He provided some nice incentives for small business the other day, and he’s proposing extending a tax break that will benefit almost all of them, except for a very small group that really isn’t anyone’s idea of “small business” anyway – including some very wealthy individuals who file as sole proprietor small business.
I really doubt that Gorrell is one of them. He’s simply doing their bidding like a good little boy, hoping for a pat on the head. And maybe a Milk-Bone.
The only difference between the Democrats’ “tax plan” and the Republicans’ is that the Republican screw costs $6 million and was made by big business, while the Democrat screw was made in China, at the cost of American jobs. Either way, the taxpayer gets the screw!
just one of many, many new mandates for small businesses is the requirement to file 1099s for every single or acumulated $600 transaction…which will drive many small businesses OUT OF BUSINESS due to added cost of doing business.
“human” (I doubt that the user name fits the obsessed poster)….keeps repeating lies….
the Iraq war did not cause the recession.
CBO reported that 8 years cost of that was was $709 Billion while one “stimulus act” in 2009 cost $862 Billion…..Obama’s addition to the US Debt, for a 2-year spending plan….
the 2007 deficit was $160.7 Billion, the 2008 deficit was $458.6 Billion…..Obama’s annual deficits are far over $1 Trillion into infinity.
“I have yet to have any Democrat explain to me why they support a Democrat President, JFK giving Very Large Tax Cuts to the Top 1% Ultra Richest of the Rich Citizens, yet they say it’s so Taboo for a Republican President to do the same exact thing JFK did and that was drastically cut the Tax Rates for the Top 1% Wage Earners.”
Oh, really? I dare say you have had many people explain it to you, Tigger, and it’s not the first time you’ve written that. JFK cut top income taxes - or, rather, they were cut in 1964, after his death - from 91 to 77%. Then Johnson slashed them again in the late 60s, to 70%. What are they now? 35%, 39.6 if you don’t count the “temporary” tax cuts. The difference is in the figures. Your “double standard” seems not ot include that after the 1964 cut, the top income tax rate was more than double what it is now.
Yes, 91% top income tax may be too high when the economy is doing well, as it was in the early 60s. That doesn’t mean that 40% - which is what we get if the Bush tax cuts expire - is too high as well.
Church, nice graph. Only… a bit misleading. After all, accomodating only 400-ish billion USD of deficit throughout 2008 would be borderline miraculous, with the budget having deficit planned into it, not accounting for the massive drop in revenue due to the recession, or the cost of the bailout, or the various other small expenses that happened in the course of the year. Then again, it’s easy to forget that the fiscal year 2009 actually started.. in october 2008. So the “Bush” 2008 deficit doesn’t include the cost of anything that happened from October 2008 on. Gee, I wonder what was happening just around then. Oh yeah, economic freefall, unemployment rising by .4 - .5% per month… interesting times.
Here’s a fun site, http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np . (that’s the site of the Bureau of Public Debt, btw). Now, you’d normally think that the deficit just gets added to the debt, but it gets fascinating around 2008 or so.
Total Public Debt:
October 1st 2007 (beginning of 2008 fiscal year): 9,062,552,400,356.63
January 1st 2008: 9,210,587,444,062.47 USD.
October 1st 2008 (fiscal year 2009 begins): 10,124,225,067,127.69 (deficit supposedly being 400-ish billion)
December 31st, 2008: 10,699,804,864,612.13 USD.
October 1st, 2009 (fiscal year 2010 begins) 11,920,519,164,319.42
December 31st 2009: 12,311,349,677,512.03 USD
Bad, isn’t it? Interesting, though : in 2009 (the actual year), when the recession was in full swing, 1.6 trillion USD were added to the US public debt. Yet in 2008, where the deficit was being handled so much better, that sum was 1.4 trillion. Actually, the debt rose by over a trillion for the fiscal year 2008 too - yet the deficit was supposedly less than half that. Strangely enough, there is no such a huge discrepancy with Obama’s deficit and the debt. Interesting, isn’t it?
When JFK made his tax cuts for the upper echelons, he also closed a bunch of ‘tax loopholes’ that had been used by the wealthy, making his tax cut a little more revenue neutral.
In addition to putting the cost of two wars ‘off budget’ so that they don’t appear to add to the deficit, the republicans ran up spending like crazy. They did not spend it on poor people either. We now have a huge deficit which they blame on the current administration. This is not arguable.
The democrats really irritate me much of the time, but they are not organized evil like the republicans.
You are either for the rich and corporations or you are for the people. Do two things:
1) Pay attention.
2) Make up your mind.
The tea baggers are right to be angry, but they direct their anger towards the government instead of towards the large corporations and their lackeys. They need to pay more attention.
I thought the comic’s simplicity was brilliant and funny. Reminded me of a Bug’s Bunny cartoon.
Good smiles, good humor.
However, there are technical issues (the boring section of the comment).
Is this saying “screwed?” Well that would be improper since the screw is actually not screwed in.
What about “screwy?” Well, not so either since the Bug’s Bunny cartoons displayed how that works… same goes for “Screw-U.”
Thus, while the implied context is obvious, the actual cartoon is flawed. Yet, its flaw is its brilliance. Why? Because it allows for the reader/viewer to interpret it as he/she would like so it could be any of those examples I provided.
But there in too lies another flaw.
However sad and twisted Human’s first comment is his initial argument is a brilliant one:
“human said, 1 day ago
Screws are highly effective fastening devices.”
I think the rest of what he said is worthy of ignoring, but he started with a good argument even though that was clearly not Bob Gorell’s implication. Yet, it does certainly reveal the one true negative flaw in Bob’s comic - assuming he wants people to share his view.
Michael Peterson Premium Member over 13 years ago
He provided some nice incentives for small business the other day, and he’s proposing extending a tax break that will benefit almost all of them, except for a very small group that really isn’t anyone’s idea of “small business” anyway – including some very wealthy individuals who file as sole proprietor small business.
I really doubt that Gorrell is one of them. He’s simply doing their bidding like a good little boy, hoping for a pat on the head. And maybe a Milk-Bone.
Charles Brobst Premium Member over 13 years ago
Small businesses like Becktel.
alan.gurka over 13 years ago
The only difference between the Democrats’ “tax plan” and the Republicans’ is that the Republican screw costs $6 million and was made by big business, while the Democrat screw was made in China, at the cost of American jobs. Either way, the taxpayer gets the screw!
4uk4ata over 13 years ago
^ Pay for it as you will, but if it can raise the same amount of money - and I’m not convinced of that - I want to know who will pay how much.
Gypsy8 over 13 years ago
Keep repeating Human, it will eventually get through.
Jaedabee Premium Member over 13 years ago
Screws… those things used in construction… as in to build up.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member over 13 years ago
Sooky Rottweiler says;
tjdestry; he’s not getting a Milkbone! Those are mine!
CorosiveFrog Premium Member over 13 years ago
Sooky Rottweiler says; Oh, well, just one…maybe…
disgustedtaxpayer over 13 years ago
just one of many, many new mandates for small businesses is the requirement to file 1099s for every single or acumulated $600 transaction…which will drive many small businesses OUT OF BUSINESS due to added cost of doing business.
“human” (I doubt that the user name fits the obsessed poster)….keeps repeating lies….
the Iraq war did not cause the recession. CBO reported that 8 years cost of that was was $709 Billion while one “stimulus act” in 2009 cost $862 Billion…..Obama’s addition to the US Debt, for a 2-year spending plan….
the 2007 deficit was $160.7 Billion, the 2008 deficit was $458.6 Billion…..Obama’s annual deficits are far over $1 Trillion into infinity.
oneoldhat over 13 years ago
yes human keep repeating your line it worked for goebbels
Dtroutma over 13 years ago
As noted, screws can be used for building. The “Man From Halliburton” was the one shoving them up America’s “place where the sun don’t shine”.
pirate227 over 13 years ago
^ Prepared by Neocons R Us, no doubt.
How about the Afghan war? Hmmm?
4uk4ata over 13 years ago
“I have yet to have any Democrat explain to me why they support a Democrat President, JFK giving Very Large Tax Cuts to the Top 1% Ultra Richest of the Rich Citizens, yet they say it’s so Taboo for a Republican President to do the same exact thing JFK did and that was drastically cut the Tax Rates for the Top 1% Wage Earners.”
Oh, really? I dare say you have had many people explain it to you, Tigger, and it’s not the first time you’ve written that. JFK cut top income taxes - or, rather, they were cut in 1964, after his death - from 91 to 77%. Then Johnson slashed them again in the late 60s, to 70%. What are they now? 35%, 39.6 if you don’t count the “temporary” tax cuts. The difference is in the figures. Your “double standard” seems not ot include that after the 1964 cut, the top income tax rate was more than double what it is now.
Yes, 91% top income tax may be too high when the economy is doing well, as it was in the early 60s. That doesn’t mean that 40% - which is what we get if the Bush tax cuts expire - is too high as well.
Church, nice graph. Only… a bit misleading. After all, accomodating only 400-ish billion USD of deficit throughout 2008 would be borderline miraculous, with the budget having deficit planned into it, not accounting for the massive drop in revenue due to the recession, or the cost of the bailout, or the various other small expenses that happened in the course of the year. Then again, it’s easy to forget that the fiscal year 2009 actually started.. in october 2008. So the “Bush” 2008 deficit doesn’t include the cost of anything that happened from October 2008 on. Gee, I wonder what was happening just around then. Oh yeah, economic freefall, unemployment rising by .4 - .5% per month… interesting times.
4uk4ata over 13 years ago
Split to save people the horror of the text wall:
Here’s a fun site, http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np . (that’s the site of the Bureau of Public Debt, btw). Now, you’d normally think that the deficit just gets added to the debt, but it gets fascinating around 2008 or so.
Total Public Debt:
October 1st 2007 (beginning of 2008 fiscal year): 9,062,552,400,356.63
January 1st 2008: 9,210,587,444,062.47 USD.
October 1st 2008 (fiscal year 2009 begins): 10,124,225,067,127.69 (deficit supposedly being 400-ish billion)
December 31st, 2008: 10,699,804,864,612.13 USD.
October 1st, 2009 (fiscal year 2010 begins) 11,920,519,164,319.42
December 31st 2009: 12,311,349,677,512.03 USD
Bad, isn’t it? Interesting, though : in 2009 (the actual year), when the recession was in full swing, 1.6 trillion USD were added to the US public debt. Yet in 2008, where the deficit was being handled so much better, that sum was 1.4 trillion. Actually, the debt rose by over a trillion for the fiscal year 2008 too - yet the deficit was supposedly less than half that. Strangely enough, there is no such a huge discrepancy with Obama’s deficit and the debt. Interesting, isn’t it?
Gypsy8 over 13 years ago
You would have to think some fooling of the people going on.
pirate227 over 13 years ago
Church, the link you provided goes to americandigest.org. That’s not the CBO.
Am I supposed to take your… word? Ha!
eepatte over 13 years ago
When JFK made his tax cuts for the upper echelons, he also closed a bunch of ‘tax loopholes’ that had been used by the wealthy, making his tax cut a little more revenue neutral.
In addition to putting the cost of two wars ‘off budget’ so that they don’t appear to add to the deficit, the republicans ran up spending like crazy. They did not spend it on poor people either. We now have a huge deficit which they blame on the current administration. This is not arguable.
The democrats really irritate me much of the time, but they are not organized evil like the republicans.
You are either for the rich and corporations or you are for the people. Do two things:
1) Pay attention.
2) Make up your mind.
The tea baggers are right to be angry, but they direct their anger towards the government instead of towards the large corporations and their lackeys. They need to pay more attention.
DjGuardian over 13 years ago
I thought the comic’s simplicity was brilliant and funny. Reminded me of a Bug’s Bunny cartoon.
Good smiles, good humor.
However, there are technical issues (the boring section of the comment).
Is this saying “screwed?” Well that would be improper since the screw is actually not screwed in.
What about “screwy?” Well, not so either since the Bug’s Bunny cartoons displayed how that works… same goes for “Screw-U.”
Thus, while the implied context is obvious, the actual cartoon is flawed. Yet, its flaw is its brilliance. Why? Because it allows for the reader/viewer to interpret it as he/she would like so it could be any of those examples I provided.
But there in too lies another flaw.
However sad and twisted Human’s first comment is his initial argument is a brilliant one:
“human said, 1 day ago
Screws are highly effective fastening devices.”
I think the rest of what he said is worthy of ignoring, but he started with a good argument even though that was clearly not Bob Gorell’s implication. Yet, it does certainly reveal the one true negative flaw in Bob’s comic - assuming he wants people to share his view.