[JStergis]

From here:
http://www.berkshireeagle.com/search...shireeagle.com

Thought you might all find this interesting:

Originally Posted by Berkshire Eagle

Bring on those Bush bucks
Letters
Article Last Updated: 01/27/2008 03:00:10 AM EST

Sunday, January 27
I feel like a wide-eyed kid in a candy store waiting for my $800 check from Mr. Bush and company. I have listed below a stimulus package for my own economy to best spend these pennies from heaven.

One hundred dollars worth of gasoline to get my car at least halfway home from the corner market after shopping for our monthly bag of groceries.

One hundred dollars worth of heating oil so I can briefly warm my house above the freezing point and stare out at another long, cold Berkshire winter.

One hundred dollars for the latest version of my cell phone that now sings while it tap dances across the kitchen floor.

One hundred dollars worth of toys, smothered in lead paint, for the kids to play with.

One hundred dollars for only two minutes of emergency medical attention for those kids to remedy the previous purchase.

One hundred dollars a shot at the veterinarian for our dog, all because his recalled food had more toxic ingredients than the rat poison I just put in the attic.

One hundred dollars to pay the interest on one of my many credit cards, now that rates have all shot up to 30 percent.

One hundred dollars for a call from my attorney
Advertisement
to check the "fine print" in our mortgage papers because the monthly payment might triple next month.

Eight hundred dollars worth of Bush bucks — priceless!

ROBERT FOOTE

Guy from north county wrote it, I don't know him, but it was an editorial in the newspaper and was up on their site.

[Rep]

I have never been a backer of President Bush. But this whole thing shows how weak he is and has been as our leader.

I just hope that the American people fully understand that Mitt Rommney and Senator Mc Cain are both strong proponents of the Bush agenda. We need reason brought back to public policy making.

Not this type of garbage. I think I am going to vote liberal in this election. We need drastic change and the Bush legacy must end.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by JStergis

From here:
http://www.berkshireeagle.com/search...shireeagle.com

Thought you might all find this interesting:



Guy from north county wrote it, I don't know him, but it was an editorial in the newspaper and was up on their site.

I'm missing the point of how any of that relates to Bush? The tax cuts were bi-partisan. Maybe one of you knee-jerk liberals can give me an explanation?

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by Rep

I have never been a backer of President Bush. But this whole thing shows how weak he is and has been as our leader.

I just hope that the American people fully understand that Mitt Rommney and Senator Mc Cain are both strong proponents of the Bush agenda. We need reason brought back to public policy making.

Not this type of garbage. I think I am going to vote liberal in this election. We need drastic change and the Bush legacy must end.

I assume you would be in favor of tax increases then? And increases in minimum wage? And decreases in tax breaks for oil companies and increases in taxes of gasoling? And increases in social spending? And this is going to lower the prices of gasoline and food how? This will benefit the average middle class working American how?

Rather than rhetoric--I'd like to hear an actual explanation grounded in economics (I know that's asking too much--like a good laywer I phrased the question so it also serves as the answer).

[WarC]

Originally Posted by Rep

I just hope that the American people fully understand that Mitt Rommney and Senator Mc Cain are both strong proponents of the Bush agenda. We need reason brought back to public policy making.

This Message Paid For by the Democratic Party.

[poochee]

Originally Posted by Rep

I have never been a backer of President Bush. But this whole thing shows how weak he is and has been as our leader.

I just hope that the American people fully understand that Mitt Rommney and Senator Mc Cain are both strong proponents of the Bush agenda. We need reason brought back to public policy making.

Not this type of garbage. I think I am going to vote liberal in this election. We need drastic change and the Bush legacy must end.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by WarC

This Message Paid For by the Democratic Party.

Another good one, WarC!

What's funny about this is that McCain is about as liberal a Republican as you are going to find--the Republican party talking heads like Limbaugh and Hannity can't stand him. McCain supports Bush's Iraq policies--that's about all he supports of the "Bush" agenda. In fact, that's why he's probably going to get the nomination because Republicans figure they have to have someone unlike Bush to win the independent vote. The Dems will vote for the Dem, the Repubs will vote for the Repubs, but its that big block of people in the middle who will choose the President.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by poochee

Can I borrow someone's Chainsaw please?

[JStergis]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

I assume you would be in favor of tax increases then? And increases in minimum wage? And decreases in tax breaks for oil companies and increases in taxes of gasoling? And increases in social spending? And this is going to lower the prices of gasoline and food how? This will benefit the average middle class working American how?

Rather than rhetoric--I'd like to hear an actual explanation grounded in economics (I know that's asking too much--like a good laywer I phrased the question so it also serves as the answer).

It's supposed to be how the gov't plans to give the people free money as a tax break and they think it will "stimulate the economy" because people will spend the money.

In truth, most people will spend the money paying off debts or paying for ridiculously high priced things that they need (heating oil...gas...) ...so it's doing nothing whatsoever to stimulate the economy IMO.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by JStergis

It's supposed to be how the gov't plans to give the people free money as a tax break and they think it will "stimulate the economy" because people will spend the money.

In truth, most people will spend the money paying off debts or paying for ridiculously high priced things that they need (heating oil...gas...) ...so it's doing nothing whatsoever to stimulate the economy IMO.

And so what would you do to stimulate the economy?

And no offense but I don't have much faith in your opinion as to what the tax breaks will do to stimulate the economy. I heard this same crap from liberals in 2001 when Bush pushed through tax breaks and the economy soared for years, unemployed dropped to record lows--liberals went silent on that and shifted to Iraq.

[JStergis]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

And so what would you do to stimulate the economy?

And no offense but I don't have much faith in your opinion as to what the tax breaks will do to stimulate the economy. I heard this same crap from liberals in 2001 when Bush pushed through tax breaks and the economy soared for years, unemployed dropped to record lows--liberals went silent on that and shifted to Iraq.

But that was just past an economic peak, so people were able to spend it all on material items (it prolonged the period we're in now slightly). Now it seems prices have gone up and wages have not for years, thus people will be paying off debts or "squirreling it away." In my opinion putting money into your bank account/getting rid of a bit of your mortgage won't help the economy in the slightest.

As I see it, the economy is now at a standstill, the unemployment rate is what, 5% and not budging too awfully much, but then no new businesses are opening either. Eventually the ones that exist are not going to be able to succeed because no one's buying their products.

Money needs to be put into the hands of the people who will most likely spend it on something other than debts, NOT middle-class Americans who will use it to pay bills. I'm not saying it's not welcome, though, being in the middle class myself.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by JStergis

Money needs to be put into the hands of the people who will most likely spend it on something other than debts, NOT middle-class Americans who will use it to pay bills. I'm not saying it's not welcome, though, being in the middle class myself.

But its not going just to the middle class--you have to give everyone a tax break. I agree with you that it should be just a tax cut at the top brackets, which will create jobs, but that's never going to happen without squeeling "tax cuts for the rich" by the liberals.

[JStergis]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

But its not going just to the middle class--you have to give everyone a tax break. I agree with you that it should be just a tax cut at the top brackets, which will create jobs, but that's never going to happen without squeeling "tax cuts for the rich" by the liberals.

Exactly, tax cuts for the rich will create jobs, keep business booming, and at least attempt to reverse a recession (which I think we may not be in quite yet, but are definitely headed there).

The thing is, giving the money to the middle class too just makes the national debt skyrocket. Someone's going to have to raise taxes eventually to pay all that off, and they'd better be a darn good leader because if they aren't, they won't be too popular.

The tax cuts are essentially "borrowed money"...everyone will need to pay it off in higher taxes eventually.

What they're doing is useless. They're giving the rich cuts...that helps
giving everyone else cuts...that just piles on the debt

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

But its not going just to the middle class--you have to give everyone a tax break. I agree with you that it should be just a tax cut at the top brackets, which will create jobs, but that's never going to happen without squeeling "tax cuts for the rich" by the liberals.

Tax breaks for the rich create jobs..................mulder, put down the crack pipe and join the real world. Cutting your taxes will not create one damn job for anyone.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by JStergis

The tax cuts are essentially "borrowed money"...everyone will need to pay it off in higher taxes eventually.

Not necessarily true or at least completely. As an example, how much tax revenue would we have if they set the tax rates at 100%? None because no one would work. Conversely, if they set them at 0, there would be no tax revenue at all. Somewhere between 0 and 100 is the "sweet spot" where tax revenue is maximized--where if you raise taxes, you will actually shrink tax revenues. We are still at a point where tax revenues are not being maximized--taxes are too high. And I'm not talking just federal--I'm talking all taxes combined.