If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Citizen, time to pay up because we're going over the fiscal cliff. Them's the breaks. We're not swimming out of this one. No eddy here   (nypost.com) divider line 54
    More: Obvious, income taxes  
•       •       •

8483 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Dec 2012 at 10:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-27 04:44:34 AM
9 votes:
The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.
2012-12-27 10:40:20 AM
7 votes:
24.media.tumblr.com
2012-12-27 10:47:50 AM
4 votes:

david_gaithersburg: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.

.
Oh for god's sake, wake up asshat. Both sides want us to go over the cliff. The US government has doubled in size in the past ten years, spending must be cut and taxes must be raised for everyone. This way each party can point the finger at the other party, and nobody has to take the blame for doing what must be done. But don't worry, your section eight house will be untouched.


I'm sensing a lot of hostility here. Do you perhaps take issue with the fact that some people rely on social programs to not wind up starving to death in a gutter?

/unemployed veteran
//still alive thanks to SNAP benefits and my disability checks
///why yes I HAVE tried looking for a job
2012-12-27 05:34:42 AM
4 votes:
I read every little bullet point on that list and couldn't find a single farking one where I didn't say aloud to myself: "GOOD!"

And a little over a year and a half ago I identified as Randian.

Guess I've improved?
2012-12-27 12:21:21 PM
3 votes:

Great Janitor: Last year the numbers I heard was basically Congress is budgeting twice the money it actually takes in. Of the budget, most of the money goes to the military, social security and medicare. Which means that all our actual tax dollars go there and there is no money left to go anywhere else. Which is why the country is in debt. The Federal Government is spending more money than it's taking in.

If a financial adviser sat down with a family who was spending $100,000 a year but only brought in $50,000 a year, the financial adviser would say "Cut the spending!" but yet, when Congress does it, the answer is "Raise taxes!!!" WTF???

Over 70% of this nation lives paycheck to paycheck. Meaning that there is nothing left from the first paycheck in January when the second paycheck in January arrives. Raising taxes and ending child tax credits will hurt families.

As for taxing the rich, there is a problem with that. The rich, be definition have the money. I heard a few years ago that when it comes to this nation's wealth, employees and the self employed combined own 3% of this nation's wealth and business owners and investors own a combined 97%. When the rich spend their money on what they want, everyone benefits. The government benefits via sales tax. The yacht companies benefit via commission for the salesman, those who built the yacht, those who built all the parts for the yacht, and as all those people spend their money, the government gets more sales tax, payroll tax, so on and so forth. If the rich just get taxed, the only people who benefits is the government. Money in an economy is like blood. Sending all the blood to the head will kill the body, taxing the rich and sending that money to the government will not fix the economy. The goal shouldn't be higher taxes, the goal should be to encourage the rich to spend their money.


This is one of those talking points that is both correct and incorrect.

First, it is correct that there is a slight trickle down multiplier when the wealthy (as defined as the top 2% by yourself) purchase luxury good. They do in fact need the infrastructure to produce those goods and the employees to run it, which feels into the economy.

However, the top 2% are historically, and actually, very bad at spending their money. There is effectively only so much house, so much luxury, or $1000 a hour call girls that a 2% family can consume in a year. And while the single dollar amount might be prodigious, it pales in comparison to the amount of money these households typically sequester away for interest bearing (the absolute worst money growth available to the economy), inheritance, or simple greed (defined as holding on to money simply to hold on to money, past amounts that would be prudent to prevent sudden economic reversal).

There are numerous studies showing that if you want to promote economic growth, you tax the wealthy and businesses at a high, but reasonable, rate and plow the money back into the poor and lower middle class. These economic groups spend every close to 100% of the money that they receive from any source simply to prevent backsliding into a more economically vulnerable group. This money climbs its way *up* the economic ladder and along the way has a far more multiplicative effect then any money coming down.

/The trick is of course to get the government to plow the money back into the lower social echelons.
//And the fight over the definitions of "high" and "reasonable" involve people on both sides who make circus carneys look like a honest group.
2012-12-27 12:00:29 PM
3 votes:

jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: I believe he takes issue with this who rely on social programs who have zero business being on them because they abuse the hell out of it.

So, something like 1% of people on social programs, mostly whites?

If you think 1% of social spending is all the abuse there is, I've got ocean front property in Colorado to sell you.

By all means, feel free to prove me wrong with numbers. Or is this one of those "gut feeling" things.

No, this is one of those "I live in the real world and watch it daily" things. You have no idea how many people I watch in a day use food stamps to pay for pop. That's 100% abuse the government could easily stop. Or candy for that matter.


Really? Your going to go after soda? God forbid that people on food stamps have more then the roughest bread, blandest cheese, or greyest meat available. But no, they are poor so must SUFFER, and do without even the tiniest pleasures in life.

A social safety net should involve more then just keeping people from dying. It should be based on the minimal standard of living that we as Americans will accept for ourselves in the event that we fall on hard time for a while. Maybe that soda and candy gives the person just enough dignity to wake up each day and care for themselves and their family.

/If your trolling, fair enough. If not I seriously hope for your sake that your family has more empathy then you do when you get put in a home eventually.
2012-12-27 11:02:50 AM
3 votes:

kukukupo: generallyso: So we're going back to the Clinton-era rates?

Clinton era rates with Carter era employment and gas prices.



So about 6% unemployment and oil for under $40 per barrel?

29.media.tumblr.com
2012-12-27 10:56:14 AM
3 votes:

MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.


--------

WRONG... Republicans agreed to my dismay to raise taxes on anyone making a million+ and Obama still said no deal. But since you are a liberal democrat idiot I assume you are used to being wrong every day.
2012-12-27 10:52:50 AM
3 votes:
We HAVE HAD a spending problem for 30 years. When you don't fix that problem it gets worse and worse. Then you fail to fix it until just when demographics are getting even worse and a smaller share of working adults are going to have to support a larger share of retired people, that's a bigger problem. But here's the kicker: those retiring assholes are the very people who voted in the politicians who borrowed from my generation. And now their farking social security and medicare are sacred cows? Fark them. They made this mess, they closed their eyes to 30 years of deficits and voted in Ronald Reagan again in 1984 over Mondale who told the truth and said that the only way to balance the budget in 19-farking-84 was the raise taxes.

Yeah, that's right. You guys lived off the economic prosperity of your parent's generation, and when that failed you borrowed from your children. Fark the boomers, biggest bunch of tit-suckling leeches on the planet.
2012-12-27 12:08:33 PM
2 votes:
Amazing how a segment of our country celebrates those cheat the system to dodge taxes and vilifies those who try to cheat the system to eat.

FYI to some - The American dream is the opportunity to better one's self and descendants, not to punish those you deem are beneath your station.
2012-12-27 11:39:43 AM
2 votes:

jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: I believe he takes issue with this who rely on social programs who have zero business being on them because they abuse the hell out of it.

So, something like 1% of people on social programs, mostly whites?

If you think 1% of social spending is all the abuse there is, I've got ocean front property in Colorado to sell you.


By all means, feel free to prove me wrong with numbers. Or is this one of those "gut feeling" things.
2012-12-27 11:25:50 AM
2 votes:

Onkel Buck: cameroncrazy1984: Onkel Buck: As long as Barry teaches those mean ol rich people a lesson *snicker*

You lost the election. Get over it already.

He isnt going to be able to fark the rich people like you want him too, hope you cant get over that one.


I like how an increase on marginal rates over $250k of 3.9% equates to "farking the rich people"

Jesus, if you lived in the 1950s you'd LOVE to have a top marginal rate of 39%.
2012-12-27 10:55:56 AM
2 votes:

chaddsfarkprefect: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.


The GOP does not want to raise taxes; the Dems do. The GOP wants things to continue as they are until were are firmly in fiscal recovery, as President Obama agreed in his first term.

It's the GOP's fault, somehow, and smells fishy.


BWhahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

What smells fishy is the idea that the GOP wants a fiscal recovery. If they truly wanted that then they would be pushing for more stimulus spending by borrowing, and pushing that stimulus money towards either direct cash payments to the poor and middle class or purchase and giving away of goods and services. The idea that we can't afford new borrowing to finance new growth is silly, as long as the US dollar is the worlds reserve currency and the US government bond is the worlds saving vehicle of choice then we can continue to borrow indefinitely.

If the US was truly in a financial crises then interest rates on government bonds would be extremely high, not ridiculously low. The fact that the US Bond has an abnormally low interest rate means the US government should borrow it's way to fiscal recovery, not cut it's way into another recession.
2012-12-27 10:43:39 AM
2 votes:
What bothers me most about this is that most (if not all) of these politicians --in both parties --are rich guys. They can weather a potential recession. They just have to settle for a smaller yacht this year. Meanwhile, millions of Americans who live paycheck to paycheck are going to be farked over. All because both sides are more interested in political points than getting something done.
2012-12-27 10:42:14 AM
2 votes:
Tax the rich? Fark it, audit the farkers.
2012-12-27 10:20:30 AM
2 votes:

DrPainMD: As usual, the press (at the request of the government) is making a mountain out of a molehill.


I wouldn't say "the press (at the request of the government)...", but rather "the press (being too lazy to do actual journalism, and instead spouting off any talking points they are handed which advance the drama of the story)..."
2012-12-27 01:41:01 PM
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2012-12-27 01:00:42 PM
1 votes:

XveryYpettyZ: We HAVE HAD a spending problem for 30 years. When you don't fix that problem it gets worse and worse. Then you fail to fix it until just when demographics are getting even worse and a smaller share of working adults are going to have to support a larger share of retired people, that's a bigger problem. But here's the kicker: those retiring assholes are the very people who voted in the politicians who borrowed from my generation. And now their farking social security and medicare are sacred cows? Fark them. They made this mess, they closed their eyes to 30 years of deficits and voted in Ronald Reagan again in 1984 over Mondale who told the truth and said that the only way to balance the budget in 19-farking-84 was the raise taxes.

Yeah, that's right. You guys lived off the economic prosperity of your parent's generation, and when that failed you borrowed from your children. Fark the boomers, biggest bunch of tit-suckling leeches on the planet.


Umm, dude...we voted for a 2 percent increase in our SS tax to fund our own retirement. We saw this coming and addressed it. Even with the Grand Deceiver in government.. The whole problem with that tax increase is that certain lobbyists wrote a loophole into that tax piece allowing the federal government to borrow that money. And what did every single iteration of our government do with our retirement money?

They cut taxes for the wealthy and filled the budget gap with our money. And this is why we have 2.5 Trillion dollars worth of IOUs in the SS Trust fund..

Now, the richest among us, who benefited GREATLY from all those tax cuts, are refusing to pay back that huge IOU and all them Boomers who've been paying that extra SS tax are going to get stiffed...because GenX has been taken in by an Ayn Rand work of fiction being pushed on us by the very people who have been abusing the SS trust fund..

The Bush tax cuts need to just expire and the cheap shiat motherfarkers who've ridden the coat tails of the middle class for the last 40 years need to pony up and kick in to pay down the excess of the past.

It's not class warfare. Its called acting responsibly.
2012-12-27 12:08:21 PM
1 votes:

max_pooper: tommyl66: jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: I believe he takes issue with this who rely on social programs who have zero business being on them because they abuse the hell out of it.

So, something like 1% of people on social programs, mostly whites?

If you think 1% of social spending is all the abuse there is, I've got ocean front property in Colorado to sell you.

By all means, feel free to prove me wrong with numbers. Or is this one of those "gut feeling" things.

No, this is one of those "I live in the real world and watch it daily" things. You have no idea how many people I watch in a day use food stamps to pay for pop. That's 100% abuse the government could easily stop. Or candy for that matter.

Be sure to snap a few pictures when it happens this afternoon, we'd all love to see it.

/Don't they also drive Lexuses in this story?

No, they drive Escalades.


Well...then those farkers at the food stamp office are holding out on me & the wife...we didnt get a damned Escalade. All we have is this 99 malibu with 155k miles and a 04 Cavalier with 160k miles. Yeah, supporting a family of 4 on $18-20k/year sucks.

I want my farking Caddy...and it better have big chrome rims on it too...just like the one the Mexican chick who goes to the food bank everyday drives. Well, OK, its a Tahoe not an Escalade. Not kidding. I pass a food bank everyday while taking my kid to school. Id say 75% of the vehicles coming in and out of it are nicer than mine.It really bothers me as thats supposed to be the last line of sustenance for the desperately poor...and it looks like theres a lot of nowhere near poor people loading up there.
2012-12-27 12:06:05 PM
1 votes:

Slam1263: For you, take the shortcut, too many people in the world as it is. We could do with one less sponge.


Then I highly suggest you have a shotgun sundae sir.
2012-12-27 12:02:42 PM
1 votes:

jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: cameroncrazy1984: jayphat: I believe he takes issue with this who rely on social programs who have zero business being on them because they abuse the hell out of it.

So, something like 1% of people on social programs, mostly whites?

If you think 1% of social spending is all the abuse there is, I've got ocean front property in Colorado to sell you.

By all means, feel free to prove me wrong with numbers. Or is this one of those "gut feeling" things.

No, this is one of those "I live in the real world and watch it daily" things. You have no idea how many people I watch in a day use food stamps to pay for pop. That's 100% abuse the government could easily stop. Or candy for that matter.


Son, I don't really think your opinion, from your vantage point as a cashier in a grocery store, is really one that carries a lot of weight
2012-12-27 11:51:03 AM
1 votes:
Last year the numbers I heard was basically Congress is budgeting twice the money it actually takes in. Of the budget, most of the money goes to the military, social security and medicare. Which means that all our actual tax dollars go there and there is no money left to go anywhere else. Which is why the country is in debt. The Federal Government is spending more money than it's taking in.

If a financial adviser sat down with a family who was spending $100,000 a year but only brought in $50,000 a year, the financial adviser would say "Cut the spending!" but yet, when Congress does it, the answer is "Raise taxes!!!" WTF???

Over 70% of this nation lives paycheck to paycheck. Meaning that there is nothing left from the first paycheck in January when the second paycheck in January arrives. Raising taxes and ending child tax credits will hurt families.

As for taxing the rich, there is a problem with that. The rich, be definition have the money. I heard a few years ago that when it comes to this nation's wealth, employees and the self employed combined own 3% of this nation's wealth and business owners and investors own a combined 97%. When the rich spend their money on what they want, everyone benefits. The government benefits via sales tax. The yacht companies benefit via commission for the salesman, those who built the yacht, those who built all the parts for the yacht, and as all those people spend their money, the government gets more sales tax, payroll tax, so on and so forth. If the rich just get taxed, the only people who benefits is the government. Money in an economy is like blood. Sending all the blood to the head will kill the body, taxing the rich and sending that money to the government will not fix the economy. The goal shouldn't be higher taxes, the goal should be to encourage the rich to spend their money.
2012-12-27 11:35:04 AM
1 votes:

WhoopAssWayne: 4 years of Obama and now the inevitable financial collapse. And here come all the usual bullsh*t liberal excuses:

B-B-B-BUT REPUBLICANS!

B-B-B-BUT BUSH!

B-B-B-BUT WAAAAAAHHHHHH!

You have the white house, the senate, and a good chunk of congress - for *years* - and nothing but failure and excuses . No more bullsh*t excuses! You own it, and you will be held 100% accountable for your failures.


Nope, only 53% will hold dems accountable
2012-12-27 11:34:29 AM
1 votes:

WhoopAssWayne: 4 years of Obama and now the inevitable financial collapse. And here come all the usual bullsh*t liberal excuses:

B-B-B-BUT REPUBLICANS!

B-B-B-BUT BUSH!

B-B-B-BUT WAAAAAAHHHHHH!

You have the white house, the senate, and a good chunk of congress - for *years* - and nothing but failure and excuses . No more bullsh*t excuses! You own it, and you will be held 100% accountable for your failures.


Look everybody. It's somebody who has no idea how the US government operates.
2012-12-27 11:32:26 AM
1 votes:
4 years of Obama and now the inevitable financial collapse. And here come all the usual bullsh*t liberal excuses:

B-B-B-BUT REPUBLICANS!

B-B-B-BUT BUSH!

B-B-B-BUT WAAAAAAHHHHHH!

You have the white house, the senate, and a good chunk of congress - for *years* - and nothing but failure and excuses . No more bullsh*t excuses! You own it, and you will be held 100% accountable for your failures.
2012-12-27 11:29:23 AM
1 votes:

Arumat: david_gaithersburg: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.

.
Oh for god's sake, wake up asshat. Both sides want us to go over the cliff. The US government has doubled in size in the past ten years, spending must be cut and taxes must be raised for everyone. This way each party can point the finger at the other party, and nobody has to take the blame for doing what must be done. But don't worry, your section eight house will be untouched.

I'm sensing a lot of hostility here. Do you perhaps take issue with the fact that some people rely on social programs to not wind up starving to death in a gutter?

/unemployed veteran
//still alive thanks to SNAP benefits and my disability checks
///why yes I HAVE tried looking for a job


I believe he takes issue with this who rely on social programs who have zero business being on them because they abuse the hell out of it.
2012-12-27 11:22:21 AM
1 votes:

ltdanman44: I read every little bullet point on that list and couldn't find a single farking one where I didn't say aloud to myself: "GOOD!"

2nded


3rded.  This isn't a fiscal cliff; it's America finally being forced to clean up its room.
2012-12-27 11:18:40 AM
1 votes:

ChubbyTiger: It's pretty amazing how few of you have any clue what is about to happen or why. Or, perhaps more impotently, who is ultimately to blame for this.


If only I had the time to watch more Glen Beck and learn what is impotent.
2012-12-27 11:12:59 AM
1 votes:

Onkel Buck: As long as Barry teaches those mean ol rich people a lesson *snicker*


You lost the election. Get over it already.
2012-12-27 11:12:52 AM
1 votes:
i29.photobucket.com
2012-12-27 11:08:07 AM
1 votes:
A three part plan to fix America.

1.The people who benefited the most from the irresponsibility of the Bush administration must not make any of the sacrifices necessary to recover from that irresponsibility.

2.Those sacrifices should fall completely on people who might need things like social security.

3.If the first 250,000 dollars you make isn't chump change to you then you better bend over and take it or we will shoot this economy and laugh at your struggles.
2012-12-27 11:06:10 AM
1 votes:

TommyymmoT: It's not as though they are dealing with some force of nature, like the change of seasons, or nightfall.
It's an arbitrary deadline.

If both sides agree that the cliff would be a disaster, why is it not possible to postpone it, and keep things as they are for a couple of months until they iron things out?


The deadline was set as a result of the debt ceiling negotiations back in August 2011. I'm sure you remember that fiasco where the GOP came to within a hairsbreadth of crashing the economy just to make Obama look bad, needlessly politicizing an otherwise routine vote which had passed dozens of times in the past without incident. Moody's lowered America's credit rating as a result of that, because of the now non-zero chance that the US would choose not to repay its debt due to right-wing hyperpartisan demagoguery.

And now, here we go again. Everyone's taxes will go up, spending cuts across the board, and a very high chance of the stock market tanking on Wednesday -- all because the GOP would rather burn America to the ground and salt the earth than agree with Obama on so much as hamburger toppings.


/remember, this is the same group of people who viewed the near-flawless mission to take out the guy who murdered 3,000 Americans as a Very Bad Thing
2012-12-27 11:04:59 AM
1 votes:
As long as Barry teaches those mean ol rich people a lesson *snicker*
2012-12-27 11:02:24 AM
1 votes:

clane: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.

--------

WRONG... Republicans agreed to my dismay to raise taxes on anyone making a million+ and Obama still said no deal. But since you are a liberal democrat idiot I assume you are used to being wrong every day.


Obama may have said no deal but Republicans did not agree to that deal since Boehner did not have the votes to pass it.

This is 98% Boehners fault.
2012-12-27 11:01:44 AM
1 votes:
It's a massive failure of leadership all the way around if this happens.

Pick your leader to blame and you are right.
2012-12-27 11:00:33 AM
1 votes:
Oh god, the wailing on facebook. And I just have to laugh because all I can think is "I KNOW you don't make enough to have to worry about this".
2012-12-27 10:59:30 AM
1 votes:
Payroll taxes won't jump on January 1 because the IRS hasn't released new withholding instructions. If Congress doesn't extend the lower rates, withholding will be greater later to make up for "underwithholding" in January.

Talk about brinksmanship.
2012-12-27 10:53:19 AM
1 votes:
My personal feeling is the republicans are waiting for the rates to reset so they can vote to cut them (rather than vote to raise them) and say they never voted to raise taxes .... I hope.
2012-12-27 10:51:54 AM
1 votes:

chaddsfarkprefect: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.


The GOP does not want to raise taxes; the Dems do. The GOP wants things to continue as they are until were are firmly in fiscal recovery, as President Obama agreed in his first term.

It's the GOP's fault, somehow, and smells fishy.


Huh? You left half of the equation out. The GOP wants to gut social programs, regardless of the fact that it's the last thing that should be done during a weak economy. Gutting social programs (the non- corporate type) doesn't affect their base (rich people) and they've done a good job of convincing people outside of their base to vote against their own interests. Of course, when the cuts DO come the GOP will cry about how Obama was the reason, thus keeping those voters.
2012-12-27 10:50:17 AM
1 votes:

iq_in_binary: I read every little bullet point on that list and couldn't find a single farking one where I didn't say aloud to myself: "GOOD!"

And a little over a year and a half ago I identified as Randian.

Guess I've improved?


Only problem I had with the list was the small increase in capital gains it needs to be treated as normal income
2012-12-27 10:45:26 AM
1 votes:

generallyso: So we're going back to the Clinton-era rates?


Clinton era rates with Carter era employment and gas prices.
2012-12-27 10:45:21 AM
1 votes:
It adds up to $536 billion more that Uncle Sam would pick out of America's pockets next year.

Ah yes, I also refer to the price I pay for civilization as theft.
2012-12-27 10:41:40 AM
1 votes:

MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.


.
Oh for god's sake, wake up asshat. Both sides want us to go over the cliff. The US government has doubled in size in the past ten years, spending must be cut and taxes must be raised for everyone. This way each party can point the finger at the other party, and nobody has to take the blame for doing what must be done. But don't worry, your section eight house will be untouched.
2012-12-27 10:39:04 AM
1 votes:
It's not as though they are dealing with some force of nature, like the change of seasons, or nightfall.
It's an arbitrary deadline.

If both sides agree that the cliff would be a disaster, why is it not possible to postpone it, and keep things as they are for a couple of months until they iron things out?
2012-12-27 10:35:56 AM
1 votes:

tricycleracer: The inheritance tax would go from 35 percent for estates valued over $5.12 million to 55 percent for estates valued over $1 million.

Who doesn't move all their stuff into a family trust before kicking the bucket? Only suckers pay these taxes.


How do things like homes factor into this?

Rising property values kind of make this a much bigger thing for a lot of people if that's the case.
2012-12-27 10:34:40 AM
1 votes:
I have been assured that the deficit is the biggest drag on our economy, so this actually a good thing, right GOPPers?
2012-12-27 10:34:21 AM
1 votes:
So we're going back to the Clinton-era rates?
2012-12-27 10:32:49 AM
1 votes:

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: DrPainMD: As usual, the press (at the request of the government) is making a mountain out of a molehill.

I wouldn't say "the press (at the request of the government)...", but rather "the press (being too lazy to do actual journalism, and instead spouting off any talking points they are handed which advance the drama of the story)..."


As I have gotten older and learned a thing or two about a thing or two, the degree to which this is done is frankly shocking. The most offensive part being that many times it only take 30-40 seconds to find information contrary to the study-report-press release that the reporter reported as fact.


Anyway, someone made a very good case last year that the parties would do a nice song and dance and then go over the cliff. Since politically it was the easiest solution.
2012-12-27 10:32:48 AM
1 votes:
The inheritance tax would go from 35 percent for estates valued over $5.12 million to 55 percent for estates valued over $1 million.

Who doesn't move all their stuff into a family trust before kicking the bucket? Only suckers pay these taxes.
2012-12-27 10:32:12 AM
1 votes:

MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.



The GOP does not want to raise taxes; the Dems do. The GOP wants things to continue as they are until were are firmly in fiscal recovery, as President Obama agreed in his first term.

It's the GOP's fault, somehow, and smells fishy.
2012-12-27 10:26:54 AM
1 votes:
It is a shame that the Democrats are not willing to compromise and agree to a more reasonable plan.
2012-12-27 10:17:51 AM
1 votes:

MadSkillz: doglover: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 449x337]

I can't remember that scene. What are you attempting to communicate? Did I get "irony" wrong again? It's a difficult concept for such a simple word.


It's from The Devil's Hands Are Idle Playthings. Bender is confirming that what is being said on stage is, in fact, ironic.
2012-12-27 06:42:18 AM
1 votes:
As usual, the press (at the request of the government) is making a mountain out of a molehill. According to the CBO, when we go off the "cliff," government spending will be initially cut by $9 billion, or 0.3%. By 2014 U.S. government spending will be above where it was this year. The deficit will go down by $487 billion. Of that $487 billion, the aforementioned $9 billion will be due to spending cuts. The other $478 billion will occur thanks to increased tax revenues. When the economy fails to revive, this will be blamed on the alleged "austerity" program of the federal government, without noting that the laughable "spending cuts" were vastly exceeded by the tax increases.
2012-12-27 06:11:17 AM
1 votes:

doglover: MadSkillz: The Repubs not wanting to budge on increasing taxes is leading to increasing taxes.

I believe that actually fits the textbook definition of irony.

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 449x337]


I can't remember that scene. What are you attempting to communicate? Did I get "irony" wrong again? It's a difficult concept for such a simple word.
 
Displayed 54 of 54 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report