Bush Tax Cut - Round 2

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Vic
The only people who "live in grinding poverty" in the US do so out of their own personal choice. I know, I know... you fools sit there and say, "Who would be poor out of choice?" Well, get it through your head - if you choose not to get an education, it's a choice. If you choose not to show up for work on time, it's a choice. If the sum result of you choices causes you to be poor, then that too is a choice.
And the "moral compass" in the US never "pointed north." Liberals should not try to point back to some enlightened day when people lived kinder lives because such a day never existed in all of human history. Right here and right now is the best that people have ever had it throughout the whole world.
And this "while billionaires are making billions more at our expense." Don't buy their products then, dipsh!t

It is pointless to debate an issue, any issue, with folks who first seek to render an alternate view holder as being a fool incapable of rational thought due to the density of matter in the head and concludes with a further indication of the high esteem that they hold view holders not in agreement with their philosophy. Ergo, I've not a comment to make on the substantive issue raised.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BOBDN
Dipsh!t, real class. You must be one of those folks who took the bull by the horns and made yourself all that you are today. LOL

Children who grow up in poverty don't have the opportunities that the children of more affluent parents have. They are more likely to live their lives in poverty. Poverty breeds poverty. And the playing field isn't level so those choices you mention are so much dipsh!t - to borrow your term.

Not to say there aren't people who break the chain of poverty. I'm one. We grew up in poverty not by choice but because we were a one parent household, latch key kids before there were latch key kids. Don't preach to me about poverty. Unless you've lived through it. With your attitude I'm pretty sure you've had your future planned for you from the start. Nice to have that advantage. Not so nice to realize you have an advantage.

I sincerely hope you have the opportunity to experience poverty for yourself someday soon.

You're wrong on every count. As a child, we did at many times live off welfare. I have tasted the government cheese and worn the hand-me-down and Goodwill clothes. My life was not planned out. When I left home young, I had virtually no money and everything I owned fit into 3 grocery bags in the trunk of a $500 car with no insurance. Don't presume to know about me and don't presume to tell me about my life.
Poverty only breeds poverty because those people choose to live the poverty lifestyle. Go to their schools, the kids tell each other not to be smart or they will get picked on. Look at their parents and the messages they instill in their kids - it's not your fault, you have no control, "the man" has brought you down. Look at the situation in both of our cases - parents who are so dishonest that they can't keep a vow that they took before God, even if it harms their children. It's all bullsh!t. But they are choices.

You must have really hated growing up poor to hold people in such disdain. What you say may be true for some people but most people I have known in or out of poverty want the same things for their children. They work very hard, more than one job. But as George HW Bush once said when asked about the cuts he was making in student loan programs, "Someone has to drive the garbage truck."

The problem is we hold people in low regard if they aren't on the proper "career path." There is dignity in any work. People should be paid a living wage for working. Instead we attack the poor simply because they cannot defend themselves.

The majority of the people earning poverty level wages in America want to better themselves. You were there. You must know that. But they are so busy running as fast as they can and still losing ground - how can they better themselves? Demand an increase in salary so they can learn a trade or work on that BA? I don't think so.

Meanwhile there are those among us who sit in board rooms and earn millions - not based on the job they do. Their corporations can be losing money every year, John Snow at CSX for instance, and they still get the fat check and the fat bonus and the fat stock options. Nice work if you can get it. Don't think the deck isn't stacked in their favor. You can't be that naive. Yet you don't mind at all attacking people who are working as hard as they can but can't find a way out of poverty.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: Vic
The only people who "live in grinding poverty" in the US do so out of their own personal choice. I know, I know... you fools sit there and say, "Who would be poor out of choice?" Well, get it through your head - if you choose not to get an education, it's a choice. If you choose not to show up for work on time, it's a choice. If the sum result of you choices causes you to be poor, then that too is a choice.
And the "moral compass" in the US never "pointed north." Liberals should not try to point back to some enlightened day when people lived kinder lives because such a day never existed in all of human history. Right here and right now is the best that people have ever had it throughout the whole world.
And this "while billionaires are making billions more at our expense." Don't buy their products then, dipsh!t

It is pointless to debate an issue, any issue, with folks who first seek to render an alternate view holder as being a fool incapable of rational thought due to the density of matter in the head and concludes with a further indication of the high esteem that they hold view holders not in agreement with their philosophy. Ergo, I've not a comment to make on the substantive issue raised.

HJD1 - your son definitely didn't post that!

You must have had a rest! Your point is well taken. I hope everyone gets it, but I doubt it.

 

[LunarRay]

CADguy,

Hey - take the Iraq talk elsewhere please - there are plenty of threads to do so. Thanks.

CkG

(I apologize for posting about Iraq/WMD when I was/am horor bound to not do so, but BOBDN doesn't have his PMs enabled )[/quote]

Had to bring up Iraq. It's one of the best Wealthfare programs ever invented.[/quote]

Read closer .... or look closer... got ya.

Not gonna file are we? Wanna Make Dough but, No Tax hmmmm... maybe I've missed the point... have I?

Three letters IRS... opps maybe you've hired an accountant... they're the bomb..

W anna M ake D ough.......

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: HJD1
CADguy,

Hey - take the Iraq talk elsewhere please - there are plenty of threads to do so. Thanks.

CkG

(I apologize for posting about Iraq/WMD when I was/am horor bound to not do so, but BOBDN doesn't have his PMs enabled )

Had to bring up Iraq. It's one of the best Wealthfare programs ever invented.[/quote]

Read closer .... or look closer... got ya.

Not gonna file are we? Wanna Make Dough but, No Tax hmmmm... maybe I've missed the point... have I?

Three letters IRS... opps maybe you've hired an accountant... they're the bomb..

W anna M ake D ough....... [/quote]

clever

CkG

 

[MrChicken]

The Reps just out manuevered the Dems again.

Already the country knows that ~350B was the sticking point for a couple of Reps and all of the Dems on the tax cut. So the Reps cut out the handout to the poor and got the bill passed. Now most Reps never saw a tax cut they didnt like, so passing one for the "poor" is in line for them too. They just got a double tax cut done. The Dems will try to play as Rep meanspiritedness, but the Reps will pass the final bill overwhelmingly and smile the whole time. Bush will declare it as a great thing for the poor.

Bush will be on the campiagn trail touting BOTH of these tax cuts, one to spur the economy and the other as a sign of "compassionate conservatism".

 

[BOBDN]

I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: MrChicken
The Reps just out manuevered the Dems again.

Already the country knows that ~350B was the sticking point for a couple of Reps and all of the Dems on the tax cut. So the Reps cut out the handout to the poor and got the bill passed. Now most Reps never saw a tax cut they didnt like, so passing one for the "poor" is in line for them too. They just got a double tax cut done. The Dems will try to play as Rep meanspiritedness, but the Reps will pass the final bill overwhelmingly and smile the whole time. Bush will declare it as a great thing for the poor.

Bush will be on the campiagn trail touting BOTH of these tax cuts, one to spur the economy and the other as a sign of "compassionate conservatism".

And what possible good can come out of this for our country?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?

CkG

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?

CkG

Some people need a handout. Have you come to the conclusion that handing millions of $ to people who run companies into the ground is a handout?

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: Vic
The only people who "live in grinding poverty" in the US do so out of their own personal choice. I know, I know... you fools sit there and say, "Who would be poor out of choice?" Well, get it through your head - if you choose not to get an education, it's a choice. If you choose not to show up for work on time, it's a choice. If the sum result of you choices causes you to be poor, then that too is a choice.
And the "moral compass" in the US never "pointed north." Liberals should not try to point back to some enlightened day when people lived kinder lives because such a day never existed in all of human history. Right here and right now is the best that people have ever had it throughout the whole world.
And this "while billionaires are making billions more at our expense." Don't buy their products then, dipsh!t

It is pointless to debate an issue, any issue, with folks who first seek to render an alternate view holder as being a fool incapable of rational thought due to the density of matter in the head and concludes with a further indication of the high esteem that they hold view holders not in agreement with their philosophy. Ergo, I've not a comment to make on the substantive issue raised.

HJD1 - your son definitely didn't post that!

You must have had a rest! Your point is well taken. I hope everyone gets it, but I doubt it.

As I see it, BobDN, the issue is how and in what manner is best for the economic growth stimuli package to be directed while being somewhat reasonable to the taxpayer (which would include the FICA paid by low income earners). It appears that Bush is focused more on the demand side of the equation. So it makes sense to put the bulk of the tax cut in the hands of the folks who will spend it on something greater than the X $ received. If a person buys a US made TV costing 2000$ using the 400$ cut as an offset and incurring debt on the balance or taking the money from under the mattress the cut is well directed to stimulate production of US made TVs.
Poor folks are not, in my opinion, poor because of intention to do so. They often are poor for reasons of intellelect, disability, underemployment, unemployment, catastrophic events, and on. Having kids should not be the right of the rich alone... the rich often became rich as the result of the keen business sense to find ways to induce the less keen to fork over their money to them through innovation, creation or hard work... no more hard than the hourly worker earning 8$ an hour... just more creative...

 

[BOBDN]

I want to start an energy company. I want people in high political positions to allow me to set national policy on energy. I want to be able to regulate my own industry. I want to be able to create false shortages in my market to boost prices for my energy. I want to be able to force my thousands of employees to invest in my company. I want to earn millions plus millions more in bonuses every year whether or not my company is making money.

Then I want to cash out my share of the company and let all those suckers lose their life savings and their jobs to boot.

Then I can blame them for wanting to live in poverty.

Haha.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?


CkG

Some people need a handout. Have you come to the conclusion that handing millions of $ to people who run companies into the ground is a handout?

If people "need" a handout - we have other places for that - NOT disguised as a "tax-cut"

Yes, I don't like corporate welfare. The two aren't similar in this case. Corps pay taxes - the "handout" people don't
Can you answer my question? please?

CkG

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: Vic
The only people who "live in grinding poverty" in the US do so out of their own personal choice. I know, I know... you fools sit there and say, "Who would be poor out of choice?" Well, get it through your head - if you choose not to get an education, it's a choice. If you choose not to show up for work on time, it's a choice. If the sum result of you choices causes you to be poor, then that too is a choice.
And the "moral compass" in the US never "pointed north." Liberals should not try to point back to some enlightened day when people lived kinder lives because such a day never existed in all of human history. Right here and right now is the best that people have ever had it throughout the whole world.
And this "while billionaires are making billions more at our expense." Don't buy their products then, dipsh!t

It is pointless to debate an issue, any issue, with folks who first seek to render an alternate view holder as being a fool incapable of rational thought due to the density of matter in the head and concludes with a further indication of the high esteem that they hold view holders not in agreement with their philosophy. Ergo, I've not a comment to make on the substantive issue raised.

HJD1 - your son definitely didn't post that!

You must have had a rest! Your point is well taken. I hope everyone gets it, but I doubt it.

As I see it, BobDN, the issue is how and in what manner is best for the economic growth stimuli package to be directed while being somewhat reasonable to the taxpayer (which would include the FICA paid by low income earners). It appears that Bush is focused more on the demand side of the equation. So it makes sense to put the bulk of the tax cut in the hands of the folks who will spend it on something greater than the X $ received. If a person buys a US made TV costing 2000$ using the 400$ cut as an offset and incurring debt on the balance or taking the money from under the mattress the cut is well directed to stimulate production of US made TVs.
Poor folks are not, in my opinion, because of intention to do so. They often are poor for reasons of intellelect, disability, underemployment, unemployment, catastrophic events, and on. Having kids should not be the right of the rich alone... the rich often became rich as the result of the keen business sense to find ways to induce the less keen to fork over their money to them through innovation, creation or hard work... no more hard than the hourly worker earning 8$ an hour... just more creative...

I agree. If you want to inject some cash into the economy target a tax cut to the middle class. Our spending has kept this economy going for the past two years in spite of everything else. So the Bush tax cut is demand side.....just more voodoo economics. And a nice payday for all his contributors. I hear he'll raise about $200 million for the next election.

So his tax cut is no more than another good investment.

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?


CkG

Some people need a handout. Have you come to the conclusion that handing millions of $ to people who run companies into the ground is a handout?

If people "need" a handout - we have other places for that - NOT disguised as a "tax-cut"

Yes, I don't like corporate welfare. The two aren't similar in this case. Corps pay taxes - the "handout" people don't
Can you answer my question? please?

CkG

I can answer your question. First I must say, these people pay taxes. They work for less than a living wage. If a tax cut for them is seen as a handout by some then so be it. Give the poor a handout. There are millions of kids living in poverty in America today. If it helps them even a little I say do it.

In the meantime all those folks on wealthfare can get a truckload of money back. And donate a bundle to the guy who keeps sending them cash.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I want to start an energy company. I want people in high political positions to allow me to set national policy on energy. I want to be able to regulate my own industry. I want to be able to create false shortages in my market to boost prices for my energy. I want to be able to force my thousands of employees to invest in my company. I want to earn millions plus millions more in bonuses every year whether or not my company is making money.

Then I want to cash out my share of the company and let all those suckers lose their life savings and their jobs to boot.

Then I can blame them for wanting to live in poverty.

Haha.

OH.... now I get it.... the poor in your above got their Tax Cut by losing their wealth and getting to write that loss off against their McDonald's paycheck... It, however, the wealth lost, went to the rich guy who stimulated the yacht industry and thereby effected the little known elite transfer of wealth and economic stimuli philosophy inculcated at the post grad universities of our land... It takes a lot off loss by lots of folks to add up to 6billion$. And the folks who paid the enormous electric bills .... that fits right in too! Wonderfull... we don't need tax cuts just smart CEO/CFO's.

 

[BOBDN]

Oh, and corps don't pay taxes.

I have been told that economics 101 tells us that everything goes to the bottom line. If these corps have to pay taxes they raise prices to offset the tax. So we pay the taxes.

However many of these corps don't pay taxes. They move offshore (a little loophole the Republicans refused to close this time around in their tax cut package) as well as use tax strategies that limit the corporate tax liability. They move jobs overseas. They do anything they can to avoid taxes.

So is the tax cut for the rich the same as a tax cut for the poor? These people don't pay taxes. Isn't this a handout?

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: HJD1

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I want to start an energy company. I want people in high political positions to allow me to set national policy on energy. I want to be able to regulate my own industry. I want to be able to create false shortages in my market to boost prices for my energy. I want to be able to force my thousands of employees to invest in my company. I want to earn millions plus millions more in bonuses every year whether or not my company is making money.

Then I want to cash out my share of the company and let all those suckers lose their life savings and their jobs to boot.

Then I can blame them for wanting to live in poverty.

Haha.

OH.... now I get it.... the poor in your above got their Tax Cut by losing their wealth and getting to write that loss off against their McDonald's paycheck... It, however, the wealth lost, went to the rich guy who stimulated the yacht industry and thereby effected the little known elite transfer of wealth and economic stimuli philosophy inculcated at the post grad universities of our land... It takes a lot off loss by lots of folks to add up to 6billion$. And the folks who paid the enormous electric bills .... that fits right in too! Wonderfull... we don't need tax cuts just smart CEO/CFO's.

HJD1...........YOU GET THE GOLD STAR!

I think America would be a much better country if we just did away with the poor, oh what the hell, and the middle class too! Nothing breeds success like success. Let's make this a land of CEO's and CFO's and all those C*O's. Who the hell wants to share the same air with those disgusting poor people?

I always say if the playing field isn't tilted in favor of the rich it just isn't a level playing field!

They'll all be much better off liberated from their poverty. They'll thank us in the end.

Hey, since it's my idea can I get a reprieve?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?


CkG

Some people need a handout. Have you come to the conclusion that handing millions of $ to people who run companies into the ground is a handout?

If people "need" a handout - we have other places for that - NOT disguised as a "tax-cut"

Yes, I don't like corporate welfare. The two aren't similar in this case. Corps pay taxes - the "handout" people don't
Can you answer my question? please?

CkG

I can answer your question. First I must say, these people pay taxes. They work for less than a living wage. If a tax cut for them is seen as a handout by some then so be it. Give the poor a handout. There are millions of kids living in poverty in America today. If it helps them even a little I say do it.

In the meantime all those folks on wealthfare can get a truckload of money back. And donate a bundle to the guy who keeps sending them cash.

These people pay no Federal income taxes - they would be getting an EXTRA $400/ child given to them. This is not a "tax-cut" it is a handout. I also don't buy your bleeding heart excuse for mislabeling a tax-cut. Taxes are a source of revenue for our gov't not a form of welfare - we have other programs for that.

CkG

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: BOBDN
I'm gonna' go out on a limb here (first time for me) and say what's on my mind.

The current administration has a propensity for saying one thing and doing another. No child left behind, for instance.

I believe there are many people who realize this but their political affiliation or the moral sleight of hand that has been perpetrated on them by some politicians has confused them to the point that they cannot recognize the discrepancy between what is said and what is done.

This is the reason they react with anger and refuse to consider opinions which may heighten their cognitive dissidence.

Not to worry. I'll keep pointing out the obvious until you come to your senses.

Have you come to the obvious conclusion that a "tax credit" for people who don't pay Federal income tax is a handout?


CkG

Some people need a handout. Have you come to the conclusion that handing millions of $ to people who run companies into the ground is a handout?

If people "need" a handout - we have other places for that - NOT disguised as a "tax-cut"

Yes, I don't like corporate welfare. The two aren't similar in this case. Corps pay taxes - the "handout" people don't
Can you answer my question? please?

CkG

I can answer your question. First I must say, these people pay taxes. They work for less than a living wage. If a tax cut for them is seen as a handout by some then so be it. Give the poor a handout. There are millions of kids living in poverty in America today. If it helps them even a little I say do it.

In the meantime all those folks on wealthfare can get a truckload of money back. And donate a bundle to the guy who keeps sending them cash.

These people pay no Federal income taxes - they would be getting an EXTRA $400/ child given to them. This is not a "tax-cut" it is a handout. I also don't buy your bleeding heart excuse for mislabeling a tax-cut. Taxes are a source of revenue for our gov't not a form of welfare - we have other programs for that.

CkG

Where have you been? We HAD other programs for that. These people are the working poor. They pay taxes. FICA, sales tax, property tax (those who own property, the others pay property tax in their rent). They pay tax all year deducted from their pay checks. They just get it all back on April, 15th.

Whatever you want to call it they deserve $400 dollars just as some others deserve hundreds of thousands (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Snow - you get the picture). I can't believe in a nation like ours people are so heartless they refuse to help people who are less fortunate.

I like the line about taxes being a source of revenue for our gov't. That's funny. Since Bush created record deficits how is he stripping our gov't of the only form of revenue it has? Isn't that just a bit irresponsible of him?

 

[BOBDN]

The focus here should be on the fact that there are thousands of people earning millions of dollars being handed a huge tax refund while we are in the throws of the greatest budget deficits in our history.

And all some people can focus on is some poor folks getting $400. Wake up. You are being taken for a ride and it isn't a free ride.

 

[BOBDN]

Check this out. There may be more people in line for that $400 tax refund........OOPS! I mean handout, soon.

Nice job, George. At this rate we'll all be getting that $400.

Unemployment Rate Rises to 9-Year High
By DAVID LEONHARDT


ASHINGTON, June 6 ? The unemployment rate rose to 6.1 percent in May, its highest level in nine years, the Labor Department reported today, as the worst jobs slump since the early 1980's continued to spread its pain.

The pace of layoffs has slowed noticably in the last two months, however, suggesting that the economy might have stabilized and could begin adding jobs this summer, forecasters said.

The economy has now lost more than 2.5 million jobs since February 2001, more than was previously thought, according to annual revisions released today by the Labor Department. It is the longest sustained period without job growth since before World War II.

"Companies are still cutting costs," said Mark Vitner, a senior economist at the Wachovia Corporation in Charlotte. "But it looks like the worst of the layoffs are behind us."

Stocks rose in morning trading, largely because investors had expected larger job losses, analysts said. But they later gave back much of their gains. In early afternoon trading, the Standard & Poor 500-stock index was up 3.45 points, or 0.4 percent, at 993.59. Still, stocks are up substantially since March as hopes of an economic rebound have grown.

Economists said that the jobs report left the Federal Reserve likely to cut its benchmark interest when it meets on June 24 and 25. The Fed has already cut the rate 12 times since the start of 2001, but the continued hangover from the 1990's boom and the uncertainty caused by war and terrorism have kept the downturn from ending and companies from needing new workers.

In perhaps the most optimistic sign, companies added a small number of jobs in both April and May, after having reduced employment by more then 200,000 during the previous two months, the Labor Department said. Government cuts have caused overall employment to decline since April, but the private sector is typically a better predictor of the economy's future, analysts say.

Companies also increased the number of temporary workers on their payrolls by 58,000, a common sign that they are preparing for better times.

But hints of a solid economic recovery have popped have emerged at other points over the last two years, and they have yet to come to fruition.

 

[LunarRay]

BobDN,

I think America would be a much better country if we just did away with the poor, oh what the hell, and the middle class too! Nothing breeds success like success. Let's make this a land of CEO's and CFO's and all those C*O's. Who the hell wants to share the same air with those disgusting poor people?

I always say if the playing field isn't tilted in favor of the rich it just isn't a level playing field!

They'll all be much better off liberated from their poverty. They'll thank us in the end.

Hey, since it's my idea can I get a reprieve?[/quote]

From getting thanked in the End? Not likely, unless you can proove you are among the elite in society. You must use all the 'buzz' words in context. Reach for but not pay the tab. Be able to say "look at that... why can't they play golf on their own courses... Hey buddy... wanna speed it up a little... don't even dress proper.. geez.. So what do you do? I'm into Dot Com Comback... Just got 50,000 suckers to donate to my little scheme... it's a no brainer... in two years it'll fold and I'll have my 25 mil and be set... Am I up... Mulligan...."

 

[BOBDN]

Originally posted by: HJD1
BobDN,

I think America would be a much better country if we just did away with the poor, oh what the hell, and the middle class too! Nothing breeds success like success. Let's make this a land of CEO's and CFO's and all those C*O's. Who the hell wants to share the same air with those disgusting poor people?

I always say if the playing field isn't tilted in favor of the rich it just isn't a level playing field!

They'll all be much better off liberated from their poverty. They'll thank us in the end.

Hey, since it's my idea can I get a reprieve?

From getting thanked in the End? Not likely, unless you can proove you are among the elite in society. You must use all the 'buzz' words in context. Reach for but not pay the tab. Be able to say "look at that... why can't they play golf on their own courses... Hey buddy... wanna speed it up a little... don't even dress proper.. geez.. So what do you do? I'm into Dot Com Comback... Just got 50,000 suckers to donate to my little scheme... it's a no brainer... in two years it'll fold and I'll have my 25 mil and be set... Am I up... Mulligan...."[/quote]

Zactly!

I hope CkG reads this. Real nice folks these compassionate conservatives.

Duped and Betrayed
By PAUL KRUGMAN


According to The New Republic, Senator Zell Miller ? one of a dwindling band of Democrats who still think they can make deals with the Bush administration and its allies ? got shafted in the recent tax bill. He supported the bill in part because it contained his personal contribution: a measure requiring chief executives to take personal responsibility for corporate tax declarations. But when the bill emerged from conference, his measure had been stripped out.

Will "moderates" ? the people formerly known as "conservatives" ? ever learn? Today's "conservatives" ? the people formerly known as the "radical right" ? don't think of a deal as a deal; they think of it as an opportunity to pull yet another bait and switch.

Let's look at the betrayals involved in this latest tax cut.

Most media attention has focused on the child tax credit that wasn't. As in 2001, the administration softened the profile of a tax cut mainly aimed at the wealthy by including a credit for families with children. But at the last minute, a change in wording deprived 12 million children of some or all of that tax credit. "There are a lot of things that are more important than that," declared Tom DeLay, the House majority leader. (Maybe he was thinking of the "Hummer deduction," which stayed in the bill: business owners may now deduct up to $100,000 for the cost of a vehicle, as long as it weighs at least 6,000 pounds.)

Less attention has been paid to fine print that reveals the supposed rationale for the dividend tax cut as a smoke screen. The problem, we were told, is that profits are taxed twice: once when they are earned, a second time when they are paid out as dividends. But as any tax expert will tell you, the corporate tax law is full of loopholes; many profitable corporations pay little or no taxes.

The original Bush plan ensured that dividends from such companies would not get a tax break. But those safeguards vanished from the final bill: dividends will get special treatment regardless of how much tax is paid by the company that issues them.

This little change has two big consequences. First, as Glenn Hubbard, the former chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers and the author of the original plan, delicately puts it, "It's hard to get a lot of progressivity at the top."

Translation: wealthy individuals who get most of their income from dividends and capital gains will often end up paying lower tax rates than ordinary Americans who work for a living.

Second, the tax cut ? originally billed as a way to reduce abuses ? may well usher in a golden age of tax evasion. We can be sure that lawyers and accountants are already figuring out how to disguise income that should be taxed at a 35 percent rate as dividends that are taxed at only 15 percent. Since there's no need to show that tax was ever paid on profits, tax shelters should be easy to construct.

Of course, the big betrayal was George W. Bush's decision to push this tax cut in the first place. There is no longer any doubt that the man who ran as a moderate in the 2000 election is actually a radical who wants to undo much of the Great Society and the New Deal.

Look at it this way: as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, this latest tax cut reduces federal revenue as a share of G.D.P. to its lowest level since 1959. That is, federal taxes are now back to what they were in an era when Medicare and Medicaid didn't exist, and Social Security was still a minor expense. How can we maintain these programs, which have become essential to scores of millions of Americans, at today's tax rates? We can't.

Grover Norquist, the right-wing ideologue who has become one of the most powerful men in Washington, once declared: "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." Mr. Bush has made a pretty good start on that plan.

Which brings us back to Senator Miller, and all those politicians and pundits who still imagine that there is room for compromise, that they can find some bipartisan middle ground. Mr. Norquist was recently quoted in The Denver Post with the answer to that: "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

 

[burnedout]

How the heck can someone afford to raise two kids with both parents working when they only make 26K/year?

My ex-wife raises one on less than $12K per year by her own choice. Needless to say, our daughter does not go completely without and is one of the best students in her school. $5,100 of that $12K comes from me, by the way. Yes, my ex receives food stamps and lives near her large family - all of whom are also poverty-stricken. They are all involved in a mutual support system of their own for things like child care, sharing of transportation, etc. Come to think of it, every adult in my ex's immediate family (5 brothers ages 30s and 40s, 1 sister in her 40s, mother in her early 70s) brings in less than $12K per year. The majority of this income is from SSI and food stamps. My ex's immediate family members are also the most honest and trustworthy people I've ever known.

Ya move to Lybia or somewhere like that.... 26K$ pays for the electric bill and maybe the water bill.

Or move to parts of Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi or Texas. Depends upon the locale. I could make it, albeit exist, in many places on $12K per year.

Not to say there aren't people who break the chain of poverty. I'm one. We grew up in poverty not by choice but because we were a one parent household, latch key kids before there were latch key kids. Don't preach to me about poverty. Unless you've lived through it. With your attitude I'm pretty sure you've had your future planned for you from the start. Nice to have that advantage. Not so nice to realize you have an advantage.

I too grew up in poverty. The experience taught me about appreciation for setting and attaining specific goals as well as individual conservation of wealth. To me, it isn't so much what one has. The main point is how one applies that which one has. My opinion is that if a "normal" American (as in healthy and of average intelligence) would like to overcome poverty in this country, than the opportunities exist. Overcoming poverty may involve working in a capacity for quite some time which is not exactly conducive to one's desires or patience. However, overcoming poverty can be done with goals, strict discipline and a work ethic. This was how I did it.