[chiefst2000]

[QUOTE=dmitexxi;4493747]It's responses like this that completly proves your polical views are based on cultural rethotic rather than facts and leaves you with little credibility.




You at least attempt to answer but again use redirection and forget key facts.

First critical flaw in your argument is incomplete... What you are overlooking to fit your political agenga is that Obama had to extend the tax cut because Bush/Paulson/Federal Reserve decided to give BILLIONS of taxpayers money to Bailout the large financials after the made risky bets on mortgages, insured those bets with AIG, and AIG unable to pay up when rich middle easter and chineese investors wanted to pull out their money from hose financial engineered instruments. So when unemployment sky rocketed and the president wanted to extend unemployment benefits he had to extend those Bush tax cuts to help that part of America people with your political agenda tend to forget. Also lets not overloook the Bush tax cuts show the largest redistribution of wealth shifted about 20% year after year creating the largest gap in the history of our nation.

Let's Also not be naive when we talking about "green jobs"; you are under the impression our electected officials care about us or our country. I'm not nieve to believe that, truth is these elected officials are in the pockets of the the special interest groups and lobbiest who fund their campaigns.[/QUOTE]

Your answer is confusing. Earlier you said that the Bush Tax cut was for the 1%. Then here you say Obama had to extend the tax cuts for the people my ideology (absurd statement BTW) tend to forget? With the power of the Presidency, House and Senate why not cancel the cuts completely or cancel part of them if that is great for the economy?

Next you claim that "the Bush tax cuts show the largest redistribution of wealth shifted about 20% year after year creating the largest gap in the history of our nation". The statement is confusing so I'd like for you to clarify. Since tax cuts are by definition the opposite of redistribution of wealth I assume you want to correct that part of the sentence. Now the Bush Tax Cut actually made the tax code more progressive by removing a large portion of the "bottom 50%" from having to pay any taxes at all.

We know the numbers. In 1980 the top 10% paid 40% of the income tax burden. Today do to shifts in the tax code the top 10% pays 70% of the income tax burden. I'm not sure how those numbers jive with your theories. Finally the main reason that statistics show a gap in income is because of the crappy economy. The liberals in goevrnment have blocked entrapraneuers through regulation. They have blocked attempts at energy expansion through the EPA's repeated obstruction. They have blocked attempts at expansion of domestic manufacturing through an NLRB filled with union cronies. When Boeing wanted to open a new multi-billion dollar plant the NLRB blocked them and sued them. In the end they blackmailed Boeing in to giving a generous new contract to workers at the Oregon plant. Then when the Keystone Pipeline project was proposed which would have brought with it jobs and energy security the President blocked it to appease his environmentalist donors. Even though everyone agrees that the project brings jobs and energy security. When government stands in the way of progress you get a crappy economy. That shrinks the middle class.

Taxing rich people is a distraction. Rich people already shoulder most of the tax burden. We can slam them some more but it wont solve anything. Obama's big "Buffet Rule" raises 4 billion a year in new revenue. So essentially rich people already on average pay around 30% or so in federal income taxes. I make a nice upper middle income salary and my effective rate is around 20%. So rich folk pay more then I do. Again please explain where you get your claime as they seem to contradict reality.

I had another question for you. In your post you say that Bush/Paulson/Bernake trio created the TARP program which essentially saved our economy from collapse during the housing crisis. Yet I noted that Obama claims on the stump that he saved the economy. Of course the reality is that Paulson led the charge that saved the economy which started under Bush continued under Obama. Which one was it, the Bush administration that created and executed the TARP program or Obama that continued it? You should watch the HBO special "Too Big to Fail" authored by Democrat Andrew Ross Sorkin for the answers.