Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(111,098 posts)
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:54 PM Dec 2012

How did working people back in 2000 make it without the taxcuts now in effect??

Were the taxcuts substitutes for pay increases? Did no one's pay increase by 5% over the last 10 years? Why are the taxcuts so vital now but not so important back in 2000?

Did working people no longer see the need to ask for pay raises because they were getting the same or better pay raise thru the tax code? Now, that the tax rates are supposed to disappear, working people are desperate?

Would it have been better to jawbone employers into giving their employees a 2% increase in pay rather than cutting the payroll tax cut? Are you going to feel the pain when the payroll tax cut is re-instituted? Would you prefer that they take this two percent from "general revenues" and not put it into the SS fund?

Have Democrats become dependent on taxcuts rather than pay raises?

I think we need to ask these questions of ourselves.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How did working people back in 2000 make it without the taxcuts now in effect?? (Original Post) kentuck Dec 2012 OP
Yes, the cuts were substitutes to pay increases nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #1
Wages were not stagnant under Clinton. MADem Dec 2012 #2
In 2000, the mortgage soon-to-be-bubble was giving a different Lionessa Dec 2012 #3
Gas was a buck a gallon. A week's groceries for us cost about $80. n/t rzemanfl Dec 2012 #4
So we need another tax cut? kentuck Dec 2012 #5
A new federal minimum wage nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #6
True kentuck Dec 2012 #7
We need a pay raise, not a tax cut rox63 Dec 2012 #8
Bingo! kentuck Dec 2012 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author slackmaster Dec 2012 #9

MADem

(135,425 posts)
2. Wages were not stagnant under Clinton.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:58 PM
Dec 2012

People could afford to buy stuff, there was much more optimism and many more jobs. Companies were actually WOOING workers with little perks--signing bonuses, covered parking, a company car! Nowadays, it's "Don't be late, parking is five bucks a day, we dock your pay if you use too many paper clips!"

 

Lionessa

(3,894 posts)
3. In 2000, the mortgage soon-to-be-bubble was giving a different
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:58 PM
Dec 2012

type of income enhancement, by increasing equity and supposedly "personal wealth". That's no longer allowing folks to feel as if they are moving forward in spite of poor employee position.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
6. A new federal minimum wage
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:20 PM
Dec 2012

Preferably a living wage. That will push salaries up, and will stimulate the economy.

We used to understand this shit.

rox63

(9,464 posts)
8. We need a pay raise, not a tax cut
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:21 PM
Dec 2012

Try squeezing some money out the corporations instead of the people and the govt.

kentuck

(111,098 posts)
10. Bingo!
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:23 PM
Dec 2012

The President could have stated that before he cut SS fund. (to be replenished from general revenue, of course)

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How did working people ba...