Republicans block small-business tax break on procedural vote

[302Riz]

Typical republican scumbags.

typical retarded reply.

[caddis]

Notice a pattern. GOP blocks tax breaks for working people while pushing tax breaks for rich people.

Which tax break for working people have they blocked?

GOP blocks tax breaks for small businesses while pushing tax breaks for multi-national conglomerates.

No, I don't see that pattern. I do notice that when a democrat calls for a tax break, it's a good thing, when an Republican calls for one, it's a bad thing.

Dem's do the opposite.

By "opposite" do you mean they never cotton to a tax break unless it's an election year? Bush tax cuts are bad so lets keep "temporarily" extending them?

Are you really incapable of identifying the patten and understanding what it means?

I know what it means. It means the democrats don't truly support tax breaks and limited government unless it will buy them votes. They have had chances to make Bush's tax cuts permanent but have failed to do so...yet they keep extending them. Their pattern is to keep pitting one group of Americans against another...class warfare, knowing the large segment that they have allowed to skip out on income taxes, far outnumbers the 5% that pay the majority of the tax load


You didn't answer my questions...why is that?

[caddis]

I know Caddis and many other non-liberals are fully capable of recognizing patterns, even those that go against their beliefs about the GOP agenda. That they refuse to publicly acknowledge them is called "willful ignorance". Avoids bad thoughts and the feeling that one is "being had", I suppose.

Much preferable would be a GOP that recognized the domestic jobs-creating value of the small-mid sized business sector a few decades ago, snuffing out arguments that they were doing hack-work for multi-nationals. But there's not nearly as much money in taking that line, is there?

You didn't answer my questions either



Isn't it odd that democrats don't believe tax relief will encourage growth and employment until it's their idea?

[caddis]

Stay on topic. Democrats have the best -recent- record for attempting to stimulate domestic job-creation.

Yeah, their last 3 budgets have demonstrated that

**cough**bullshit**cough**

[BooRadley]

Which tax break for working people have they blocked?

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...oll-tax-battle

Yeah, they eventually had to cave, but they did their best to block it.

In a surprise move, House Republican leaders on Monday backed off their demands in the battle over extending a payroll tax cut that affects some 160 million Americans.

[ . . . ]

The House GOP has not given up its fight entirely. Other provisions set to expire Feb. 29 – extended unemployment insurance and a “fix” for a 27 percent mandated cut in reimbursement rates for doctors treating Medicare patients – remain stalled, especially over how to pay for them.

But had Republicans not yielded on the popular payroll tax break, the political costs could have been formidable, especially in an election year.

“It’s a total capitulation,” says Stan Collender, a longtime congressional budget analyst, now with Qorvis Communications in Washington. House Speaker John “Boehner read the tea leaves and said, ‘I’m not going to do this again.’ ”

House Republicans took a pounding in the polls last December, as a struggle over how to pay for extending benefits was resolved at the 11th hour only after Speaker Boehner told his deeply divided caucus, in a conference call, that they had no option but to accept a two-month extension of the popular tax break – until Feb. 29 – and continue negotiations.

[ . . . ]

“There is still the very real issue that we’re either taking money from the Treasury to shore up Social Security or we’re denying revenue to a program that’s going to put it in a more difficult position,” says Steve Ellis, vice president for Taxpayers for Common Sense.

But he adds that it’s a smart political maneuver for House Republicans, because it defuses the argument that they are opposing a tax cut. “I’m not saying it’s responsible budgeting, but it’s not bad politics,” he adds.

[caddis]

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...oll-tax-battle

Yeah, they eventually had to cave, but they did their best to block it.

Strange that you dot, dot, dotted this part out of your post:

The move, which would keep payroll taxes at their current 4.2 percent rate through 2012, is expected to add another $83 billion to federal budget deficits. Republicans had wanted to offset that amount through spending cuts

So, to summarize, the GOP did not block tax cuts to the middle class(as you stated), they wanted some actual spending cuts ALSO

And again, you haven't answered my questions but I'll add another....Why do democrats oppose spending cuts?

[BooRadley]

So, to summarize, the GOP did not block tax cuts to the middle class(as you stated), they wanted some actual spending cuts ALSO

Why didn't they block the tax cuts for rich people without demanding spending cuts? Why do they only oppose unfunded tax cuts for working people? And why do they oppose tax cuts for small businesses, but not international conglomerates? And why do they oppose tax cuts for compaines that insource jobs, but not companies that outsource jobs?

Why do they only oppose tax cuts that help the majority of people, but never ever oppose tax cuts that help their constituency (the top 1%)?

Even more, why haven't you figured out yet that you aren't their constituency? They're not here to help you. They're here to help billionaires, at your expense.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Why didn't they block the tax cuts for rich people without demanding spending cuts? Why do they only oppose unfunded tax cuts for working people? And why do they oppose tax cuts for small businesses, but not international conglomerates? And why do they oppose tax cuts for compaines that insource jobs, but not companies that outsource jobs?

Why do they only oppose tax cuts that help the majority of people, but never ever oppose tax cuts that help their constituency (the top 1%)?

Even more, why haven't you figured out yet that you aren't their constituency? They're not here to help you. They're here to help billionaires, at your expense.

You sure have a knack for concise statements. You pack a heck of a lot into so few, clear words.

[caddis]

Why didn't they block the tax cuts for rich people without demanding spending cuts? Why do they only oppose unfunded tax cuts for working people? And why do they oppose tax cuts for small businesses, but not international conglomerates? And why do they oppose tax cuts for compaines that insource jobs, but not companies that outsource jobs?

lol...You are barking up the wrong tree. The answer is simple. Democrats balk at any and every spending cut. The republicans have to compromise to get any spending cut passed, what the hell makes them think they can get a tax break for someone making over $250K AND a spending cut?

Why do they only oppose tax cuts that help the majority of people, but never ever oppose tax cuts that help their constituency (the top 1%)?

And another question that you will not answer: What is the point of payroll taxes?

Even more, why haven't you figured out yet that you aren't their constituency?

Because I'm not a selfish, self-centered, greedy, POS, and I don't base my decisions on what is most profitable for me. I guess I have a different set of values then your typical government-dependent liberal

[BooRadley]

I don't base my decisions on what is most profitable for me

Clearly.

Do you think those GOP billionaire families got all that money by not making their decisions based on what's most profitable for them? They're sure as hell not looking out for your interests.

My god. How can people be such humongous suckers?

[Malcolm Wright]

Why didn't they block the tax cuts for rich people without demanding spending cuts? Why do they only oppose unfunded tax cuts for working people? And why do they oppose tax cuts for small businesses, but not international conglomerates? And why do they oppose tax cuts for compaines that insource jobs, but not companies that outsource jobs?

Why do they only oppose tax cuts that help the majority of people, but never ever oppose tax cuts that help their constituency (the top 1%)?

Even more, why haven't you figured out yet that you aren't their constituency? They're not here to help you. They're here to help billionaires, at your expense.

I disagree somewhat - it isn't that cut and dry.
Taxes on international conglomerates reduces their attraction to invest in US facilities and labor. Fiddling with taxation related to these conglomerates can and does cause them to take their business elsewhere.

Otherwise I agree with the gist of the rest of your comments, and particularly it is damning if they don't apply the same requirement of cutting spending to balance the books evenly.

[9ball8]

I thought tax breaks were bad? Wouldn't giving these businesses tax breaks be akin to forcing the middle class pay for them? This makes no sense, can one of you liberals explain your thinking here

OK, I'll answer one of your questions. This one might clear things up for you. If business tax breaks were given to the small/mid size business sector, while simplifying (read, eliminating loopholes) the tax code for everyone, then any business savings will most likely be invested within the US. Eliminating a small portion of what multi-nationals currently evade with the same simplified tax code could allow a continuation of the current tax rate applied to the middle class. If all multi-nationals paid a minimum of 10% (which they do not do now), that would also compare with the most business tax-friendly codes in the world.

What would the multi-nationals do with a bigger tax break, Caddis? They'll do what is in their best interests, as they should do. But that might well mean they'll spend that money overseas, with no direct or immediate effect to benefit domestic consumption or employment in the US.

If you actually believe that multi-nationals have a better track record for stimulating domestic employment in the last 10 years than small/medium sized business, then post your results. I dont' believe you'll find the results to back up the myth. Such oddities from non-liberals... All I want is for government to negotiate deals and streamline the tax code for the benefit of it's non-profit customers -US citizens and the domestic business sector. That doesn't mean we punish multi-nationals. It means that we negotiate with them based on the understanding that they have been known to shit-can agreements with various levels of government, outsourced jobs, and left the locals holding the bag (empty large buildings and higher unemployment rates). Doesn't mean every smaller businesses will employ the big numbers or will always stay afloat to employ people. Just means they are a more reliable source for the government to partner with, when it comes to employing US citizens.

Really, I continue to be disappointed with non-liberals. It is embarassing when a quasi-socialist like me has to explain sensible stimulation of the capitalist sector. Perhaps that stems from non-liberals of the tea bag variety believing that anything the gov't. does is wrong. Prevents them from even entertaining ideas on how the government should deal with the private sector. Unless you believe the gov't shouldn't deal with the private sector? Maybe F&L believes that, but I don't think anyone else is naive or cynical enuf to actually go there.

[caddis]

Clearly.

Yes, clearly you don't understand what it means to have values beyond your own self-interests. I guess I have a different sense of fairness and I believe we all benefit from the freedom and opportunity this country offers so therefore, we should all pay even if it's a minimal amount. I don't believe I should be begging for a tax cut on one end and then turn around and demand that someone else, who is already paying a higher rate, pay more. Likewise, I don't believe it is fair that 50% of our country doesn't pay income taxes. You can't convince me there are that many people in this country that can't afford to pay.

Do you think those GOP billionaire families got all that money by not making their decisions based on what's most profitable for them?

Here is another difference between you and I, I don't care how others get their money nor do I care how much they have. Your class warfare game is based on greed and envy. You can play...I choose not to.

They're sure as hell not looking out for your interests.

Nor should they. Mine is my own responsibility

My god. How can people be such humongous suckers?

You tell me, you are the one that supports the One



BTW...You still have failed to answer the questions

[caddis]

I thought tax breaks were bad? Wouldn't giving these businesses tax breaks be akin to forcing the middle class pay for them? This makes no sense, can one of you liberals explain your thinking here
Why do democrats oppose spending cuts?

OK, I'll answer one of your questions.

Why just one? And why such a long convoluted answer for the simple questions I asked? That’s enough to send up a red flag or explain why Boo couldn’t attempt an answer.

This one might clear things up for you. If business tax breaks were given to the small/mid size business sector, while simplifying (read, eliminating loopholes) the tax code for everyone, then any business savings will most likely be invested within the US.
.
.
What would the multi-nationals do with a bigger tax break, Caddis?
Really, I continue to be disappointed with non-liberals. It is embarassing when a quasi-socialist like me has to explain sensible stimulation of the capitalist sector. Perhaps that stems from non-liberals of the tea bag variety believing that anything the gov't. does is wrong. Prevents them from even entertaining ideas on how the government should deal with the private sector. Unless you believe the gov't shouldn't deal with the private sector? Maybe F&L believes that, but I don't think anyone else is naive or cynical enuf to actually go there.

First, I eliminated your rant against multinationals because it didn’t address any question I asked.

Second, you never really answered any question I asked; are tax breaks good or bad? Would this tax break to business mean someone else would have to “pay for it?” ... I ask this question because that is how liberals classify a tax cut (unfunded spending)

Third, I put in bold the critical flaw in your reasoning. You support giving a specified tax credit to small business yet you want to simplify the tax code and eliminate loopholes. Make up your mind.

Fourth. With regards to your rant against multi-nationals when you asked this question: “ What would the multi-nationals do with a bigger tax break, Caddis” Maybe you don’t understand the tax credit. It will be given to small business if they hire new workers. My question is a simple on: If this is a good idea for small business, why isn’t it a good idea for all business?

If you actually believe that multi-nationals have a better track record for stimulating domestic employment in the last 10 years than small/medium sized business, then post your results. I dont' believe you'll find the results to back up the myth. Such oddities from non-liberals...

Such oddities? How about such a typical strawman from non-conservatives

Really, I continue to be disappointed with non-liberals. It is embarassing when a quasi-socialist like me has to explain sensible stimulation of the capitalist sector. Perhaps that stems from non-liberals of the tea bag variety believing that anything the gov't. does is wrong. Prevents them from even entertaining ideas on how the government should deal with the private sector

Really, I’m never surprised by liberals, socialists, Marxists, and statists. Their elitist mindset allows them to believe they have all the answers except, of course, when they are answers to specific questions you may be asking

[Chachma v'Oz]

Why do democrats oppose spending cuts?

Too broad. Which Democrats? Which spending cuts? I don't know that I can answer, but we can't know that until I know what you're asking.

[86Dùde]

Where is Joe McCarthy when we need him most?

[Chachma v'Oz]

Doing what Republicans do best for America - remaining dead.

[caddis]

Too broad. Which Democrats? Which spending cuts? I don't know that I can answer, but we can't know that until I know what you're asking.

Strange post after thanking Boo for asking all those "broad" questions (which you considered concise) about the GOP.

ahypocritesezwhat

[Freedom&Liberty]

Where is Joe McCarthy when we need him most?

Rolling in his grave wondering why guys like ChaCha are allowed to mingle with the general public.

[Chachma v'Oz]

Strange post after thanking Boo for asking all those "broad" questions (which you considered concise) about the GOP.

ahypocritesezwhat

He was using rhetorical questions for comparison purposes.

I didn't think you had any specific objections and only broad, vague complaints. You must feel right at home with Romney.