush presidency as compared to at the end of the Clinton presidency, and demographic changes that don't fall in their favor (i.e. the decline of rural America and growth of urban America), have been the "downfall of the republican party". The current trend of appealing to a certain type of conservative is just changing the GOP: picking up some voters and flinging away others. Though, I doubt I can change any deeply held convictions by strong conservatives that they compose a sizable majority in America, and have simply been kept away from the polls because Republicans have been too compromising and moderate. So it goes, I guess.
More :lol: s. Republicans managed to act like big government, big spending democrats when being "compromising and moderate" that is the root cause of their "downfall". Hope they figure it out this time around. They can not run as conservatives only to act as ruling class elite "moderates" by compromising the conservative principles in order to "get along" and placate democrats .
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
LOL! Democrat trick to kick the class warfare can down the road for two years in order to bring it up again for the 2012 elections. Then they can once again demonize those making more than $250k as the evil rich that don't pay their fair share and are in bed with republicans. Don't fall for their bait.
Essentially you are saying that the Democrats are trying to position the issue to run against Bush in 2012 the way they did in 2010, 2008 and 2006. Can you image how unbelievably hilarious that would be? :lol:
 

ExpectantlyIronic

e̳̳̺͕ͬ̓̑̂ͮͦͣ͒͒h̙ͦ̔͂?̅̂ ̾͗̑
SmilinSilhouette said:
Yea, the administration is willing to listen to economists, as long as they are followers of Keynes.
You won't find many professional economists who ignore the contributions of Keynes to the field.

SmilinSilhouette said:
More s. Republicans managed to act like big government, big spending democrats when being "compromising and moderate" that is the root cause of their "downfall". Hope they figure it out this time around. They can not run as conservatives only to act as ruling class elite "moderates" by compromising the conservative principles in order to "get along" and placate democrats .
I'm not sure what the point of just contradicting me without addressing my points or providing supporting arguments for yours is.
 
Last edited:

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
You won't find many professional economists who ignore the contributions of Keynes to the field.
Of course, but just because he was has made contributions to the field does not mean that his theory is right.

I'm not sure what the point of just contradicting me without addressing my points or providing supporting arguments for yours is.
To further my point that the idea of decoupling tax breaks at some arbitrary income level of $250K and putting that debate off for another two years is a trap being set by democrats to impugne republicans before the next election. This is a regular play from the divisive democrat class warfare playbook to demonize the successful and rationalize the punishment of even higher taxes on the entrepreneural class.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
You won't find many professional economists who ignore the contributions of Keynes to the field.
That depends on what you mean by ignore. If you are saying you won't find many economists who disagree with Keynes that I disagree. If you are saying you won't find many economists who haven't studied Keynes and his work then I'd agree.
 
Top