tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946942062204448159.post3514582146993223828..comments2023-10-14T04:34:47.438-04:00Comments on The Happy Wanderer: Republicans Still Oppose Tax increases!vanillamanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08385749975343350948noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946942062204448159.post-30508348596674098012011-08-05T13:39:29.403-04:002011-08-05T13:39:29.403-04:00Anonymous good analyse
The Republicans should pay ...Anonymous good analyse<br />The Republicans should pay off the expense of the Bush tax cut, but they have played this game before when they took office in 2010 they said every thing that would increase the deficit should be payed for. They wanted to cut Obama-care which would save some 200 billion over 10 years, and said that Obamacare was more expensive, because it was a new entitlement that would increase the deficit ignoring the fact that the CBO said it was budget friendly. <br /><br />The Republicans will play the card again in 2012 that if we eliminate the bush tax cuts revenue will go down. Which makes no sense, but they will play (the don't care what the experts say this is what we think). They will say it will eliminate jobs and lower revenue. Some of the far right Republicans will say cut taxes even more and revenue will go up! The scary thing is sometimes they actually make you believe that they actually believe the things they are saying.vanillamanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08385749975343350948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946942062204448159.post-12690226824062744302011-08-05T08:28:27.263-04:002011-08-05T08:28:27.263-04:00Good post.
One interesting but seldom mentioned t...Good post.<br /><br />One interesting but seldom mentioned thing to keep a watch on is that in the latest, much panned debt deal, the dynamics have changed a bit.<br /><br />It doesn't seem like much now, but could by the end of 2012. The budget projections that form the basis of the debt deal include the EXPIRATION of the Bush Tax cuts. So if the Republicans want to extend them, they will have to account for it somewhere else, i.e other revenue sources or even deeper cuts.<br /><br />In other words, for the first time, the Bush tax cuts are represented as an expense that needs to be taken into account, which flies in the face of the much repeated Republican talking point that "taxes don't really count when you're talking about deficit reduction" (I know, eliminating revenue from a 3 part equation seems rather silly but they get away with it all the time).<br /><br />If, and it is a big if, the Democrats wise up, they can hang them up on their semantics with a spelled out piece of legislation - the debt agreement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com