Comments on: Fix the Tax Code Friday: Second Economic Stimulus Package

By: vickie sanders

vickie sanders — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:26:54 +0000

I am all in favor of a second stimulus check. I could really use the money for extra food and get current on some bills.

By: Cassandra

Cassandra — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:41:38 +0000

To fix our(USA) economic problem we should strike at the root of the problem first. Penalize all of the corporations that got fat(profits) off the housing and oil markets and we would be able to actually pay off our national debt. Bush asked the taxpayers to foot the bill, but why can’t we go dutch and have him contribute to the mess he helped make. BRING our TROOPS home already.

By: SANDRA

SANDRA — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 02:12:35 +0000

MARSHA,I WASN’T TALKING ABOUT THE DISABLED.I’M TALKING ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE THAT SIT AROUND HAVING CHILDREN THAT RECEIVE FOOD STAMPS AND TANF,THAT DON’T BOTHER GETTIN A JOB.WHY?THEY ARE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THEY HAVE,SO WHY BOTHER WITH A JOB.WHILE,THE WORKING YOUNG PEOPLE GET ALOT OF GRIEF TRYING TO GET FOOD STAMPS,TO FEED THEIR KIDS.THEY DON’T WANT TO HELP THE ONES WHO HELP THEMSELVES.

A SECOND TAX REBATE CHECK WOULD HELP SOMEWHAT,BUT NOT FIX PROBLEM
I SO SO AGREE WITH CHOOK!!!!!!!

By: Shaunie

Shaunie — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:50:05 +0000

I vote – A second round of tax rebate checks

By: Liberty11

Liberty11 — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 02:10:21 +0000

DON’T FALL FOR THE SWEET TALK!!!
TEN COMPELLING REASONS TO VOTE MCCAIN
1. CHECK ON LIBERAL CONGRESS. The only way the liberal Congress will be checked at all is if McCain gets elected. Otherwise Pelosi, Dodd, and Frank(the very same people who contributed greatly to the current crisis through resisting reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and pushing “affordable housing” to those who weren’t credit worthy) will have unchecked freedom to cause further economic havoc and impose irresponsible, unaffordable spending programs on this country(we’ve had a Democratic Congress for the last two years and frankly they’ve done a terrible job—-the last thing we need to do is to give them unchecked power)
2. OBAMA TAX POLICIES WILL TURN CRISIS INTO CATASTROPHE Obama, despite his promises, will turn a crisis into a catastrophe if his economic policies are implemented. This will not help the average “Joe”. Raising taxes in a weak economy is the worst possible economic policy one can do. In 1932, for example,(in an effort eerily similar to the rationale Obama is using) Congress raised taxes on the wealthy and the result was an 8 point jump in unemployment. Moreover, taking money from the pool of funds job creators have means less money to pay wages, less money to pay health care and other benefits, and less jobs. What good is a $500.00 government check if the tax punishment meted out by Obama on your boss forces your boss to cut salaries, health care benefits, raise prices on consumers or, in the worst case scenario, close the business?
3. REAL OBAMA VIEWS MIDDLE CLASS AS “BITTER CLINGERS” AND OBAMA’S JOE THE PLUMBER ENCOUNTER SHOWS HIS DISDAIN FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS We’ve seen evidence of what Obama really thinks about the average “Joe” and it isn’t encouraging or pretty. Remember Obama’s remarks that Pennsylvanians were “bitter clingers to guns and religion”. These remarks were made when Obama wasn’t expecting them to be recopied(they thus represent the real Obama). And why should we be surprised at this elitist worldview given the fact Obama is a Ivy League lawyer who spent 20 years in the hate filled church of Jeremiah Wright? Further, look at Obama’s appalling treatment of “Joe” the Plumber. “Joe” is an average guy who wants to buy a business but his dreams can not happen under the Obama tax plan because Obama takes away any incentive to gross more than $250,000.00 in income. And both Obama and Biden essentially mocked “Joe the Plumber” once they learned he was probably a McCain supporter. They and the media made sure(within a days time) that this average “Joe” would have numerous embarrassing details about his life exposed worldwide in an effort to discredit him. And why, all because(when Obama came to his house—he didn’t seek out Obama—Obama sought him out) he dared to ask a reasonable straightforward question that any private citizen should be able to ask their President? Vote for other Democrats if you like(except Murtha who in my view shares the same elitist worldview as demonstrated by his comments Pennsylvanians are “racists” and “rednecks”) but we don’t need more elitists like Obama in leadership positions.
4. DEMOCRATIC PARTY LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CURRENT CRISIS. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Barney Frank, and ACORN have pushed for the “affordable housing” policies that have encouraged or pressured banks into making loans to poor minorities and whites who weren’t credit worthy. These bad loans are at the root of the current crisis(not “deregulation” as Obama demogogically claims—there was little to no financial “deregulation” under Bush—in fact even more financial regulation in the form of Sarbanes Oxley—and Gramm Leach Bliley was under Clinton and may have helped the current crisis by making mergers between commercial and investment banks easier). Obama and Dodd were the top two recipients of Fannie Mae campaign contributions. Obama also picked Jim Johnson(former Fannie Mae executive) to lead his vice presidential team. According to the Washington Post, one of Obama’s economic advisers is Franklin Raines(another Fannie Mae executive who in Raines’ case raked in 90 million dollars from Fannie Mae). Obama represented ACORN, trained ACORN workers, he and Ayers gave $200,000 to ACORN, Obama’s campaign gave $800,000.00 to ACORN, the Democrats included a grant for ACORN in the original bailout bill and ACORN intimidated many banks into giving bad loans to minorities with discrimination lawsuits. John McCain, in contrast, called for reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, and Dodd, resisted those reforms. Bush called for numerous reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Democrats also opposed these reforms. So why in the world, given the fact the Democrats largely caused this crisis, would we want to put Obama, Dodd, Reid, Pelosi, and Frank in total unchecked command of the country?
5. HEALTH CARE PLAN DISASTROUS On health care, Obama’s plan is unaffordable and will lead to a total collapse of the system ultimately. Obama wants a single payer system(he doesn’t say that now outwardly but that’s what he wants—-in 2003 in a speech before the AFL-CIO he said he favored a single payer system—-further his plan will ultimately lead to single payer because private insurers will be crowded out of the market—-they will be subject to costly new mandates and won’t be able to compete with Obama’s government subsidized plan) And single payer is an abject disaster and the the worst possible choice for health care. Why? For one thing, if you have single payer, you never get rid of it and you have no other option if you don’t like the way the single payer treats you. Further, in single payer countries like Canada, you have enormous wait lines(many Canadians flock to the US for care because of these wait lines), health care gets rationed(the government covers less because they have to in order to cut costs), and quality doctors leave the system(because they are paid low wages under single payer systems or less than they could make elsewhere). So Obama’s health care plan will not only not help the average “Joe”, his single payer dream will only lead to further hardship for the average “Joe” and a collapse of the system.
6. OBAMA ENERGY PLAN LEADS TO GREATER, NOT LESS DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL On energy, Obama’s energy policies will do next to nothing to help this country achieve “energy indepedence”. The last time a “windfall profits tax” was imposed(under Carter) our dependence on foreign oil grew and this happened because the windfall profits tax kills innovation on the part of oil companies(why should they drill more if they can’t make any profits from more drilling because Obama will take the money away) Moreover, Obama and the Democrats have historically railed against more drilling(Obama even scoffed we could save more energy by inflating our tires than we could gain from drilling for more oil) and nuclear power(two energy sources which are critical to helping us lessen dependence on foreign oil) so McCain and Palin are much more reliable in terms of drilling for more oil and building more nuclear power plants. Biden also said he and Obama wouldn’t build any “clean coal” plants. You should also note Obama wants to keep gas prices high(in fact he said he wasn’t upset about the fact gas prices rose, only that they rose too fast). Keeping gas prices high certainly doesn’t help the average “Joe”. And Obama also favors keeping gas taxes high while McCain has favored suspending the gas tax in the summer. The gas tax clearly hurts the average “Joe” because everyone has to buy gas(regardless of income level) yet it is McCain, not Obama, who is willing to give the average “Joe” the tax relief.
7. OBAMA FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE There is also no reason to believe Obama will be more fiscally responsible than McCain. McCain has proposed a spending freeze while Obama propses a trillion dollars in new spending. The resulting debt burden created by these spending programs will place an incredible burden and yoke on future generations. McCain is much more likely to keep spending in check.
8. MCCAIN MORE EXPERIENCED. OBAMA’S FOREIGN POLICY DISASTROUS In terms of foreign affairs, McCain has 26 years experience, Obama has 2. And Biden’s experience shows he has made the wrong judgment numerous times so he can’t be counted on to offer much help to Obama(after 9/11 Biden proposed giving $200 million to Iran—-a ridiculous idea, Biden also proposed partitioning Iraq—an idea Iraqis almost unanimously rejected, Biden and Obama opposed the surge while McCain’s judgment was vindicated on the surge). In terms of an unsteady hand, Obama has certainly shown an unsteady hand with his foreign policy gaffes already(e.g. wrong on the surge, 3 different answers on the Georgia situation, talking with dictators “without preconditions”, invading Pakistan). And, more recently, Biden said Obama would experience an international crisis if elected because he’s so inexperienced and that “America hang with us because our response won’t seem to be the right one”. There’s no evidence therefore Obama is capable of handling foreign policy crises better than McCain.
9. PALIN MOST EXPERIENCED ON ENERGY ISSUES, PALIN AT LEAST AS EXPERIENCED AS OBAMA In terms of Palin, Palin has at least as much experience than Obama. And on the critical energy issues, it is Palin who arguably has the most experience and knowledge of ALL the candidates on energy issues(because Palin was an oil and gas regulator, her husband has worked in the oil business, Palin negotiated the natural gas pipeline deal in Alaska, and Palin has lectured and given speeches on energy issues). Palin also hasn’t been given a fair shake by the media so if you’re relying on CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, or the New York Times for your information on Palin, you are not, in my view, getting a fair picture of her. You should know that in the ABC interview Palin had, portions of it were edited out and were not shown to the public(these edited out portions would have made her answers appear more complete).
10. OBAMA’S ALLIANCES RAISE CRITICAL DOUBTS ABOUT HIS JUDGMENT AND SHOW HE LIKELY HAS RADICAL POLITICAL LEANINGS. And I haven’t even discussed Obama’s numerous alliances with radicals, party hacks or corrupt individuals such as
a) Reverend Wright
b) Bill Ayers/ACORN
c) Tony Rezko
d) Rashid Khalidi
e) Khalid al Monsour
f) Stroger
g) Richard Daley
h) Father Pfleger

Ten compelling reasons to vote McCain over Obama.

By: Urbie

Urbie — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:29:34 +0000

Enough with the “Obama will tax us into the poorhouse” nonsense. That is exactly what the righties said when Clinton won, and what happened? Very little change in tax rates, the biggest boom in our lifetime, and — just to give one data point — my income tripled while he was in office.

Oh — and I forgot to mention the budget surplus.

Ya, my favorite combination is Democrat in White House with GOP Congress, and we’re obviously not going to get that — but bag the “Obama will tax us to death” canard. He may increase capital-gains rates, and marginal income tax for you $250K+ guys, but I’m not worried about paying more myself.

Urb (who has not, by the way, voted for a Democrat since Clinton)

By: Chook

Chook — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:48:46 +0000

A second stimulus check for individuals earning under $40,000 (married: under $80,000) sounds good, increase income limits for receiving food stamps and extend unemployment benefits. And, maybe, throw in allowing offshore drilling if it’s more than 50 miles offshore. Suspending capital gains tax won’t accomplish much as there aren’t much cap gains being made now. And cutting taxes on corporations is just rewarding those who helped create the mess in the first place.

By: Nathan Owen

Nathan Owen — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:30:09 +0000

None of the above. Those are handouts from my left pocket into my right pocket. I have another idea. It strikes me as very odd that in these times when companies are laying off, forcing retirements and so forth to adjust to economic realities (thus affecting the output of the working class) that the government is not doing the same? I’m not seeing it in the newspapers. If the government reduced it’s ranks to save, say $300 billion, wouldn’t that help instead? It wouldn’t immediately help the taxpayer to pay their medical bills but then we wouldn’t have to pay in so much into the coffer on a month to month basis either. Same effect but everyone (that pays in) benefits in someway. Why does the government get to vote for more money (as in printing more) to keep running when in fact they should look at thinning out? And I’m not talking about the Federal employees that deliver the mail or run the local offices to serve our needs; I’m talking about those in the administrative positions and those jobs that are there to manage the complexity of our governmental system. It goes like this: Sales are down (tax payments from us – if we lose our job then we make less ergo less tax revenue) so as a company (the government) it reduces headcount (the spenders of the revenues coming in) because some of the assets (government commitments, national programs, security needs, global involvment, etc) are somewhat fixed, but the variable costs (vehicles, travel expenses, high wages, etc) can be reduced. Then as the thinning out occurs, the company employees begin to think about how things can get done cheaper, and more efficiently, or even dropping “the wants” in favor of “the needs” relative to getting the job done. Just a thought.

By: marsha

marsha — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:03:02 +0000

There are plenty of people who work and are on food stamps. But, there are also disabled people like myself who rely on the program to survive. That’s right survive. No matter how much I try to stretch them out, I never make it to the end of the month. I have two children to feed as well, all on $693 a month SSD. Food stamps are my only source to buy food, and I get sick of being told to cut back.

Where should I cut back?

On my utility bill so I get shut off?
My medications so I get even more ill?
My physical therapy so I end up bedridden all over again?
on and on…..
My girls medications? (their state insurance is a joke)

There is nothing left when the bills are paid. Before people question if I smoke or drink…no.

If I could work I absolutely would. I worked 50 hours a week before becoming disabled and I lost everything I owned. Voc Rehab said I was not qualified to participate in their program because they determined my health would not be conducive to have an employer hire me. Are they kidding? I have brain and I consider myself to be intelligent.

The government says to save money. What shall I save? The 20 or so cents I have left in my checkbook each month?

Bring on the increase because I am sick of going through the last week of the month with hardly any food and into the next month until they come in again.

By: Carl Hill

Carl Hill — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 12:51:54 +0000

None of these ideas really work.. our Government is a reflection (unfortunately) of ourselves. We need to end continual reelections..bought by foolish give aways..and increased debt. Congress should go..and any new Congress should be term limited (even though an imperfect solution)… then, we might get honest governmental management. Our tax code is divisive in it’s very core….we need a “fair tax” that would do away with the IRS.. a consumption tax..then all Americans would pay taxes..but only to the extent of their participation in the spending. We’d all be pulling together..and these miscreants that run Congress wouldn’t be able to “pit one group against another”!