AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.
Click here to visit the new home of Politics Daily!
A Washington Post/ABC News poll, also conducted Dec. 9-12, said 69 percent approved of the overall package while 29 percent opposed it, with 2 percent undecided.Aren't polls great? If you read the questions it becomes obvious that the result is skewed by UNEMPLOYMENT extensions. THAT was not the question that needed asking. Lumping unemployment with the weakening of Social Security, Elimination of Tax credits for working class, giving huge bonuses to the rich and a pittance to the middle class is dishonest. It is like putting adding a segregation clause to a bill to feed the homeless. If you like feeding the homeless then you are for Segregation?? Come on.
Read the questions.
What galls me is the press is fully on board with this sham. Here is MY poll question:
Do you think the press and the pollsters should keep taking bribes from corporations and right wing groups?
The tax cuts Bush put in were a sham and caused zero net job growth.
Social Security was not in real trouble. This bill reduces its funding which makes it less stable while the unemployment causes it to be under pressure already. It puts Social Security in jeopardy - even to be de-funded.
It allows general funding of Unemployment which makes that de-fundable.
It takes away taxes from Payrolls which causes employers to skip raises with the excuse that the worker is getting more take home pay so why give a raise.
The tax credits that get eliminated here are not offset by payroll tax cuts for the lowest paid workers so the ONLY people who get higher taxes are those making $20K to $40K.
The using of Unemployment as a bargaining chip is a horrible precedent which had never ever been considered by anyone on either side of the aisle until this Congress and Senate and Administration got together for the benefit of Banks, Insurance Companies and Wall St.
Why is it that these people that think the successful people in America can do with less money, yet I never hear them tell the Government to do with less money. This moeny is the property of those that earned it. If the Government takes more, percentage wise, from the successful than they do the lower and middle class it is simply stealing from the "evil rich". IMO, the probelm is the Federal Government is OUT OF CONTROL in so many ways it is impossible to list them all here. IF the FG would rein itself in and be more accountable, more efficient and not try to be everything to everyone (like a Nanny State) over 90% of the discussions about problems in America would be moot.
December 14 2010 at 10:56 AM PermalinkIm for the tax cuts. But not for the rich. They dont need it
December 14 2010 at 10:48 AM PermalinkI feel this is to help keep the jobs over sea. We need jobs here in AMERICAN.
Not over sea. The wealth is for the wealth.This is NOT the time for congressional "paybacks" to their campaign donors and their special interests groups. To me, these days the term "middle class" should describe anyone making under $40,000.00 Dollars. You make $7.25 a hour fourty hour a week or $10.00 a hour for fourty hour a week and try to pay all your bill. I like to
Predicted Monetary Changes in America:
Due to the downward spiral of the US Dollar attributed to the extremely weak economy in America and the continual printing of money further devaluing the dollar, the following will be effective beginning April 15, 2011:
1) There will be an "economic adjustment" to the dollar. This will be a devaluation of the dollar by 30%. For example, if you have $10,000 in a bank account, effective April 15, 2011 your statement will read $700. It will also be a "double hit", so to speak, on the purchasing and the payment end. A loaf of bread that previously cost $2.50, will cost $3.25, a 30% increase in price; a gallon of gas that cost $3.25 a gallon will cost $4.23 a gallon; real estate taxes that previously were $4,000 a year, will be $5,200; and so on.
2) The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Union (EU) have declared the Euro to be the newly recognized international currency standard, effective November 30, 2011. The IMF and the EU warned, however, that this may be a temporary move if the EU doesn't straighten out problems with their economy...it may be an intermediate step. Many predict that the future international currency standard will be the Chinese Renminbi (RMB).
After the "economic adjustment" above, November 30, 2011, all US dollars will be valued at the Euro, which currently has an exchange rate of 1.32 times the dollar (Note: exchange rate at that time will apply). This, for example, will mean that a dollar will be worth .758 Euro. All financial reporting in America will be in Euros, everything from the financial basis of the New York Stock Exchange to purchases, taxes, financial reporting, banking, etc.
These significant, and really dramatic changes, reflect the inability of successive administrations in Washington to control our national debt that has skyrocketed and is fast approaching $14 trillion, and an irresponsible Congress that has been spending out of control for several years.
What these dramatic monetary changes signify is that the United States has essentially given up its' position as a world leader, and will push all Americans into a much lower standard of living, with millions more descending into the poverty level.
April 15 and November 30, 2011, will be sad days for America.
tax cuts for the rich? boloney when Bush put them in it was suppost to create jobs
yet unemployment was at 9% when Obama took over no jobs were created all the tax cuts did was make billionaires out of millionaires no jobs. i think that there should be a 90% tax on those billion dollar bonuses the C.E.O's got for downsizing
people out of their jobs let's see 10 billion dollar bonus tax 9 billion so the c.e.o. has to bite the bullet gee.all the good jobs went to China 50% dropout rate in high schools when will these people learn that all high school people are not college material. Budget cuts should include downsizing federal,state,and city employees while companies were downsizing they were getting raises in salary and benefits less workers in the private sector less people needed in government.
Oh Bob the envious/jealous one. Why not just take all the money form everyone and have the Government do everything for everyone? I mean that is where you will go with your line of thinking. There was a country not too long ago that did what you want done. Go over to the former USSR and ask them how all that worked out for them.
December 14 2010 at 10:59 AM PermalinkThe real story could be about Surveys. Talk about a warning sign! Note the difference: The Post/ABC survey said 36 percent say it will help... The Pew survey said 48 percent said it would help. This means either they are asking different questions or their sampling is quite different. I'd like to know which surveys to believe and which to avoid. What were the questions they posed????
December 14 2010 at 10:30 AM Permalink +9Not toooo long ago, there were some astonishing figures shown that if we "stole" (taxed) ALL the money of the so called "rich" and put it into the coffers of the government..... ALL of it..... it would still only be a drop in bucket compaired to teh disasterous national debt of this nation! The liars in WDC and the crooked media who parrot their lies have duped the voting public with this "Tax the hell out of the ugly rich." for so long that like stupid sheep, they follow the Judas Goat to the slaughter every election..... all hoping to "get" their personal cut. Cut government spending? Yes, as long as you only cut "someone elses" part of the government slop pot. Free insurance for all.... and the poor of course..... only problem, after decades of taking care of the poor by government socialism, they ar still just as poor, just as unemployable, just as dependent on the taxpayer nipple. When do we go back to the Founding Father's original plan of equal and free opportunity for ALL??? NO Government Loans = No national Debt!!!
December 14 2010 at 10:28 AM Permalink +760 percent are in favor of this deal? I doubt it - at least not in the form where it continues tax cuts for the wealthy. Continuing those tax cuts is irresponsible, and just in case you actually buy the argument that says that the wealthty will use these cuts to create jobs - I have some beach front property here in Colorado that I'm willing to let go for a song. The wealthy do NOT use their personal wealth to create jobs, other than nanny, gardener, and butler jobs - and they give THOSE jobs to illegal immigrants. These tax cuts were created in a completely different time and completely different situation than the country now finds itself, as rjeffreycook points out. Adding to the deficit so that the rich can keep more of their money at the expense of the country is just another example of how far out of touch our elected officials are with reality - and that includes Republicans AND Democrats.
December 14 2010 at 10:23 AM Permalink +2It would seem the people are smarter than our "leaders," at least on this subject. We ALL know for a fact that when taxes increase for the big money (rich) who own everything, the cost ends up coming out of our pockets. That in turn increases the wealth of the really big money ("super rich"), and makes life more difficult for small businesses that can't compete (the $250k group). Government revenues may or may not pick up. Over the past 50 years, since JFK, tax increases have led to LOWER revenues as the super rich found places to hide their money. Every tax DECREASE, including JFKs, has led to an increase in tax revenues. Our biggest problem is our "leaders" have yet to learn they cannot spend the way they do. Why do we STILL have congress persons who have been in office for more than 40 years???? That is one bad habit that will lead to our downfall.
December 14 2010 at 10:16 AM Permalink +3Pete, thwy raise and lower prices no matter what! Look back to when the oil profits were BOOMING under Bush. Did we get a break? No, we were paying twice as much for gas. Credit card companies raking it in big, did they lower our interest rates or their overlimit and late fees. No they did not. So this idea of "OMG if we put any undu burden on them they will raise our prices" is not a sound assessment. Here in Colorado we had a pending vote on taxing the land belonging to the oil companies and there was a rash of paid advertising that said just what you are saying. If you looked at the sponsors of those ads - hello it was the oil industry. My idea is to vote just the opposite of what big business says is good for you because what they mean is, "It wouldn't be good for us"!
December 14 2010 at 10:58 AM PermalinkFollow Politics Daily
POPULAR
News From Our Partners



Top News
More News
More on Aol
Local News
More Blog/Sites
Sites and Services
109 Comments