Remember the Democrats promising to keep George Bush's tax cuts for the middle class. Forget about it.
From Fox News: "Senate Democratic leaders decided Thursday to delay a vote on preserving soon-to-expire middle class tax cuts until after congressional elections in November.
President Obama has made the tax cuts a priority. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decided to delay any vote after a meeting with other Senate Democrats failed to produce a consensus on how to proceed.
"Democrats believe we must permanently extend tax cuts for the middle-class before they expire at the end of the year, and we will," Reid spokesman Jim Manley said. "Unfortunately, to this point we have received no cooperation from Republicans to do so."
Enacted in 2001 and 2003 under President George W. Bush, they were the most sweeping tax cuts in a generation. If Congress takes no action, taxpayers at every income level face significant tax increases next year."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/23/senate-dems-consider-delaying-vote-bush-tax-cuts/
First, Reid's spokesman is lying his butt off. No surprise there. The GOP wants middle class tax cuts and tax cuts for everyone else.
But my prediction. I think if the Dem's get thrown out of office in November like the polls are predicting, they will say "screw you voters" and let all tax cuts expire and raise taxes on everyone.
Political suicide. And this is being done by Harry Reid. But he really doesn't care. He lives in the Ritz Carlton in Washington D.C.. He goes shopping with in two gas sucking SUV's while telling others to drive in gas saving cars. Do you really think he rally cares about the middle class?
Sharron Angle, are you listening?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't understand why Harry Reid didn't push for a vote on extending tax cuts to everyone making $250,000 or less per year. It's a winner. And keep in mind, that's EVERYONE, since even if you make more than that, you get the cut on the first quarter million. But what I REALLY don't understand is why ANYONE is arguing for tax cuts for the rich. Why?
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it is that it is better to keep the money out of government hands. I do agree with you that he should have just brought up just the middle tax cuts and then talk about the rich tax cuts. I think the poor and middle class tax cuts would have been passed 100-0. Then move on to the tax for the rich. I disagree with you the rich getting a tax cut. It's not going to raise that much money, when you compare it to the budget, but it will create more jobs.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how it will create more jobs. The rich currently HAVE their tax cut. It's just set to expire (by design, by the way). If they already have the tax cut, why haven't they been creating jobs all along?
ReplyDeleteThe rich create jobs by buying things, like luxury items. In Wisconsin, we have several luxury boat builders. When taxes were high, the boat builders shut down or laid off workers. When the Bush tax cuts came about, the ship building industry took off and employees were added.
ReplyDeleteThe rich can also spend more on foods, housing, cars, gas and more. They pay more in taxes, local, state and federal. If it wasn't for the rich, Las Vegas would not exist. If the rich have to pay more in taxes, they are going o cut back on expenses and a trip to Las Vegas may be cut.
And they have been creating jobs all along in their spending.