The Tax Deal - Illustrated (WaPo)

[jefferson_dem]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/business/tax-cut-compromise/

[high density]

1. Another trillion bucks in tax cuts the nation can't afford

Change is definitely circling the drain.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. So the rich get more than half the cash. And guess who gets the bill?

Working Americans: $400B.

Unemployed: $56B.

Poor: $21B

Rich: More than $600B

So 2% of the population gets 60% of the cash.

(But the middle class gets most of the debt)

Mission accomplished!

[JamesA1102]

6. $600 Billion????

Think your math is off.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Feel free to be specific.

Thanks.

[jefferson_dem]

10. Pretty smooth little sleight of hand there.

You count the tax cuts up to the $250,000 mark as for the rich.

The bars are even color-coded for easy interpretation. That should help.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. No. That's not what I did.

And the color code does not represent which group gets the cash - only who allegedly favors it.

[ClassWarrior]

17. They are for the rich. Or do you buy the Faux spin that they're "only for the middle class?"

:eyes:

NGU.

[JamesA1102]

20. Why don't you be specific and tell us all how

you came up with $600 Billion.

[dkf]

23. I'd like to see that too.

I haven't seen anything that asserts this yet

[Fruittree]

28. The parts specifically for the wealthy appear to

add up to 147B not 600B - the majority of the benefit is for the middle class. A case can be made that we can't afford any tax cuts or expenditures given the size of the deficit but the belief seems to be that raising taxes would stall the economic recovery that's still pretty weak at this time. Remember, it's not just about numbers, it's about people. Further, cutting off unemployment benefits to people who've had the misfortune to not be able to find a job would be wrong. Pres. Obama said he did not like giving any tax break to the wealthy but the overall deal is a win for him - and for most of us. Long term though, we're all going to have to face the deficit and that's going to be hard...

[dkf]

3. That payroll tax holiday is pretty significant for my sister and her family.

It's frankly more than I've ever gotten from these little dinky past cuts.

[Clio the Leo]

13. Me too. nt

[Dawgs]

30. Maybe, but now you'll have to work until your 75.

I'm not sure I support any of it.

[JamesA1102]

4. Looks like Dems got a lot more than the GOP did nt

[jefferson_dem]

5. Imagine that.

We'll be told to not believe our lyin' eyes. Angry ignorance is so much more exciting. The extreme right wing does not corner the market on "Truthiness".

[JamesA1102]

7. True

Just look at MG's post above.

[jefferson_dem]

12. And this one below.

The poster is literally proving the point. Don't believe your eyes! Believe what we tell you!

[ClassWarrior]

16. Good point. Given a choice between the facts or a newspaper graphic...

...that was probably assembled by an intern, I'll go with the cheap desktop publishing job any day.

:eyes:

NGU.

[KansasVoter]

18. Blind ignorance is worse!

[ClassWarrior]

9. Yeah, it sure does LOOK that way, especially to anyone too intellectually lazy to...

...learn that it actually shows the opposite.

NGU.

[JamesA1102]

21. Really? How so?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClassWarrior]

29. No, I pulled that out of statistics, like the ones right below this post...

:shrug:

But thanks for playing.

NGU.

[high density]

15. GOP Priorities: $27700 per person, Democratic Priorities: $1372 per person

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/12/07/comparing-priorities

[JamesA1102]

22. Yeah the GOP is for the rich

No one here will agrue that.

[dkf]

25. Lol your link wants to reduce the payroll tax even more! They say it would create

500,000 more jobs than the 2.2 million jobs Obama's plan creates. All this is making my head spin.

[dkf]

26. And their total adds up to less than $350 billion. Doesn't this thing cost almost a trillion?

[Supersedeas]

32. thanks for the link

[Hippo_Tron]

19. Yea but they control Congress and the White House until January

It's not like we should be expecting them to get less.

[Silent3]

14. So if we took out the most contentious stuff that only Republicans want...

...and passed a bill that was just stuff both parties want plus what Democrats want, we'd still have a bill that costs $887 billion dollars over two years instead of $990 billion?

If I'm reading that right, the Democrats are only modestly less reckless than the Republicans.

I'd say let all of the old tax cuts expire, certainly don't introduce any new damned tax cuts, and if we're going to be running up a deficit for anything, run it up paying for unemployment benefits, assistance to the states, and infrastructure projects -- you know, things that stimulate the economy, reduce the suffering of those hurting the most, and invest in the future.

Or is that just crazy talk? :eyes:

[Cosmocat]

31. Up is down, down is up ...

Mindboggling, just friggen mindboggling that tax cuts that do anything from jack shiite to a hair more than jackshiite are treated like the holy grail ...

I like BO a lot, but this is a double down on stupid - bad policy, and he WILL get vilified by the republicans and MSM for the deficits these cuts will keep in place ...

He gets to have them have actual tangible stuff instead of the made up stuff, to beat him senseless for going what they wanted ...

[lamp_shade]

27. Wow. Great information. Thanks.