Why a tax-rates extension is a no-brainer (Updated)

President Obama is drawing fire from his left for seemingly agreeing, if a Huffington Post interview with White House adviser David Axelrod is any indication, to a two-year extension of the current federal tax rates. (UPDATE: Axelrod is now walking back that notion. Big surprise.)

I’m not sure what else Obama’s critics expected him to do.

In the first place, most economists agree that, if there’s ever a good time to raise taxes, this isn’t it. The economy is still too weak. Even speaking from a purely political standpoint, if Obama were to refuse to extend all tax rates for high earners and the economy were to remain stagnant, he’d be very vulnerable to further attacks that he was to blame.

Second, it’s undeniable that one loud and clear message from last week’s elections was that a majority of the electorate believes Washington’s fiscal problem is spending, not revenue. That said, it is hard for Republicans to argue at this point that they won enough of a mandate to make the rates permanent. We are in the middle, not the end, of a debate over federal taxing and spending. It will last through the 2012 elections.

Which brings me to the third point: Keeping the status quo on tax rates seems to be the only option compatible with taking seriously yesterday’s initial draft proposal from the president’s debt and deficit commission. The commission’s co-chairmen proposed a tax-code overhaul that moves in the direction of lower marginal rates and fewer deductions. Their specific ideas will continue to be debated, but I think enough people agree that this is the correct general direction. So, it would be very counterproductive to move in the direction of higher marginal tax rates in the meantime.

I’m still going over the commission co-chairs’ proposal and will have more to say on it soon. But I can already say that it is a serious enough set of ideas that it should be considered very carefully. There will be changes, I’m sure. However, I think that’s all the more reason not to add political noise to the discussion by changing tax rates now.

ADDED: The AJC is interested in your ideas for cutting the deficit. Besides discussing them in the comments below, click here to contact a reporter.

108 comments Add your comment

Question Authority

November 11th, 2010
11:02 am

If the death tax exemtion is not extended, expect a December full of plug pulling and suicides. Anyone who cares about their estate who is nearing their end may very well decide that allowing their heirs to have the money rather than the worthless federal government will take the rational approach. The statistics are clear from the year before the death tax complete exemption went into effect. Dozens of people hung on until after midnight on 12/31 just to insure that the government got none of their money.

But of course if the republican controlled house, senate, and presidency actually cared about americans, they would have made these permanent tax breaks and would have eliminated the death tax the FIRST year rather than dragging it out 10 and then giving it only another year until it came back with a vengence, but don’t ever count on the republicans to actually care about americans or their money (unless they need to steal it to fund illegal and unconstitutional wars).

Two years worth of extensions are really no better. The uncertainty will continue, and the management of investments and capital will still be distorted. People need to be able to count on consistency. This is the same thing that made the first depression last so darn long. When will government ever learn?

Larry

November 11th, 2010
11:18 am

If your theory is that the economy is to weak for a tax increase then you must accept that for the top 2% for whom the economy is working very nicely thankyou as they increase their grab of an outsized share of the ntations income and wealth through political corruption, they should be taxed. Better yet, lets take their campaign contributions which enables they to continue profitting through a recession with measures just like this.
http://moneyouttapolitics.org/

jconservative

November 11th, 2010
11:21 am

I would agree that the Bush cuts need to be extended for a couple of years. I do have a problem with there being no offsetting reduction in spending. As a result more borrowing or more printing.

I also have been going over the Simpson/Bowles proposals. And I really look forward to the full committee report or reports. Will there be both a majority and a minority report?

This sentence from the AP story is telling:

“The government reported separately Wednesday that the deficit for last month alone was $140.4 billion — and that was 20 percent lower than a year earlier. The red ink for all of the past fiscal year was $1.29 trillion, second highest on record, and this year is headed for the third straight total above $1 trillion.”

We cannot continue down this road.

Nothing can be taken off the table. Nothing!

Kyle Wingfield

November 11th, 2010
11:21 am

Actually, Larry, I don’t have to accept that — because I don’t buy into class-warfare politics.

Kyle Wingfield

November 11th, 2010
11:24 am

jconservative: I agree, there must also be spending cuts. I think the voters’ message on that was loud and clear. It will be interesting to see what kind of overlap there is among the Simpson/Bowles proposals and other spending-cut plans out there (e.g., the one from Heritage that I mentioned a week or two ago).

CJ

November 11th, 2010
11:33 am

Now is not a good time to raise taxes? Stop the presses! I could have sworn that the TeaGOP voters hated deficits. I thought they hated Keynesian economics. But today Kyle is advocating on behalf of deficits (Kyle and his Very Serious colleagues at the WSJ can’t find $700 billion in cuts to make up for the lost revenue) and Keynesian economics? I’m starting to question whether his arguments and assertions are genuine.

I also recall Kyle insisting that not all tax cuts are alike (it follows that not all tax increases are not alike). But now is not a good time to raise any taxes? Even the taxes of people who are unlikely to put most or any of the tax benefits back into the economy (Google “marginal propensity to consume”).

No, I’m sorry, but Kyle is misinforming his readers again when he writes that most economists agree that this isn’t a good time to raise taxes. It’s true that this isn’t a good time to raise taxes on the poor and middle class, but most economists agree that raising the top two rates will have little to no effect on private sector spending or hiring.

Kyle is also misinterpreting the election when he asserts that a majority of the electorate believes Washington’s fiscal problem is spending, not revenue. In fact, Obama was easily elected after promising that he would raise taxes on income over $250,000, and polls still show that the majority of Americans still support that position.

What do Obama’s critics expect him to do? We expect him to refuse to negotiate with hostage takers. If the TeaGOP Party insists on holding the middle class cuts hostage in order to maintain cuts for the wealthy, then they can do it. But if and when they’re responsible for all Bush cuts expiring, then Obama can introduce his own middle class tax cuts next year that, no doubt, will be necessary and popular.

Kyle Wingfield

November 11th, 2010
11:39 am

CJ: Thanks for summarizing the argument that lost last week.

Grimlock

November 11th, 2010
11:42 am

Me, Grimlock, no like liberals.

Liberals want to take all of Grimlock’s hard-earned money which he worked to receive all on his own by overtaxing his wages.

Then, liberals, want to give tired Grimlock’s money to lazy people in form of welfare or pointless of jobs for stupid people with no education, serviceable skills or work ethic like airport TSA agents.

Me, Grimlock, want tax money to stop going to pay perverts from touching little girls and women in their naughty places.

Me, Grimlock, want more money left in worker’s pockets to spend as they see fit in providing for themselves and their families and thereby stimulating.

Ugly Pelosi and Obama Jive Talker take Grimlock’s money and urinate it away on socialist programs and handouts to our society’s incompetent and UNDERacheiving. Obama Jive Talker want to put more American jobs in India instead of America. If you not actual American citizen like Obama Jive Talker, you probably not care about American jobs, either.

Ugly Pelosi and Obama Jive Talker should be in unemployment lines, not honest, hardworking, law-abiding American citizens with valid American birth certificates.

Grimlock

November 11th, 2010
11:48 am

Me, Grimlock, do much better job in investing in & stimulating American economy with his more of his own money not taken from him in taxes than Ugly Pelosi or Obama Jive Talker.

Ugly Pelosi and Obama Jive Talker FEAR tax cuts, as most liberals do.

Tax cuts lower liberals’ ability to stay in power by buying votes from lazy and not-smart people by promising them free stuff so they won’t have to do honest work for themselves.

CJ

November 11th, 2010
11:55 am

Kyle: You’re one who gloats. Good to know.

Clovis

November 11th, 2010
11:57 am

I, Clovis, do not wish to witness further amounts of my descreationary income forcibly removed from my person to be allotted for supplemental tele-prompters for “The Great Community Organizer.”

Gordon

November 11th, 2010
12:00 pm

I am extremely surprised by what I have heard out of the debt commission so far. I was sure it would be nothing but tax increases and excuses to expand government but I happily admit I was wrong.

Too bad it will never happen….

Gordon

November 11th, 2010
12:04 pm

Kyle is correct. The Bush tax cuts are the topic of the week, but deficit reduction is the topic of this generation. Revenue and expense solutions must be considered together. It is time to stop treating them as separate things.

Kyle Wingfield

November 11th, 2010
12:09 pm

CJ: No, gloating sounds more like “I won.” No prizes for guessing who uttered that gloat-tastic phrase.

Kyle Wingfield

November 11th, 2010
12:11 pm

Note the difference between the finality of “I won” and what I originally wrote:

“We are in the middle, not the end, of a debate over federal taxing and spending.”

SPSU

November 11th, 2010
12:22 pm

Hey liberals your man, your party, your policies were handily defetaed. Like your hero Obozo stated – go to the back of the bus!

Road Scholar

November 11th, 2010
12:29 pm

Kyle, here’s your cuts if the top earners get their tax cut renewed: end all their deductions!all tax shelters! Still need to cut spending: Cut the salaries and benefits of conservatives in the federal government who stated its a spending issue. Let them stand up for their principles. Thus we pay for the tax break and we cut spending! Now I bet the repubs will howl!

Linda

November 11th, 2010
12:36 pm

According to CNSNEWS.com, Pelosi promised “no new deficit spending.” When she was inaugurated on 1/4/07, the natl. debt was $8.67 T. As of 10/22/10, it was $13.67 T, an increase of $5 T!!!!!!! The 60th speaker of the House has added more to the natl. debt than the 1st 57 House speakers combined (from 1789 thru 1995). Gingrich only increased it $812.4 B, but Hastert increased it $3.1 T.

Most bills originate in the House.

We have a spending problem & an unemployment problem, not a revenue problem.

The $600 T the feds. are printing out of thin air & spending will not be added to the natl. debt but rather to the cost of consumer goods in the form of inflation.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/debt-has-increased-5-trillion-speaker-pe

jt

November 11th, 2010
12:36 pm

“Why a tax-rates extension is a no-brainer ”

Actually, a tax-rate EXTENSION is a LOBOTOMIZED brainer.

Make the tax-rate permanent, and then, start the process of weening the citizens of Georgia off of the corrupt Federal teat.

The citizens are doing this whether or not the media or politicians acknowledge this or not.

We’ll do it the hard way or the easy way.

Independent J

November 11th, 2010
12:46 pm

CJ-
“but most economists agree that raising the top two rates will have little to no effect on private sector spending or hiring”

so your reasoning to raise taxes on the top 2% is only out of spite, because you’re upset that people did better than you in their career…the evil profit sharing companies that employ the middle class and lower class have to pay more….you entitlement “a” hole ..
i own a small business that makes about 850k a year , 10 employees and my margins are around 20%….which is great in comparison…do you know why and how i have made my money..i own a recruiting firm putting people into the work force…and i watch and save my expenditures so i can reinvest in my company….to hire and expand…. you want to tax me more when i am putting people to work? wow!! you sound like a lazy liberal looking for handouts…whoa is you!!! CJ send me your resume and let me get you in a better career…i need your tax dollars….

Recent Grad

November 11th, 2010
12:48 pm

I say do away with taxes for rich people anyway. While we’re at it, let’s do away with the minimum wage and all labor laws. Let’s just do away with the middle class. It’s time to get back to the 19th century. Whether you believe in class warfare or not, it’s here. It’s war on the middle class whether you like it or not. And a large part of the working and middle class will be complicent in their own demise. Somebody has to pay off the loan to China. I guess it has to be the poor and middle class.

Linda

November 11th, 2010
12:54 pm

Independent J, If you were hiring your 11th employee, would you hire a liberal/progressive/socialist?

Linda

November 11th, 2010
1:01 pm

Recent Grad, Every time the Dems. raise the minimum wage during a time of high unemployment, the unemployment rate increases on the minimum wage earners. Raising taxes on employers during a time of high unemployment also increases the unemployment rate. Remember Econ 101?

JF McNamara

November 11th, 2010
1:01 pm

I agree that tax rates are unlikely to change because of the political ramifications. That doesn’t, however, mean that its not the right thing to do.

While Washington may have a spending problem, that’s not what I got out of last week’s elections. I got out of it that Obama isn’t a great political tactician, because the Republicans simply won the media managing to turn the failed economy they spawned on him. Also, the Southerners got revenge by electing all Republicans. It was just a referendum on Republican anger.

Simply stated, If the economy wasn’t “bad”, no one would care about spending. In order to say people care about spending, you would need to be able to make that case in both good and bad economies. My point, Bush spent wildly in a good economy and no one cared. If Obama had the same economy, he could spend wildly too.

I think we’ll both agree that a lot of voters don’t actually have a handle on any of the issues. Only a small percentage of those voters who do have a handle on them also have a grasp on economics. One thing is clear. No one is going to vote for higher taxes or less service…EVER. If you say that’s what you are going to do, then you are going to lose. Its the reason why governance is hard when you need to make changes that we need to be made.

We need to raise taxes because we won’t (and can’t) cut nearly enough. Maybe I haven’t looked in the right places, but there is no workable plan that actually cuts enough to get us to a balanced budget. There never will be, and politicians just keep kicking the can down the road so they can get re-elected. Until we have a Greek style disaster, nothing will ever change and those who try to stop the crisis beforehand will get voted out. I see how this works now “Lie about fiscal responsability to elected but never change anything.” and I’m beginning to care less. At least I’m running up the credit card. Someone else will get to pay it later.

Independent J

November 11th, 2010
1:02 pm

Linda,

do you think they understand capitalism? because if they cant understand value and role of profits, and they have the same business acumen as Obama..why would i hire them….
its business, not personal…
would you hire them?

JDW

November 11th, 2010
1:02 pm

Hello Kyle, thought I would give you a shot at explaining reality.

Jay Bookman pointed out this morning that “what a lot of people miss in this taking money that could be invested in jobs” argument is that money that we have to borrow to cover the higher deficit is ALSO money removed from the private economy that might have funded growth.”

I believe, that in a nutshell is why the Clinton years were high growth and the Reagan-Bush-Bush-Obama(To-Date) years are not. When Clinton raised taxes it had zero effect on the creation of jobs or spending but a gigantic impact on investment…those billions of new dollars required to finance debt spending had to find a different investment home.

If you want to see economic growth raise taxes to the level needed to support the appropriate funding level…in the long run it encourages investment and keeps interest rates naturally low.

If you want to turbo charge growth, institute a 5% national sales tax with the express purpose of reducing our national debt…again freeing investment dollars that need a new home while putting downward pressure on interest rates.

Fully anticipating the argument but, but, but tax cuts create growth…the nums don’t lie.

GDP Growth Rates

Historical…1/1/47 to 1/31/81 GDP growth averaged 3.73%…total debt incurred in the period $988 Billion over 34 years.

Clinton…2/1/93 to 1/31/01 GDP growth averaged 3.81% or about the historical average. Total debt incurred 1.383 Billion over 8 years.

Reagan-Bush…2/1/81 to 1/31/93 GDP growth averaged 3.08% or about 17.5% below the historical average. Total debt incurred $3.414 Trillion over 12 years.

Bush-Obama…2/1/01 to now GDP growth averaged 1.65% or more than 55% below the historical average. Total debt to date $6.102 Trillion over 9 years.

Tax cuts that create deficits are the problem not the solution and extending the current crop of government giveaways just continues to compound our problem.

Recent Grad

November 11th, 2010
1:17 pm

Yeah, what McNamara and JDW said.

DannyX

November 11th, 2010
1:19 pm

Georgia Republicans just gobbled up 4.6 billion in stimulus dollars. Gov Perdue campaigned for more federal dollars on behalf of Republican Governors. The Bush tax cuts created a huge gash in the deficit.

The incoming Republican leadership are retreads from the disastrous “Yes Mr President” Bush years. The Republican “Bridge To Nowhere” has become a “Bridge to the Past.”

To fund the Bridge to the Past, “earmarks” will now be called “appropriations.”

Thank you Kyle for doing your “Bridge to the Past” introduction. We’re now back to waiting for those Bush tax cuts to solve everything.

Imma Lib

November 11th, 2010
1:23 pm

Whhhhaaaatttt????? Let people keep more of THEIR money???? Not let some all-knowing bureaucrat in Washington decide what to do with other people’s money!?!?!?!?!

OOOOH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!!

Imma Lib

November 11th, 2010
1:30 pm

“…We’re now back to waiting for those Bush tax cuts to solve everything.”

No, we’re waiting for Spending Cuts to help solve everything.

Jefferson

November 11th, 2010
1:31 pm

Kyle, you will never see the gov’t get to where you say you want it with your attitude, you and your kids can have the debt as you don’t want to solve the problem, just stick your head in the greedy sand.

The Great and Powerful Community Organizer

November 11th, 2010
1:33 pm

“John….the Election’s over….I WON!”

Linda

November 11th, 2010
1:41 pm

Independent @ 1:02, Do entrepreneuers/employers tend to vent potential employees as to their understanding & opinion of business? Do they simply ask if the candidate thinks the employer is evil for being a capitalist? Is it more difficult for a socialist/progressive/liberal to obtain a job in the private sector from a self-employed capitalist?

CJ

November 11th, 2010
1:46 pm

I wrote, “…most economists agree that raising the top two rates will have little to no effect on private sector spending or hiring…

Independent J wrote, “…so your reasoning to raise taxes on the top 2% is only out of spite, because you’re upset that people did better than you in their career…

I wonder if Independent J knows what a non sequitur is.

My reasoning to raise taxes on the top two percent is to help balance the budget. If Independent J knows how to do that without raising those rates, then I’d love to hear it. Because Kyle, the WSJ, Heritage, Cato, GOP, Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin, and others from the right can’t figure out how to do it.

ExRepublican

November 11th, 2010
1:49 pm

Average Americans want and need a president who truly fights for them, not a weak sellout too quick to lay down and compromise too much, too often.

President Obama will be gone in 2013 unless he bloodies his knuckles more by fighting harder for America’s middle-class and against reckless GOP excesses.

Talk is cheap. More tough battles from Obama to win some rounds for the forgotten middle class would be his best weapon for winning a second term.

DannyX

November 11th, 2010
1:52 pm

‘No, we’re waiting for Spending Cuts to help solve everything.”

Lol. Here’s an idea, keep tuned in to Fox News. The Pelosi “Jetgate” story took up about 1000 hours of Fox News airtime. Come January Fox News will be spending more time on the issue. I’ll bet they will fill another 1000 hours on how Boehner has given up his jet privilege all in the name of the deficit. A true Deficit Hawk. LOL, yea, that’s going to happen. Better set those DVR’s!

Hey, are you “waiting for Spending Cuts Republicans” waiting to repeal socialist Medicare Part D?

Imma Lib

November 11th, 2010
1:58 pm

hahahaha…I knew you couldn’t do it—go ONE day without Medicare Part D! Dayum, Danny Boy, get some new material…LOL. YES, repeal Medicare Part D.

And you, and the 15 to 16 others, keep tuned into MSNBC. Guess that “tinglin’ feeling” is not so “tinglin” anymore, huh? LOL!

Linda

November 11th, 2010
1:59 pm

If we raise taxes on the top 2% of earners, which include at least 700 small businesses, & the DC bunch spends it rather than paying down the natl. debt & balancing the budget, while unemployment remains the same or increases, what’s the liberals/socialists Plan II?

The coins/change I have left read “In God We Trust,” not the govt.

My common sense says, “You go first.” Stop the spending/looting/printing before you ask me for more money.

Independent J

November 11th, 2010
2:03 pm

Linda,

Yes..understanding a simple business model, sales strategy and why we’re in business is at the top of my list.
No.. dumb question in an interview- and were not evil,
im not sure if its more difficult… i dont ask political questions and views, but it can become very obvious,
I and millions of other small business owners cant afford to hire candidates, no matter what their political view is, if they dont understand the fundamentals values of business and services.
A socialist/progressive/liberal wont be knocking on my door anyway….its not their calling,but i wish them well…just dont expect me to pay for them….
does that answer your question…or is there a setup and a blasting im a about to receive :)

mrs. w

November 11th, 2010
2:05 pm

You can start by stopping all of the holidays that govt. employees get that the rest of us don’t. It seems like every other Monday is some dead presidents birthday. Do you guys get Columbus Day off? Veterans Day? MLK day? All with pay. That should save them a bundle right there.

And don’t get me started on the welfare system and people who receive more of a tax refund than what they actually paid in. We all live here, we all need to pay.

Linda

November 11th, 2010
2:09 pm

Most bills originate in the House, which has been controlled by Pelosi & the Dems for 4 yrs. The Dems had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Everyone has know since ‘01 & ‘03 that the Bush tax cuts would expire in ‘10. The Dems. did not even attempt to extend ANY of the tax cuts, not even for the middle class by introducing a bill that they could have passed.

There’s not a single person in the US that knows what their tax bracket will be in a month & a half, including all the small businesses whose owners fall into either the middle or higher income tax brackets. And we wonder why unemployment is permanent at almost 10%???????

Consumer confidence is now consumer panic.

steve tanner

November 11th, 2010
2:14 pm

Wow, the tiny sliver of wealthy people in this country have really duped the hard-working citizens of this country to work against their own best interests once again. How recklessly selfish these people are to cut crucial safety nets for the most vulnerable so that they can stash a little more vacation or yacht money aside. It’s nothing more than disgusting greed — trickle down economics has never been proven, and the wealthy know it. They’re just greedy, sociopathic pigs with absolutely no regard for the well-being of society as a whole. Don’t believe their self-serving lies, people!

CJ

November 11th, 2010
2:19 pm

Linda, “The Dems. did not even attempt to extend ANY of the tax cuts, not even for the middle class by introducing a bill that they could have passed.

As usual, Linda wallows in her ignorance.

The Democratic House passed a bill that would make the middle class tax cuts permanent (that is, all except the top two rates). Obama has said that when the Senate passes the bill, then he will sign it. However, the Republicans in the Senate are continuing to block an up-or-down vote on this legislation. The TeaGOP position is either tax cuts for all or tax cuts for none.

Independent J

November 11th, 2010
2:19 pm

CJ- read “the fair tax “book it has all your answers, your welcome!!

and by raising taxes on the top 2%…do you think that it wont be passed down to everybody else…those 250K (small business owners) earners will merely raise goods and services to the consumer….or quit expanding their operations….
i wonder if CJ has ever run a payroll? or a small business or shopped for insurance for employees….nah…he’s a taker
could cut spending…drastically!!!! could happen….we balance the budget going after the top 2%? then what…you think the spending will then cease..noooo, govt figured out how to balance the budget….screw the business owners!!!!how much is enough CJ..

serious read with an open mind The Fair Tax…..
i can squabble all day..but its not going to make me a profit so i can pay more taxes for your satisfaction…no what i mean?

Independent J

November 11th, 2010
2:22 pm

steve…YOUR FIRED!!
go get a job from the middle class or lower class….lol …greedy? huh..go invent something, sorry sitting your ass on the couch has been taken

CJ

November 11th, 2010
2:27 pm

I read the Fair Tax book IJ…and it’s sequel. Let me know if you have any questions.

Recent Grad

November 11th, 2010
2:28 pm

Kudos to steve tanner!

Linda

November 11th, 2010
2:30 pm

Independent J @ 2:03, You will not be getting a blasting from me. I’m just taking advantage of an opportunity to ask questions of another employer & recruiter. I’ve noticed on the blogs that most of those who are unemployed are those who disagree with capitalism. I think it’s more than a coincidence. I have always made certain that those I hire believe in the free enterprise system. If a prospective employee is a liberal, he can’t be conservative with my expenses.

Jimney Cricket

November 11th, 2010
2:30 pm

Bottom line..we’ve had ten years of the lowest tax rates on the wealthy in history coupled with the least amount of over-sight of the financial industry in our history and the result has not been job creation..but the biggest financial catastophe since the depression, widest gap between the rich and poor since before the Depression, and a sinking middle-class. The poor are getting poorer and the rich a whole lot richer. Obama wants to tax the wealthiest 2% back to the Clinton era rates. I’ll remind you that during the “socialist regime” of Eisenhour the tax rate on the wealthy after the first $200,000 was 91-94%!! The Middle-Class was booming, jobs were being created, and the rich were still rich! During that time the average “CEO” pay was 10-15 times the average salary of their workers..today it’s over 150 times that. But I know it’s all the Union’s fault, but during the “communist experiment” of the 1950″s around 40% of American workers were union members today it’s around 12%. It’s not a coincidence that as we lower tax rates on the wealthy, dimish the collective power of labor, and lower regulation of industry..that real wages for workers have dimished greatly and the middle class is dissappearing. And I mean a real middle-class with a comfortable standard of living that could actually choose to exist on one parent’s salary and not go broke(which is the biggest negative impact on our culture). If tax cuts for the rich(trickle-down) worked then the last ten years would have resulted in a huge period of job creation, but in fact the exact opposite has occurred. In fact, the only thing being created is insane and immoral amounts of wealth for the super-rich. We should promote capitolist innovation and wealth creation, but seriously stifle the immoral and unjust greed that continues to be a cancer on our culture and push us toward “class warfare”.

j

November 11th, 2010
2:33 pm

“Second, it’s undeniable that one loud and clear message from last week’s elections was that a majority of the electorate believes Washington’s fiscal problem is spending, not revenue”

Kyle, the voters are effing clueless, that’s why they waste their time voting. If they knew what was really going on they wouldn’t bother voting.

They vote every year expecting different results and haven’t realized that the joke is on them and nothing will change. Isn’t that the definition of insanity. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Stop voting and live your life. :)

Kyle what’s taking you so long to get the message of the commission dude? The message should be loud and clear, the country is broke. get it?

no money. The party is over. Time to pay the piper or learn Chinese quickly.

The pie shrinks every year and the number of people who rely on the pie goes up.