We must support the President's plan to help the economy and the poor

[hfojvt]

Sure, it provides some benefits for the rich, but the primary reasons to pass it are because it keeps the working poor from paying more in taxes and it provides an absolutely necessary economic stimulus in this bad economy.

Here are some more quotes to drive those points home.

"My tax relief plan is a fair one, lowering the rate for all taxpayers. The typical family of four with two children will get $1,600 in tax relief. And the greatest benefits, the largest percentage reductions, will go to those who need them most. My plan is pro-growth. It gives our economy a jump-start by leaving more money in the hands of those who have earned it." Feb 17, 2001

"The President's tax plan provides relief for every income taxpayer; however, it gives the lowest income families the greatest percentage reduction. Indeed, higher income individuals will pay a higher share of income taxes after this plan takes effect. (See Chart 2–2.)" Feb. 28, 2001

"It recognizes that our tax code is unfair. It is unfair to people who struggle to get ahead. It is unfair for the single mom, who lives on the outskirts of poverty, who's working hard to provide for her family. For every additional dollar she makes above $25,000, she pays a higher marginal rate on that dollar than someone who's wealthy. And that's not right and it's not fair. It's not what America is all about, as far as I'm concerned. Our tax code makes the code more fair." Feb 7, 2001

"We need tax relief that creates the greatest number of jobs. (Applause.) The goal is to create a million new jobs by the end of next year. I've submitted a good, strong plan that will help meet that goal. The United States Congress must not only listen to your voice, but must listen to the voice of somebody looking for work. We need aggressive action out of the United States Congress now." May 6, 2003

"Oh, you'll hear the talk about how this plan only helps the rich people. That's just typical Washington, D.C. political rhetoric, is what that is. That's just empty rhetoric. This plan for a family of four making $40,000 a year would see their tax bill go from $1,178 a year, to $45 a year." May 12, 2003

"Yes, I'm worried about the deficit. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the fellow looking for work. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the single mom who's worried about putting food on the table for her children, so she could find work. And that's where the focus of this administration is going to be." May 12, 2003

"But in spite of the good news, people are looking for work. And as long as our fellow citizens are looking for work, we must act. So long as families are struggling to pay the bills, we must act here in America. So long as small businesses are hesitant to expand and to create new jobs, we must act. And the "we" in this case is the United States Congress." May 12, 2003

"We need at least $550 billion in tax relief over the next decade, big enough to make a real difference in the paychecks of American workers, big enough to help entrepreneurs create more jobs, and big enough to give our economy the boost it needs." May 10, 2003

"The unemployment number is now at 6 percent, which should serve as a clear signal to the United States Congress we need a bold economic recovery package so people can find work. (Applause.) That 6-percent number should say loud and clear to members of both political parties in the United States Congress, we need robust tax relief so our fellow citizens can find a job. (Applause.)" May 6, 2003


Ooops, I am sorry, all of those quotes are from George W. Bush and Co, but it happens to be almost the same plan, only with the added cost of a poison pill for social security which actually increases taxes on people making less than $20,000. And it largely provides benefits mostly to the rich too, except places like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities have fallen on their calculators and are not saying much to oppose a Democratic President. (Way to show that your analysis is partisan rather than objective guys).

Those arguments didn't pass the smell test in 2001 or 2003 and they don't pass the smell test now.

[Davis_X_Machina]

1. Nonsense....

A cold, hard, small, disciplined, real Democratic party is the only thing that will save the country.

Oh, sure, some people will carp, and point out that during this process real people will suffer real pain that could otherwise have been averted. When the historical necessity of their sacrifice is explained to them properly, however, they will come around.

Some day, when real progressives finally take power, we can recognize their sacrifice. A memorial, something tasteful, and not too grandiose on the Mall? Or a commemorative stamp...we could have Banksey do it; think how cool that would be.

That'd be a good DU poll -- stamp, or memorial on the Mall.

[bobbolink]

16. I'd like to be on a stamp, please.

Thank you.

[Davis_X_Machina]

18. Your sacrifice is appreciated....

...but no cost is too great if it brings the progressive future a little closer.

You are officially a Hero of the Revolution, too. (Gets you a better cardboard box, under a classier bridge.)

[bobbolink]

20. Thanks for the stamp, but hold the cardboard box.

Just give me the painless and quick exit, please.

[Davis_X_Machina]

42. Oh, dear no...

...did you miss the whole Terri-Lynn Schiavo thing. Can't do that....

It's a really nice box. 20 cubic foot refrigerator came in it. You could actually sublet, it's so big.

[bobbolink]

44. Shit, They want us off the planet, it is only right that we oblige them. It's their duty to

provide the means.

[jaxx]

2. There is no comparison.

Now, I know there are some who would have preferred a protracted political fight, even if it had meant higher taxes for all Americans, even if it had meant an end to unemployment insurance for those who are desperately looking for work.

And I understand the desire for a fight. I’m sympathetic to that. I’m as opposed to the high-end tax cuts today as I’ve been for years. In the long run, we simply can’t afford them. And when they expire in two years, I will fight to end them, just as I suspect the Republican Party may fight to end the middle-class tax cuts that I’ve championed and that they’ve opposed.

So we’re going to keep on having this debate. We’re going to keep on having this battle. But in the meantime I’m not here to play games with the American people or the health of our economy. My job is to do whatever I can to get this economy moving. My job is to do whatever I can to spur job creation. My job is to look out for middle-class families who are struggling right now to get by and Americans who are out of work through no fault of their own.

A long political fight that carried over into next year might have been good politics, but it would be a bad deal for the economy and it would be a bad deal for the American people. And my responsibility as President is to do what’s right for the American people. That’s a responsibility I intend to uphold as long as I am in this office.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/12/07/press-conference-president

[Edweird]

5. Actually, there IS a comparison. It's in the box up there ^. It's not a favorable one, though.

[hfojvt]

6. according to Senator Bernie Sanders

there is a longstanding bipartisan agreement to extend unemployment insurance whenever the unemployment rate is over 7.2%.

So I am not buying a "If we don't pass a tax cut for the rich, then people won't get unemployment."

Once you take that away, the only thing left is "working people will pay higher taxes unless we pass a huge tax cut for the rich" and "the recession will be longer if we don't cut taxes for the rich" which are basically the same arguments that Bush made.

[nenagh]

8. Thank you for posting this....

I remember Bernie saying exactly that on Friday..

[jaxx]

13. Did Bernie forget that they were haggled over the last extension?

Yes, they were. The pubs demanding they be paid for, for the first time ever in our history. They haggled for 6 weeks while people had no income. Nothing is solid anymore, the old days of agreements are gone. The party of no has jerked the rug out from under the senate.

[Davis_X_Machina]

19. We elected a Congress....

...with a larger than ever -- and non-trivial --- number of members who essentially don't believe in UI, at all -- that its recipients are all slackers.

[jaxx]

23. Well, they're wrong.

[hfojvt]

28. haggled over, but what happened in the end?

I forget, did Democrats have to offer more tax cuts to billionaires to get them passed?


And that is going to pay for them how?

Actually I think it was future cuts to food stamps. Which may not matter - if the economy improves then less people will need food stamps.

[killbotfactory]

45. Does Bernie think republicans will act in good faith, or honor "longstanding bipartisan agreements"?

When holding out only strengthens their position?

[laughingliberal]

11. We would have preferred they had not left it until the hair on fire last minute emergency was...

upon us. Obama could have asked Congress, at any point, to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. If the Republicans had voted against it, we could have beat them senseless in the election for not helping struggling middle class families.

Instead, it's the same old hysteria over having to do something NOW, leaving people unable to ponder the details and unintended consequences of the 'deal.'

[Edweird]

3. Yep, that's it in a nutshell. What's not for liberals to love?

[scarletwoman]

4. Very good.

:thumbsup:

[Better Believe It]

7. How does increasing taxes for the poor and cutting Social Security taxes help us?

[hfojvt]

27. Well the President says they do.

The quotes will explain it, if you read the quotes.

[hay rick]

46. Just read the last two paragraphs. nt

[asdjrocky]

9. Oh give it a rest.

No thinking person, not one person that can think for themselves any way, would believe Obama spends 2 minutes a day thinking about the poor.

The food banks here are low. Very low at Christmas.

[hfojvt]

14. another DUer who didn't read past the title

What a bummer. I thought about changing the title, but thought it would be funny if the story went in a different direction than the title suggested.

[Skittles]

15. leave it as is - it's a great read!!!

:D

[asdjrocky]

22. I am a boob.

Clearly, I'm a boob. What else can I be?

Well done. Don't write down to idiots that might come across your stuff, and don't change the title because I'm stupid.

[hfojvt]

26. Nah, I have done the same thing.

If the title sucks, then why waste time reading the further opinions of an idiot? But I had to hope that people who thought the title was full of crap would want to read it so they could post a devastating rebuttal.

It's hilarious that I think I am picking up unrecs from people who agree with me. Clearly the title sends the wrong message and I should have put a huge NOT!! at the end.

[me b zola]

36. I think that you should repost

...to allow the rec's to reflect the way that we really feel about your OP, not the way that many of us :blush: reacted to the title.

[nc4bo]

41. +1. nt

[zeemike]

10. But they worked so well the last time

Why not use them again...most people will never notice..in fact it may seem familiar to them an so think it might be right.

[madrchsod]

12. it`s just old wine in new bottles.

if he was serous about getting people back to work he`d go for tax and trade reform. instead he`s signing another trade agreement with a country that is not in interest of the workers in both countries.

oh well, we are stuck with him. there`s nothing we can do but try to survive the coming storm

[bobbolink]

21. Nothing we can do?

Will there be a signal when we can say "We told you so"?

[alsame]

17. IOKIYAD. nt

[Individualist]

24. No sale! Unrec.

[Odin2005]

25. His plan does not help the poor or the economy.

[Better Believe It]

29. "must support the President's plan to help the economy and the poor" When will he be releasing it?

[earth mom]

30. You mean the do nothing plan? nt

[DainBramaged]

31. When DADT is repealed, the wars ended, Gitmo closed, and and on and on

maybe I'll sit here and debate the merits of your 'cheers' for the Administration. Until then, hollow words.

[dflprincess]

32. And if he ever comes up with a plan to do those things

I will support it.

[nc4bo]

33. I'm confused. First and last paragraph seem conflicting. nt

[L0oniX]

34. Tax the fuck out of corporations that out source jobs.

[Edweird]

35. Too bad people are reacting to the title alone. I recced, but to no avail.

[TheKentuckian]

37. Old arguments never die. They are apparently co-opted in the face of failure.

[rucky]

38. Why is this getting unrec'd?

[BzaDem]

39. Because at this point, the rec/unrec system is just registering disapproval or approval of Obama

and people don't look past the subject and the first few lines before deciding if the post is pro or anti Obama.

[nc4bo]

40. Yes, to your 2nd sentence. Must read all the way down on this one.

But another DUer made a really good suggestion imho, to go ahead and repost with a change in title.

[killbotfactory]

43. Bush wasn't presiding over the worst economy in half a century

This is the best the republicans will let us get because they are in lockstep and can filibuster any legislation worth a damn.

[hay rick]

47. K&R

You seem to have confused a lot of people, but that's ok.