QUESTION: Who pays for the debt caused by continuing the Bush tax cuts for the top 2%?

[AnArmyVeteran]

I haven't heard one person in the media and not one person in political office telling the American people who will pay for the massive debts caused by extending the Bush tax cuts for the top 2%. Of course, all of that debt will be ultimately paid for by the poor and the middle class. So the tax cuts for the top 2% will be subsidized by the poorest in the country. So how could anyone in either political party support extending tax cuts for the rich when it means THEY will have to pay for it?

Reaganomics led to the biggest transfer of wealth from the poorest to the wealthiest in the 1980s and the same thing is happening with the Bush tax cuts. So why is the media completely silent? Why isn't there ONE democrat telling the people THEY will be subsidizing the tax cuts for the richest 2%?

Communication and messaging for the past two years from the Obama administration has been almost nonexistent. Even simple messages are beyond their ability to communicate. Why are they so silent? Is it because they secretly support continuing to bankrupt our country and force the poorest citizens to subsidize the richest 2%?

[EOTE]

1. The people in the bottom 98%. NT.

[daa]

2. The Chinese since the DEFICIT goes up a trillion nt

[snot]

11. The Chinese lose only if we default, at which point we're too screwn to contemplate.

[Winterblues]

3. Democrats will pay election after election...

They do not have the ability to protect our country from this plunder..

[slackmaster]

4. Employed, middle class people like me

:hi:

[HopeHoops]

5. WE DO!

[snot]

13. Ding ding ding!

It's being monetized, meaning the dollar's being trashed so the debt can be paid with dollars worth less.

The dollar being worth less means your wages and savings buy less. In effect, an automatic tax increase.

The dollar lost 15% of its value during Bernanke's first round of monetizing. This is still percolating through the system; but inflation on essentials like food and energy has already hit hard at the wholesale level. Inflation on essentials has been relatively high at the retail level, too, but we haven't yet felt the full effects, because retailers have not yet passed all their cost increases through, since they know consumers are too strapped to absorb big increases without changing their buying patterns even more than they already have.

And Bernanke just announced a second, $6 trillion round of monetization.

[AnArmyVeteran]

15. Right, so why haven't we heard one word from Obama saying this???

[HopeHoops]

16. Well, he probably has - just not in a way that translates well.

[Angry Dragon]

6. No one

[AnArmyVeteran]

7. No one pays the debt? Could you explain please?

[kick-ass-bob]

10. Well, right now it's no one.

Because no one is paying the debt. It is those 30 years from now most likely...

[Angry Dragon]

12. No one is going worry about the deficit

When was the last time the republicans brought the deficit down??
How do you tax people that are not earning a wage??
We will see the deficit continue to rise, a war is perhaps on the horizon,
social services will be cut, SS will be cut,corps will ask for tax cuts
so they can hire, but will not hire because the masses will not have the money
to buy anything.

Who is going to pay the debt?? No one

[valerief]

8. Bush borrowed a trillion from Social Security before. That'll happen again.

Who needs social security?

[stray cat]

9. Those who lose jobs because of budget cuts

[Gin]

14. maybe this is an issue we can unite around....since we all seem to

be all over the board with other issues..(all valid)

I am frustrated too but need to focus on one thing that might help...maybe this is it..

Obama needs to recoup this money...the country needs it.

[bvar22]

17. All according to plan, my pretty...

All according to plan.

Aside from that, are you enjoying the Kabuki?

[Nihil]

18. Answer: It is because the answer is *too* simple.

> Even simple messages are beyond their ability to communicate.
> Why are they so silent? Is it because they secretly support continuing to
> bankrupt our country and force the poorest citizens to subsidize the richest 2%?

This message actually isn't beyond their ability to communicate.

Nor is it beyond the ability of the general population to understand.

That is why they are frightened to state it: they can't hide it or hope that
it will just go over the heads of the ignorant (like most of their plans do).

The answer is simply that they are IN the richest 2% and so they are doing
it purely for THEIR OWN benefit at the cost of the other 98% of the country.

And they know that when that sinks in to all of the millions of dumb bastards
(regardless of colour or lettering on their banners) who are happily squabbling
over the trail of crumbs leading to the slaughterhouse, they will be in the
kind of trouble that they have never known before.

There comes a point where even the most ingenious lie will not work.
*That* is why they are silent on this.