A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Benefits for Unemployed better econ stimulus than tax cuts for rich

Posted: Nov 29, 2010

See link

;

unemployment - GOPmt

[ In Reply To ..]
What an article!!! Geeezz...I guess I'm gonna hafta be a politician in my next life. Imagine the money they are making for stating "unemployment benefits" create jobs...and it only took them what??? 4-5 pages?

Better to know what is effective and what isn't - than to waste tax cuts on the rich

[ In Reply To ..]

That's hilarious.......... - tstone

[ In Reply To ..]
Did you notice that it's dated 2/10? Before the freakin' healthcare bill was jammed down our throats?

BTW......tax cuts on the rich just might get you a J-O-B!!! A funny thing happens when you cut someone's unemployment benefits off..........THEY MIRACULOUSLY GET A JOB!!! Look it up......statistically, that's what happens.

True true true!! I have family members who hold - themselves back while getting this.

[ In Reply To ..]
Unemployment can be a temporary huge help, but to keep extending and extending these benefits... come on! If you give the so-called "rich" a break, yes, they might relax and feel able to hire more people. ..and I am certainly not proud to think so many in this country want to label the RICH as some kind of evil greedy people. Grow up, children! Most people I know with money have busted their rears to earn that money, so why do you have a problem with that? You should be ashamed of yourselves for your jealousy or own GREED. Go out and make something of yourself and quit blaming the rich that you dont have what they do.

Except that most of \"the rich\" are not - employers.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

How do you figure that? Just askin. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
that most of the rich are not employers.

Using the $250,000 figure - you figure it - out

[ In Reply To ..]
x

A lot of small businesses fall into that category and they ARE employers. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
why would you think they aren't?

That wasn't your question. - S. Amsafreeper

[ In Reply To ..]
You're missing an important word... "most"

Oh well. I guess if just "some" are that is their tough luck.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
and they get their taxes raised along with the the nasty old corporations making multiple times that amount, so I guess in your world of "fairness" that equates. So sorry you are upset with the the difference between "lot" and "most."

Not a freeper; don't even know what that is.

What are you, by the way?

Where do you come up with this stuff? - S. Amsafreeper

[ In Reply To ..]
You asked the question. Just because you didn't understand what you asked in no way makes me upset. That's your problem.

What are YOU by the way? you ducked the question. nm - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I found the word "Freeper" - Get a load of this

[ In Reply To ..]
You've got to read this - if anything for a laugh. Evidently Daily Kos has got their own dictionary cos they have so many of those buzz words they want to pretend they are real words. Anyway...this is pretty funny. Kind of sad too that actually wrote what THEY are doing, but turned it around like the other side is doing it and not them. LOL. Which, BTW, now you'll know where they got that little new liberal buzz term "Echo Chamber" also.

Freeper
A right-winger who repeats or reprocesses with limited changes the current talking points or message (c.f., On-message), often making unreasonable vociferous personal attacks on all lefties as if required to justify their own New Troll point of view. The name comes from the self chosen nickname of the members of the right-wing political site Free Republic. While they consider themselves to be ethical trolls, many lefties disagree.

See also: Freep.

Back to: Kossary: Echo Chamber to Fundie

To give credit - this is the link...

http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Freeper

Well, that was enlightening.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
lol. Although nothing on the site that I saw supported the description you posted. The basic statement "Free Republic is the premier online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America" I don't have a problem with...it is the "we always have fun doing it" is where I divert...lol. I could find no "on message" stuff though...or "drone posting."

Curious though...what would you call the liberals who live on Huffpost? Huffers? ahem. ;)

Cute, but the freepub is not an internet - newspaper

[ In Reply To ..]
far from it, as you well know. There is also another name for "freepers," but I can't say it here.

The first time I heard freeper was here...and you well know nothing. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
I googled it and it took be to the Free Republic website. First time I had been there. But, since your opinion means less than nothing to me, call me anything you want. Think anything you want. You are just perpetually PO'ed just like the rest of the Dems because of the shellacking you took at the midterms and people are onto you now.

The best you have when you can't debate is to make fun (pubes, pubs pouting) of people. There are words for people like that too. I don't say them ANYWHERE.

We're done.

I didn't say I did. - Guess

[ In Reply To ..]
you well know nothing. Maybe you have found a good home now. Jeepers Freepers!

I love your moniker. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I love yours too. - its so expressive.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

any figures to back up that most? nm - Youra.socialist

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

It's surprising anyone would need figures for something - so obvious

[ In Reply To ..]
You can look around on the internet. If you need help doing a search, just let me know.

Looking down your nose at people will make you.... - cross-eyed. sm

[ In Reply To ..]
there yet?

I happen to know that statement isn't true. - What does that

[ In Reply To ..]
tell you? :)

That you obsess on triviality and cover it with... - a smile. :)

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I knew you wouldn't get it. :) - .........

[ In Reply To ..]
:P

in order to get something, there has to be ... - something to get.

[ In Reply To ..]
when you actually have something important to say, I'll check in. Start the post with Important so I will know it is really worth reading.

Continue talking to yourself now. I've had all the fun I can stand for one day.
:)

More importantly, the ability to realize there is something - to get :)

[ In Reply To ..]
x

Exactly. - Hmmm... let's see...

[ In Reply To ..]
There is old money, cleric wealth (my Mom's pastor made over $200k, tax free, and his p-t secretary is paid for by the congregation - nice piece of tax-free RE he lives on, too), and people making lots of money who do not employ others, like politicians, freelance sales people, to name a few. Yes, there are the Martha Stewarts and Oprahs, but those are few and far between, and not the norm. An economist I used to babysit for is still wildly wealthy but he employs no one, and he's on TV all the time.

You're not suggesting that Oprah and Martha... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
Stewart fall in the 250,000 range are you? lol.

But what about the people who DO own businesses who make $250,000 a year who DO employ people? You walk down the street in any mid size town and the individually owned businesses would fit in that category. They might only have 1-2 employees, but multiply that across the entire country.

I realize it is uncomfortable to think that when you go after the big heads the little heads roll right along with them, but those are the facts. Not every business who has employees in the $250,000 or above bracket are crooks, but you want them to help pay for what you say the crooks caused. Now please explain to me...how is that right?

That economist..if he is on TV all the time my guess is he employs an accountant, a business manager, and probably an agent. You would have no way of knowing if he employed any of those people, right?

I just don't understand why you think it is the responsibility of wealthy people to pay more than their share of taxes, when they already pay 85% of all taxes paid in the country. They are already footing 85% of the bill. What is your rationale for thinking they should pay more than that? Where is your sense of fairness?

Are you sure you aren't just angry because they have it you don't, and you are all for the government taking it away from them and redistributing it as the government sees fit? Serves'em right, right? lol.

Welcome back - it has been awhile -nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Supply and demand economy--so simple - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
If the low and middle income people have the money to spend, they will create demand for basic goods and services. Thus, unemployement benefits help keep the unemployed off the welfare roles and in the economy creating a demand for goods. When the rich have more money, it does not make sense for them to create goods that no one can afford or want, so they just invest it and it does not really help anyone.

Don't get your logic. Whether they are on welfare or extended... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
unemployment benefits, we are paying for them. They might as well go on welfare...they basically are anyway on extended unemployment benefits. People on welfare spend money too. So, by this logic, why don't we all quit and get on extended benefits and let the "rich" just take care of all of us, those sorry suckers? That is the Democrats' dream! Then the govt takes over all the businesses and you go back to work whether you want to or not, or you don't eat. Check out how your everyday person in Russia is doing after the "workers' revolution." They sure don't co-own anything with the "state." Check out the middle class in Cuba...oh wait...there isn't one.

Why not cut taxes on businesses so they can start hiring and we can put these people back to work and they can spend the money they have earned rather than the money we who are still working have earned? What is wrong with that?

Again, why can't Democrats try ANYthing else than raise taxes? The billions in the stimulus that Obama Admin spent did nothing, zip, nada. Economy still in the tank. Did not put people back to work. And still all they want to do is SPEND to address the DEFICIT. Someone needs to take a big red Sharpie and a calculator to Washington and explain how when the ink is RED you STOP spending and CUT costs. Has the Obama admin done that? NO. Have not cut one cost and pushed through yet another huge budget buster, and now they want the "rich" to pick up the tab. Which is completely unfair, the "rich" are Americans too, and yes, they should pay their share, but not more. It does not matter if you put in any kind of cost cutting measures if you spend equally or spend MORE. That is called treading water until you get so tired you drown.

They never even consider anything else. They just play the class warfare card and scream "tax the rich!" They play on the worst human emotions and the sad thing is, people jump right on that wagon with them. Yeah, tax the evillll rich and hand it to me, even though I did nothing to earn it.

Sorry, I don't get that. I don't know how someone justifies that.

Don't get your logic - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Please stop blaming the democrats for everything that is wrong in this country. Both the republicans and the democrats have done a great job of screwing things up. The country is in bad shape because of both political parties, whether you believe it or not.

Anyway, Personally, I believe people that are on welfare should be made to do some type of work. I believe we should stop rewarding people on welfare for having more children. I believe if you are on welfare and become pregnant on welfare, you should not get extra benefits for it. Welfare has been around for a long time, through both parties reign.

As far as your theory that if we give the rich tax breaks, they will create jobs, that is a bunch of bull. They have had these tax breaks for a long time and are not creating jobs. I have listened to many wealthy people say that they have no objection to paying more in taxes and believe they should. It is not the rich that need the tax breaks, it is small business, which there should be breaks in there for them, which I believe has been mentioned. Wealthy individuals believe they should be paying more in taxes, why don't you? Not criticizing you, just asking.

Stop with blaming the democrats for everything and realize that both parties have had their chance to straighten things out and haven't. Yes, something needs to be done, but by blaming the democrats for everything, you are only creating more tension and not solving the problem. You see, in my opinion, you are only for the rich and not for everyone. We all need to make sacrafices, not just the rich and not just the poor. Whether you believe it or not, not all poor people are lazy and not all rich people create jobs.

Okay....let me try to make this more clear. I blame the... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
for their policies. Their policies never change. They have been saying tax the rich for YEARS. This is not new. We have the highest corporate taxes in the world except for Japan. That is not a good environment for creating jobs. That is a fact. Pure and simple. Maybe not ALL rich people create jobs, but MOST jobs ARE created by rich people. The Democrats define rich as anyone making more than $250,000 a year. Most small businesses make that much. It is not just BIG corporations who are hurt by this taxation. When Obama bailed out GM, nofunds were given to the mom and pop car dealerships out there that failed when GM was going down the tubes. If the Democrats really cared about the little people, they would have helped them too. But they didn't. That was all on the Democrats. They had total power then. The Republicans were powerless. President Obama could make the decision right now to cut costs rather than raise taxes. He chooses not to. The Democrats choose not to. You cannot blame that on the Republicans. Every time they say don't raise taxes, instead cut costs, the Democrats say no. That is a fact, can't change it. Right now, at this point in time, the Democrats ARE the problem. They won't even TALK about alternatives to raising taxes on the "rich." And yes, I find fault with them for that.

With all due respect, it is not a bunch of bull. When Bush instituted those tax cuts, it DID stimulate hiring. You need to look at the past when the tax cuts started. Now we are in a bad economy, a really bad one....and it is common sense that is the WORST time to raise taxes on ANYONE, especially the jobmakers in this country. As I said, not ALL the rich create jobs, but of the jobs that ARE created, the "rich" create the majority of them.

As to your assertion that the rich want to pay more, and why shouldn't they? Hey, I am all for it. Those rich who think they should pay more, all they have to do is check that box on their income tax forms and they can pay all they want to. No one is keeping them FROM doing it. If they really thought that would fix the problem and they really wanted to, no one is stopping them. So, with all due respect, the rich wanting to pay more is, to use your own words, a bunch of bull.

I will stop blaming the Democrats when they stop spending and act like responsible adults, like you and I have to. They have dug us further into the hole and the issue is, they just won't stop. They just keep spending and expecting the "rich" to pick up the tab. Anyone who stops and thinks about it knows that the only way to bring a deficit down is to STOP reckless spending and CUT costs. NOT keep spending. To create jobs and keep jobs ON SHORE they need to create an environment where businesses can flourish, NOT make them have to go offshore to survive. It is simple economics...if you are going to sell your goods to a guy next door that is going to be taxed at 38%, but if you go 10 miles down to the next county and you will be taxed at 20%, where are you going to sell your goods? You are going to say I love ya neighbor, but I gotta make a living, am going to the next county to sell my goods.

Simple economics.

Totally agree with you - with a caveat

[ In Reply To ..]
I worked for two years in a mentoring program for abused and neglected children. This program was funded by the state child protective services, even though many of the children were not from poor homes. However, I had to attend classes provided by the state "welfare" offices and that was an eye opener. The myth that poor people are rewarded for having more children really needs to be dispelled. Increase per child is about $20/month. Anything owned, such as a car (in NJ), must be sold for cash, so there goes job transportation. In areas, like NJ, where mass transit stinks, it is really difficult to find a job, especially in the burbs where you just can't even safely walk to a job if you could find one.

When I think about the tax cuts, it reminds me - of The Little Red Hen

[ In Reply To ..]
That story seemed so simple when we were young. You don't get a piece of the bread that you didn't contribute to. Of course, that was when our minds were also simple. We did not have the greed that we have now. I am starting to get a older and more mature, and it is really starting to get my goat that people who don't pay taxes are even able to open their mouth on the issue. Half of America does not pay taxes, but yet all of American can vote in someone that decides what to do with my money.

On the Bush tax cuts, what about the child tax credit, raise in the married filing joint? Wonder if we will get to keep that. That is a credit that really has helped middle class America.

I believe right now they are only talking about letting the tax cuts expire.... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
on those making $250,000 or more...and the rest expire in 2 years, and that would mean the ones you describe expire in 2 years. The Republicans want to make them all permanent from what I understand. The cuts worked and stimulated the economy when they were put in. I don't think anyone disputes that. But now we have this huge gargantuan deficit that grows millions every DAY and the Democratic answer is what is always their party's answer. Tax the rich. They would tax all of us if they thought they could, but they are waiting to let the other tax cuts expire in 2 years (after the prez election, great timing that). They are putting that letting expire in two years to appease the hard left who would like to see all of them expire.

I can't explain it, I don't understand it, but the Democratic party's answer to anything is raise taxes.

One wonders when the stimulus kicks in... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
is this the second extension or third extension of unemployment benefits? When can we expect some return on our investment? (those of us who are still working and paying for this).

Third time's the charm? Yep, that makes really good economic sense.

HEY! How about a program for cash incentives for those of us who are still working? Pay US to KEEP working to pay for this. 25% of welfare and extended unemployment benefits off the top for those of us still working. Share the wealth. That should warm the cockles of the socialists' hearts. Oh, but rewarding people for working is the very LAST thing they want to do.

That last sentence is THE most idiotic - thing I've ever

[ In Reply To ..]
read. Reward people for working is the last thing they want to do. Astounding. Yet - it is okay to reward the monsters who perpetuated through-and-through fraud (because, since they're wealthy CEOs, they must be providing jobs, right?). How about upping the minimum wage in states where it nets below the poverty line? You are a mouth piece and a puppet for a media-fabricated ideology that has NOTHING to do with reality.

Wow, way to avoid the personal insults. Calm down, - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
before you blow a blood vessel. Yes, the last thing socialists want to do is reward someone for working hard. They want you to work hard so they can reward someone not willing to work so hard with your tax money.

Monsters? LOL. You seem to think that a corporation is just a big building with a CEO who does nothing and nobody else in the building. You think every CEO in this country is a monster perpetuated by through-and-through fraud? Really? Like the CEO of Ford, like one poster pointed out, who took $1 in compensation for an entire year so he did not have to be bailed out by the government (like GM did). yeah, there's a monster for you. Off with his head.

I am not opposed to upping the minium wage. Did I say I wasn't? I didn't see that on the list of the things the Democrats wanted to do. Did I miss that? I think people who work hard SHOULD be rewarded, and if some of us do better than others either through a good idea (Bill Gates, Windows Operating system) or Warren Buffet (who got rich on that NASTY old Wall Street) or the guy who invented the safety pin and I could go on and on. There are thousands of small and mid and large businesses/corporations that are operated honestly. What about THEM? Because some are bad (you see, the thousands of good ones never seem to make the headlines, do they) tax them ALL at a higher rate to make up for it? And that is fair and okey dokey by you?

I think you should consider looking in the mirror the next time you call someone a mouthpiece and a puppet for an ideology my friend.

"In a higher phase of communist society... only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be fully left behind and society inscribe on its banners: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." - Karl Marx

Wow - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I am the one who mentioned Bill Ford and I do admire him. On Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, I just saw a show on TV Sunday where Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Ted Turner were all on there. They actually said the rich should be taxed more. Warren Buffet said he has billions and by the time he gets through all the loopholes and tax breaks, he actually pays less taxes than an office assistant. I also applaud those men. They are very, very rich and they believe the rich should be taxed more. Hmmm......

Hmmm...then again...WHY don't they check the little box... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
on their income tax forms and GIVE more?? Nobody is stopping them! They are free to give as much as they want to give. They can put their money where their mouths are at ANY time. Do you know how many people making $250,000 a year it would take to add up to what those men make? There is such a wide disparity there that is not even funny. If all those men would give as much more as they think they owe, they could make a little dent in the debt. Why do you suppose they DON'T do that?

Again...let them put their money where their mouths are, then I will take them seriously.

Well, if Warren Buffet said that and believes that, then he needs to cut a check for all his assistants to make up for it. And...NO ONE is twisting his arm to take advantage of all those tax breaks and loopholes, are they??

Sheesh. LOL.

Corporate Profits Were the Highest on Record Last Quarter - so why aren't they hiring?

[ In Reply To ..]

The corporations and big business owners (the rich) already have the money and they aren't hiring. There needs to be a demand for products and services. The middle and lower incomes need the cash to create demand. You can create good and services until the cows come home, but without anyone to buy them, the economy is stagnant.

why? - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I'm sure sam will have an anwer to that, which of course will be the democrats fault. However, like I said before, just because they have money does not mean they are going to create jobs. We already saw what the big corporations do with extra money, they give themselves bigger bonuses, but I'm sure that is the democrats fault too.

The Bush tax cuts did not stimulate the - economy. There

[ In Reply To ..]
was a tremendous amount of real estate fraud, securities fraud, and tax fraud that began, basically, the real estate/credit bubble was starting to inflate. It was false wealth. Same as the dot.com wealth of earlier decades. The dot.com bubble was not built on fraud. People were making tons of money and no one was about to stop it. The fraud had nothing to do with regulations either - it was plain fraud and anyone who could have done anything looked the other way. We've had a couple of scapegoats - Countrywide, for instance - but we are going to be paying for this a long time, as are countries like Ireland, Portugal, Spain, whose economies are imploding now.

Did you read the whole article? - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
First, big business owners "the rich"...small business owners are also among the "rich" according to the $250,000 a year baseline.

The article says this: "This breakneck pace can be partly attributed to strong productivity growth â�� which means companies have been able to make more with less â�� as well as the fact that some of the profits of American companies come from abroad. Economic conditions in the United States may still be sluggish, but many emerging markets like India and China are expanding rapidly." You know why a lot of the profits come from abroad? High corporate taxes. We are second only to Japan in that arena. Perhaps they would hire and make those profits HERE if the taxes were not so high. The good news is they are not LAYING OFF, but that could happen real soon if this economy does not get under control.

Why is it so difficult to even consider another avenue like cutting costs rather than raising taxes on anyone? Because you are a proponent of socialist wealth redistribution? Because that is what you are describing. Take it from those who earned it and give it to those who did nothing to earn it so they will then spend it and stimulate the economy. Why not, instead, make doing business in America more attractive again, put those people back to work and contributing to the tax base? Why not cut costs FIRST? What is wrong with that?

You accuse anyone who disagrees with you - of following the party line

[ In Reply To ..]
but do you ever diverge from the \'pub/TP talking points?

Okay...answer this for me. - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
first, I don't believe I said anything about toeing the party line. All I said was, the post did not match the article. Information was either missed (which is why I asked if whole article was read) or deleted on purpose because it did not fit the point that was trying to be made.

Why do you always attack with the pub/TP talking points, nothing in rebuttal or anything to contribute other than attacking me?

Why does the Democratic party always want to tax first and ask questions later? This is not new. This has been the party line for years. All I had the audacity to ask is why is that? Why not not even CONSIDER cutting costs rather than raising taxes, and STOP spending (common sense) to deal with the deficit? Stop programs that aren't working (an Obama campaign promise)?

It is a simple question. The Republicans are not stopping Obama from cutting costs, they are not stopping him from keeping his campaign promise to cut programs that are not working...the Democrats don't even want to go along with the bipartisan committee that Obama created to look into plans.

So YOU tell me. The Republicans are bad because they don't want to raise taxes on ANYONE and the Democrats are good because they don't want to consider anything else?

Please, enlighten me. What is your opinion for fixing the economy? Keep on spending and raise taxes? And yes, that is toeing the party line. But if you are for it, and you believe the Democrats are right, then why would you be offended if someone said you were toeing the party line?

Getting mixed messages here. Care to clear it up for me?

First of all, you have plenty of posts where you - talk about the democrat party line

[ In Reply To ..]
Second, when you write on and on, I am only going to read the first paragraph because you only repeat yourself. I am one of those hard working people who does not get paid for posting on this board.

Why do you always have to have the last word?

If I am not mistaken, the post was directed at me. If they don\'t... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
want a response, why post? If you don\'t want to read my posts because I repeat myself, why do you?

I don\'t get paid to post on this board.

As to the Democratic party line, I repeat...that is the platform and behavior of the Democratic party. They like to tax. Period. If you believe in what they are doing, and you are proud of what they are doing, why on earth would you be offended by toeing the party line? Why not defend what they are doing instead of attacking me? It is not MY fault their first answer to a deficit is raising taxes. It is just a fact. If you agree, you are toeing the party line, so why be offended? I thought you guys were proud of the Democratic party and what they are doing. Was I wrong?

Why do you feel it necessary to shoot the messenger?

you - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Yes, it is all about you! I wish the moderator would give you your own forum so you could stay out of this one and go argue with yourself and let people discuss things without having to have you answer everything people post with name calling and hostility. I have seen many discussions, excluding you, where people disagree on things, but they don't call each other names and get hostile.

You are right, though, we don't have to read what you say and I, for one, am going to do just that.

Oh my - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Again to quote: "Because you are a proponent of socialist wealth redistribution?" Why are you always attacking and then crying "wolf"? I thought I read somewhere about how you were reforming.

Guess that didn't last.

Okay, you tell me...taxing the rich at a higher rate than any... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
other American...if that is NOT socialist wealth redistribution, what is it?

What part of that is wrong? If you are a proponent of taxing the rich at a higher rate than any other American, you are a proponent of wealth redistribution. Why would you be offended if you are for it?

It is always amusing to see a blue collar - worker

[ In Reply To ..]
arguing for those who oppress him or her. Especially on an MT board where employees and ICs have seen their wages drop like a rock, while working longer hours on shitty computer systems that a few people are making a lot of money on. When a few CEOs and their sales execs are making money hand over fist on the backs of their MTs. Why? The wealthiest Americans have tax shelters that no one else has. They get favors. They get into better schools for less money without the hoops others have to jump through. Why should the administrative assistant to a Wall Street CEO be paying a higher tax rate than s/he is? Please study up on what is socialism. We've been seeing corporate socialism for years and no one blinks an eye. A republic DOES have socialist components, which most people don't understand. Socialist countries often have democratic components. There is a lot gray.

Okay...you tell me how the small and mid size MTSOs... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
are supposed to cope with their clients paying less and less and less? It is a valid question. You seem to think that the MTSOs should be able to absorb taking in less and keep on putting out the same amount. Wouldn't that make YOUR checks start bouncing?

Finally comes the "oppressed" word. Comes right before the great workers' revolutions. Like Russia...how are the middle class doing there by the way? Like Cuba...how are the middle class doing there, by the way? Check it out, if you can FIND them.

I am middle class. I have no problem with people - who actually pay in taxes

[ In Reply To ..]
I am where I am by choice. I could care less if the rich get to go to special schools, whatever. Who cares? No one forced me to be an MT. I could have done whatever I wanted. I chose simple and am happy. If these MTSOs are getting so rich, why have there been so many sales lately? I know my boss gets bonuses, and good for her. She pretty much works 24/7. There are many reasons this field is going down. I knew it would eventually happen. Seriously, we type medical charts, that is not really a 60,000 a year type of job, but for those of us that get out of paying childcare for multiple children, eating out, clothing, gas, we end up doing pretty good. I am by no means making the \"big dollars\" but still make more than I did actually in a doctor\'s office. I worked in medical billing/office management before and know what the reimbursements are like right now and how hard it is for them to keep an office/hospital going. Although, these tax cuts do help these business too. I\'m not sure how taking them away is going to help us. I am middle class and pay in taxes. It really irks me that so many people don\'t pay taxes. What about them?

LOL - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Why is it that they have the money to give themselves big bonuses but don't create jobs in this country? Don't YOU get it? This has nothing to do with taking from the rich, this has to do with the rich getting richer at the working American's expense.

By the way, not all rich are rich by working hard. Many are rich because of taking advantage of people and many have inherited richness and just plain luck. Don't make it like people who work hard for a living are only rich. And don't make it like all middle class people are lazy and trying to take advantage of the poor rich people. You really need to open your eyes!

They are taking their business overseas because they can get cheap labor and make more profits to stick in their pockets. If they were smart, they would invest here and hire people here so people had money to buy their products and make their profits that way. That way, everybody benefits, the corporations and the working class, not just the rich. I don't care how many tax breaks they get, they are going to take it overseas because they can get slave labor over there and make even bigger profits.

You know, this is a scary post...next thing you know... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
you will be at the gates of the \"rich\" peoples\' houses with pitchforks and torches. Do you even really think all the "rich" are evillll people? This post sure sounds like it.

First...let\'s define the \"rich\" as Democratic politicians define them. Those making more than $250,000 a year. A business making $250,000 a year is NOT giving million dollar bonuses to ANYBODY. Do you get THAT??

What IS it if it is not taking from the \"rich?\" Of course it is. Somehow you have been made to believe it is YOUR right to take money from someone else that they have earned that you have done nothing to earn yourself. In my world, that is called stealing. You can gloss it up and call it anything you want...it is the same thing as going next door and stealing the neighbor kid\'s bike because it is pretty and shiny and you can\'t afford one and she can buy another one because she\'s rich so you justify it and steal the bike. Same thing, larger scale.

By the way...the majority of the \"rich\" DO work hard, and were NOT given it through inheritance. And even those who inherit it, at some point back in history their ancestors DID earn it and those who came after were good stewards of the money. I bet you would be singing a different tune if YOU were one of the \"rich.\" Would YOU be checking that box on the income tax form to give more of your money like some claim they want to but never do??

Don\'t YOU make it that all the rich DID NOT work hard to get rich and continue to work HARD to remain so. Not all companies are Enron or Lehman brothers. You are doing the exact same thing you accuse me of...you really need to open YOUR eyes.

I said NOTHING about the middle class being lazy. The middle class works hard and they pay their taxes. They should NOT be paying for people who do not work because they choose not to (and don\'t even begin to tell me that everyone welfare needs to be on it). You and I should not have our tax dollars funding that. That is where cutting programs that aren\'t working should START. But if you talk to Democrats (I mean Democrats in power, politicians, and everyone posting here should know that and not take it so personally) about cutting ANY entitlements and they stick their fingers in their ears and say \"I don\'t hear you!\" They are completely UNwilling to compromise. That is just a fact, borne out by history and votes on numerous bills that you can check out by going to the congressional record, if you are really interested in opening your eyes, as you suggest I should do.

So, you are telling me if you had a business and made $250,000 a year and the cost of business keeps going up, you have done everything you can to keep what employees you did not have to lay off because of tax hikes, and now you are about to go bankrupt. You have the opportunity to go offshore where taxes are 50% less. What ARE YOU going to do? Go bankrupt? How does THAT help anything?

They WOULD invest here if the government would STOP taxing them to death!! Invest here??? They raised capital gains taxes! What are capital gains taxes? Taxes on investments!!

Taxes, taxes, taxes, taxes, the mantra of the current and past Democratic politicians in charge. THAT is the problem. And you support all that just in the hopes that they are going to take money from the rich who don\'t in your opinion deserve to be rich and redistribute it to the \"poor\" who did nothing to earn it but in your world \"deserve\" it.

Again...bet you would sing a different tune if you were one of those making $250,000 a year.

scary - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I'm not even going to answer your ranting, I am going to let you argue with yourself since you like twisting things around that people say. I'm thinking anger management classes for you!

I did not twist a thing you said. Your post was angry... - sam

[ In Reply To ..]
you believe the rich owe more than their fair share simply because they have more than you do. That is what it boils down to, and you lump everyone making over $250,000 a year in that group. What about the good companies, and there are thousands of them out there? What about them? The tax doesn't know who are the good ones and the bad ones. It hits ALL of them. So why not root out the bad ones, like the LEhman Brothers, the Enrons, but don't make all the GOOD ones, the jobmakers, bear the burden of the mistakes of the Enrons and the Lehman brothers? There is nothing FAIR about that.

All I am saying is give something ELSE a chance to work. Don't just knee jerk raise taxes in a down economy. My problem with the Democrats in power now is they won't drop that silly tax the rich mantra and even consider anything else.

And yes, I am at a loss as to why you won't either.

Nice talking with you.

Actually, everything she has said makes complete - sense

[ In Reply To ..]
I would think it would be pretty to hard to argue. I would say most of us are those middle class people. I took your post the same way she did.

I guess this is the difference between parties. I pay in taxes. I have a problem with people getting back more money than paid actually paid in. I'm a Republican. Democrats seem to think that the rich should have to pay the brunt of the load because they have the money to. I have gave this scenerio before. It is no different than going out to eat with a friend who makes more than you and expecting them to pay more of the tab because they make more. When a person is working for their money whether it be bonuses or whatever, why is it okay for the public to be sticking their hands out expecting any of it.

actually - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Why is it fair that many hardworking people lost their homes and jobs while the big CEOs still got bonuses and bailouts?

By the way, MOST people that go out with a friend who makes more money don't expect the one making the more money pay for lunch. Just saying.

That is kind of the point with the lunch scenerio - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Why is it any different with anything else? Is it okay then since you don't know the rich to expect them to pay more in taxes. Half of America doesn't even pay federal income tax. Just saying!!

I am so tired of hearing about the big bonuses. I have had a very hard time with my mortgage for this past year. It has had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there have been big bailouts and bonsues. It all has to do with the fact that we were spending more than we should have been, and I am now paying for it. I have been having to learn for once in my life to make without plastic.

I would like for someone on this board that is a liberal to sell me on their party. It is funny how people post, but there is no substance to their message. Stuff like rich tax cuts, yada, yada, yada. Well, they can't give tax cuts to the lower income because they don't pay any.

Similar Messages:

Jul 01, 2010
It was only 9.7% in May 2009, and in December, it was 10.9. This doesn't include those who ran out of benefits. I just can't imagine how many are really out of work here. They stated we have 8,300 people out of work. That doesn't sound like much, but I think our county only has a population of 30,000, and most of them have had to leave the county to find jobs. ...

Sep 20, 2011
Totally disgusting they want to cut benefits from those who pay the ultimate price. The government needs to honor its contract with the troops. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ron-paul-issues-open-letter-to-president-obama-concerning-cuts-to-veterans-benefits-2011-09-20 ...

Dec 07, 2010
Talk Box: Tax Cut Extension Would Lead to More Borrowing From China 12/7/10 at 01:50 AM // MSNBC's Chuck Todd reported that the framework deal President Obama seems to have reached with Republicans on extending the Bush tax cuts will result in a loss of revenue totaling nearly $450 billion in 2011, more than the cost of the 2009 stimulus while Countdown guest host Sam Seder investigated the huge amounts the U.S. will have to borrow from countries like China, Russia and th ...

Dec 06, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/alan-grayson-fox-news-tax-cuts_n_791533.html Here's an excerpt: They want tax cuts for the rich because they want a tax cut for themselves. What do I mean by that? Let's take a look at the people who are really in charge, the ones who actually run the Republican party. Let's start with this gentleman here, the man with the cigar, Rush Limbaugh. Doesn't he look happy? According according to Newsweek, he makes $58.7 million a year, an ...

Jul 30, 2010
Seventeen claimants who previously reported incomes in excess of 10 million (whose monthly benefit averaged $5,765) along with 3000 or so who had reported incomes of greater than 1 million collected unemployment last year, despite the fact less than 20 percent of their inome is derived from actualy working with the emainder coming from capital gains. Curiously, there is no upper limit on the amount of income you can make to collect, while of course there IS a lower limit below which you be ...

Sep 28, 2012
Sharp kid. See link. ...

May 10, 2012
...

Jan 01, 2010
My partner is on SSI and has not worked for years although she is able to work now. I am shocked at my feelings of resentment as I knew fulll well what I was getting into. I was told the house would be cleaned, meals prepared and she would do the errands. It turns out I want to hire my housecleaning service back, I prepare the meals and she runs to the store once a day. She does not understand that her $750 a month does not even take care of spending money for the t ...

Nov 11, 2015
If you need to apply for unemployment in Wisconsin, you have to now pass a drug test--even though you have earned those benefits. This is thanks to former Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker and Republican controlled state legislature. Thanks be to the higher powers that made him come to his senses and realize he was not presidential material. Can you imagine how he would have set the entire country back? Makes me sick to my stomach. ...

Feb 23, 2010
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pushed for a $15 billion jobs bill Monday by suggesting that unemployed men are more likely to abuse their wives. “Men when they're out of work tend to become abusive,” Reid said as he argued in favor of a cloture vote on the jobs bill. “I met with some people while I was home dealing with domestic abuse. It has gotten out of hand. Why? Men don't have jobs. Women don't have jobs either, but women aren’t abusive, most of the ...

Mar 26, 2010
Kinda late. So many lost homes already. This is what should have been done in the beginning. Obama administration announces effort to slash mortgages for unemployed borrowers // = 0 ) ? wp_article.comments_period : 3 ; if ( typeof thisNode == 'undefined' ) thisNode = 'admin' ; // (wp_article.allow_comments) && !(black list) && (white list) of ancestors and sections goes here if ( SITELIFE_ENABLED && ( typeof wp_article != "undefin ...

Apr 12, 2010
Coburn and his ilk are poised to replay the Bunning debaucle of last month as the Senate goes to work today on debating ANOTHER temporary 30-day unemployment benefits extension in advance of the larger measure that would extend benefits until the end of the year. Dems are prepared to empower the pubs by ignoring their own Paygo measures, rather than diffusing the pub argument and exposing them for the obstructive hypocrites we all know they are as both parties line up to mak ...

Aug 22, 2012
Not good. Directly to state-run media. (link) ...

Feb 10, 2010
To take a look at where the stimulus money is slated to go, how much has arrived so far, and what it's being used for IN REAL TIME, check out this interactive map at MSNBC. It gets interesting when you look at what's happening around your area. On the left, look at the drop-down box for "Contract stage" and pick "Awarded". Then click your state on the map, and check out your county and the counties nearby. Not a lot of the money has gone out yet. Anyone know why? Specifics woul ...

Oct 08, 2010
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101008/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_stimulus_checks_dead_people ...

Oct 08, 2010
See link ...

Sep 03, 2010
I had heard this a couple months ago and now I know why they waited so long to do something. MIDTERMS. Most of the Dems must think this will get them re-elected so they must be getting nervous over the midterm elections. White House considers pre-midterm package of business tax breaks to spur hiring With just two months until the November elections, the White House is seriously weighing a package of business tax breaks - potentially worth hundreds of billions of dollars - to spur hiring and c ...

Sep 09, 2012
nm ...

Feb 17, 2010
Compilation of republican reps taking credit for stimulus success in their local districts after having voted against it on multiple occasions. Stimulating Hypocrisy: 111 Lawmakers Block Recovery While Taking Credit For Its Success http://thinkprogress.org/touting-recovery-opposed/ ...

Feb 18, 2010
Looks like the democrats are at it again. This spendulous plan they are trying to get everyone to believe has worked has not. The figures they have reported are incorrect. http://www.kitv.com/video/22597274/index.html I'm sure more reports will be forthcoming on the "un-truths" this administration thinks we are so stupid to believe. ...

May 23, 2011
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110523/ap_on_re_us/us_stimulus_tax_cheats ...

Feb 20, 2017
The 2009 stimulus package funded millions of dollars for safety improvements for a dam in California that was in “good shape,” but not to the Oroville Dam that is now on the verge of a spillway crisis. Nearly 200,000 residents north of Sacramento were ordered to evacuate after fears that erosion would cause the emergency spillway to fail, which would lead to “catastrophic flooding“ from a 30-foot wall of water. Despite more than a decade of warnings about Oroville, there is no publ ...

Aug 16, 2011
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/solar-power-firm-goes-bankrupt-after-receiving-millions-of-taxpayer-dollars/ ...

Feb 17, 2010
Imagine if, one year ago, Congress had passed a stimulus bill that really worked. Let’s say this bill had started spending money within a matter of weeks and had rapidly helped the economy. Let’s also imagine it was large enough to have had a huge impact on jobs — employing something like two million people who would otherwise be unemployed right now. If that had happened, what would the economy look like today? Well, it would look almost exactly as it does now. Because thos ...

Sep 08, 2012
These results are from PAGE 1 of 10 on stimulus funds claims, many of which were made by the Romney camp in their recently launched offensive that would appear to be based on a compulsion to squirm and fib in an effort to deflect attention away from Romney’s offshore accounts. Pants-on-fire Ad says stimulus tax credits funded a solar company building a Mexico plant http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/02/americans-prosperity/ad-says-stimulus-tax-credits-funded-sola ...

Jun 17, 2010
jobless unemployment benefit recipients, requiring ALL 9.8 million of them to pee on demand before their checks can be released. UI checks are released twice monthly, so I wonder if we will be required to test more often than ex-cons on parole. But they don't want to stop there. They also are suggesting to extend this requirement to include the 4.4 million families receiving TANF and any and all of the other millions of Americans on social assistance and subject them ...

Aug 19, 2011
Our country is spending more money than it is taking in....and has for quite some time now. Because of this...this administration has threatened older folks with no SS check unless the debt ceiling was raised. Now they are talking about changing benefits for the military. There has also been talk about taking away from Medicare and Medicaid. Both parties have talked about taking away from Medicare...even the president's healthcare takes away from Medicare to pay for ...

Aug 26, 2010
My first husband (a military man) killed himself years ago. I was (am) entitlted to death benefits and have received them for the past 12 years. I am now in a common law relationship (2 years), but ready to end it. He is being very difficult and wants everything, including for me to sell MY home and split the money from that. I've spoke to a lawyer who says that my state recognizes common law relationships and we will actually have to go through a divorce. My q ...

Oct 12, 2012
Well, here's another eye opening bit of info. Note the date of August 24, THIS YEAR. The Breakdown on A123’s Wanxiang Takeover Chinese auto-tech giant Wanxiang wants A123’s R&D—and continued U.S. federal support—for its $465 million bailout. JEFF ST. JOHN: AUGUST 24, 2012 Wanxiang Group Corp. wants A123’s R&D intact as part of its $450 million rescue investment, and a big chunk of the money ($200 million) is tied to continued access to $1 ...

Feb 05, 2013
...