168 Republicans voted to raise your taxes!

[asterism]

They may have. I asked how many times you see it. With a huge civil rights bill like HCR you expect that. With a bill to give millionaires a bonus tax cut, not so much.

It clearly defines the priorities of each party, too. Thanks!

In a roundabout way, you're correct. More government control vs. less government control. Higher taxes vs. lower taxes. Yup, the Dems sure have shown their priorities. If only the Republicans could actually govern the way they posture.

Did you support the more government control regarding wiretapping? What about the government power that was bestowed by Bush on the TSA? How about the creation of the largest Federal bureaucracy in history, Homeland Security?

Yes, no, and oh hell no.

I don't consider the wiretapping to be government control. Nice strawman.

 

[Full-Auto]

Dems will go along with maintaining the status quo on taxes, as long as repubs will spend more money extending welfare for MORE THAN THE MAX 99 WEEKS!!



Harry, Are you fucking kidding me?

If you've been such a loser as to be unemployed for 99 weeks, then I have news for you, Harry: Another week, another 6 weeks, another 52 weeks, or another 52 years, probably isn't going to help.

Where did you guys come up with they want to extend it beyond 99 weeks.

The argument is so bogus its laughable.

Pay attention, the extension if it goes through does not extend the benefits beyond 99 weeks. It allows others that have been laid off an opportunity to the same benefits that pthers before them recieved, if the economy improves the cut offs are already in place.

I'd appreciate confirmation of this: You're source?

My source, which I quoted, said:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he hoped for an agreement by the middle or end of next week on legislation that would combine an extension of tax cuts with a renewal of expiring jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

Currently the jobless benefits for the long term unemployed are 99 weeks

Then they expire.

Renewing them would allow them to last longer than 99 weeks.

However, I conceed that the quote could mean "renewing the 99 week jobless benefits."

The MSNBC aritcle isn't terribly clear on this point.

Go to any states EUC section. EUC is only for 53 weeks, the EB is for just 20 weeks if they qualify. The previous 26 was provided by the state. If someone who was laid off 7 months ago, as of nov 27th they would only be entiltled to an additional 16 weeks, then they are cut off. The extension being discussed is whether this individual will qualify for the additional compensation up to the 53 weeks EUC provides. He would be eligible for an additional 49 weeks. Those that have exhausted thier benefits have exhausted thier benefits, there will be no addtional funds.

 

[asterism]

Oh, you run a commune! Sounds communist.

No, we just choose to sink or swim together. No government force needed.

Do you split all profits equally? Or do they just share in the downturns?

No we don't split profits equally. However, they never showed up to work and had to bring some of their savings with them just to keep the doors open. I did. Their bonuses are small during bad times and big during good times. Their base compensation is based on the value they bring to the company which is still above comparable jobs in this area.

 

[Trajan]

Where did you guys come up with they want to extend it beyond 99 weeks.

The argument is so bogus its laughable.

Pay attention, the extension if it goes through does not extend the benefits beyond 99 weeks. It allows others that have been laid off an opportunity to the same benefits that pthers before them recieved, if the economy improves the cut offs are already in place.

I'd appreciate confirmation of this: You're source?

My source, which I quoted, said:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he hoped for an agreement by the middle or end of next week on legislation that would combine an extension of tax cuts with a renewal of expiring jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

Currently the jobless benefits for the long term unemployed are 99 weeks

Then they expire.

Renewing them would allow them to last longer than 99 weeks.

However, I conceed that the quote could mean "renewing the 99 week jobless benefits."

The MSNBC aritcle isn't terribly clear on this point.

Go to any states EUC section. EUC is only for 53 weeks, the EB is for just 20 weeks if they qualify. The previous 26 was provided by the state. If someone who was laid off 7 months ago, as of nov 27th they would only be entiltled to an additional 16 weeks, then they are cut off. The extension being discussed is whether this individual will qualify for the additional compensation up to the 53 weeks EUC provides. He would be eligible for an additional 49 weeks. Those that have exhausted thier benefits have exhausted thier benefits, there will be no addtional funds.

mu understanding is however that dems are now in this proposed bill paying for more money to provide to the states TO provide benes to even the 99ers....I could be wrong but thats how I understand it...typical DC speak who the heck really knows, have they spelled it ? probably not if it doesn't fit the muzak, reps evil dems a chicken in every pot.

 

[Full-Auto]

I'd appreciate confirmation of this: You're source?

My source, which I quoted, said:



Currently the jobless benefits for the long term unemployed are 99 weeks

Then they expire.

Renewing them would allow them to last longer than 99 weeks.

However, I conceed that the quote could mean "renewing the 99 week jobless benefits."

The MSNBC aritcle isn't terribly clear on this point.

Go to any states EUC section. EUC is only for 53 weeks, the EB is for just 20 weeks if they qualify. The previous 26 was provided by the state. If someone who was laid off 7 months ago, as of nov 27th they would only be entiltled to an additional 16 weeks, then they are cut off. The extension being discussed is whether this individual will qualify for the additional compensation up to the 53 weeks EUC provides. He would be eligible for an additional 49 weeks. Those that have exhausted thier benefits have exhausted thier benefits, there will be no addtional funds.

mu understanding is however that dems are now in this proposed bill paying for more money to provide to the states TO provide benes to even the 99ers....I could be wrong but thats how I understand it...typical DC speak who the heck really knows, have they spelled it ? probably not if it doesn't fit the muzak, reps evil dems a chicken in every pot.

My god, I hope you are wrong. My understanding is its just an extension of exsisting rules. Which has its phase out clauses. If the government can make thier buddies rich, then 300 a week to people that need it should not be questioned. The government had a great deal to do with this decline, dumping on the people while congreess continues its biillion a year on congressional perks is not acceptable to me.

 

[Trajan]

Go to any states EUC section. EUC is only for 53 weeks, the EB is for just 20 weeks if they qualify. The previous 26 was provided by the state. If someone who was laid off 7 months ago, as of nov 27th they would only be entiltled to an additional 16 weeks, then they are cut off. The extension being discussed is whether this individual will qualify for the additional compensation up to the 53 weeks EUC provides. He would be eligible for an additional 49 weeks. Those that have exhausted thier benefits have exhausted thier benefits, there will be no addtional funds.

mu understanding is however that dems are now in this proposed bill paying for more money to provide to the states TO provide benes to even the 99ers....I could be wrong but thats how I understand it...typical DC speak who the heck really knows, have they spelled it ? probably not if it doesn't fit the muzak, reps evil dems a chicken in every pot.

My god, I hope you are wrong. My understanding is its just an extension of exsisting rules. Which has its phase out clauses. If the government can make thier buddies rich, then 300 a week to people that need it should not be questioned. The government had a great deal to do with this decline, dumping on the people while congreess continues its biillion a year on congressional perks is not acceptable to me.

me too, but we'll see. it would be nice if we could find a clearly detailed explanation.....

 

[Trajan]

ths is out the latest article I could find, I am pretty sure this is what nancy andharry is up to...

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks
By Michael Cohn
July 30, 2010

Lawmakers are mulling the possibility of adding an extra tier of unemployment benefits beyond the four tiers currently available for those who have been out of work for over 99 weeks.

However, the hard-fought battle over extending unemployment benefits that played out earlier this month is leaving some lawmakers exhausted.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., recently told an Elmira, N.Y., TV news outlet, WENY-TV, that Congress was working on a bill that would help those who have exhausted the 99 weeks of benefits during the economic downturn, adding a possible Tier 5 of benefits.

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks



at what point does this end?

 

[Full-Auto]

ths is out the latest article I could find, I am pretty sure this is what nancy andharry is up to...

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks
By Michael Cohn
July 30, 2010

Lawmakers are mulling the possibility of adding an extra tier of unemployment benefits beyond the four tiers currently available for those who have been out of work for over 99 weeks.

However, the hard-fought battle over extending unemployment benefits that played out earlier this month is leaving some lawmakers exhausted.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., recently told an Elmira, N.Y., TV news outlet, WENY-TV, that Congress was working on a bill that would help those who have exhausted the 99 weeks of benefits during the economic downturn, adding a possible Tier 5 of benefits.

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks



at what point does this end?

Thankyou very much for the information. I hadnt been aware of this latest development.

Things would improve if congress would put the budget out there. Make a decision on cuts etc. I dont think it will fly though. I believe this to be nothing other then posturing.

At some point everyone in the country will take a hit. Its just a question at what speed do we crash.

 

[Trajan]

ths is out the latest article I could find, I am pretty sure this is what nancy andharry is up to...

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks
By Michael Cohn
July 30, 2010

Lawmakers are mulling the possibility of adding an extra tier of unemployment benefits beyond the four tiers currently available for those who have been out of work for over 99 weeks.

However, the hard-fought battle over extending unemployment benefits that played out earlier this month is leaving some lawmakers exhausted.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., recently told an Elmira, N.Y., TV news outlet, WENY-TV, that Congress was working on a bill that would help those who have exhausted the 99 weeks of benefits during the economic downturn, adding a possible Tier 5 of benefits.

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks



at what point does this end?

Thankyou very much for the information. I hadnt been aware of this latest development.

Things would improve if congress would put the budget out there. Make a decision on cuts etc. I dont think it will fly though. I believe this to be nothing other then posturing.

At some point everyone in the country will take a hit. Its just a question at what speed do we crash.

well the problem is they have been adding $$ to fed. agencies like no tomorrow, aside from stimulus etc. I am speaking to discretionary spending too, they didn't do a budget back in jan 2010 for next year, 2011, because they could not afford to fight that battle to, they had the obama care war going on, and they knew, if they floated the budget for 2011 that is basically in effect due to ongoing spending bills to just keep the gov. running, there would have been a revolt.

 

[Synthaholic]

No, we just choose to sink or swim together. No government force needed.

Do you split all profits equally? Or do they just share in the downturns?

No we don't split profits equally. However, they never showed up to work and had to bring some of their savings with them just to keep the doors open. I did. Their bonuses are small during bad times and big during good times. Their base compensation is based on the value they bring to the company which is still above comparable jobs in this area.

Ok, that's cool, and you seem like an owner who gets it. There are too many who want to lay off people, then want the rest of the workforce to take on those jobs. Others who call for sacrifice, yet in good times hire more people and cut everyone's hours in order to have part-time help, and the financial advantages that reaps.

And I do believe that wiretapping = more government control. It has a chilling effect. I have a relative overseas, non-military, and I do not feel comfortable talking politics with him any longer, through email or phone convo. How do I discuss U.S. foreign policy without discussing al Qaeda, etc.

 

[The T]

ths is out the latest article I could find, I am pretty sure this is what nancy andharry is up to...

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks
By Michael Cohn
July 30, 2010

Lawmakers are mulling the possibility of adding an extra tier of unemployment benefits beyond the four tiers currently available for those who have been out of work for over 99 weeks.

However, the hard-fought battle over extending unemployment benefits that played out earlier this month is leaving some lawmakers exhausted.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., recently told an Elmira, N.Y., TV news outlet, WENY-TV, that Congress was working on a bill that would help those who have exhausted the 99 weeks of benefits during the economic downturn, adding a possible Tier 5 of benefits.

Congress Ponders Extending Unemployment Benefits Beyond 99 Weeks



at what point does this end?

In a Socialist Utopia? never.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

The democrats hates rich people and small businesses and want to tax the hell out of them.

Dude, I possess enormous wealth and earn millions each year. The increase in my federal income tax rate, if the Bush tax cuts expire, wouldn't even come to close to taxing the hell out of me.

PS: I earn millions each year from municipal bonds, none of which is even subject to the federal income tax.

Not everyone has the millions you have.

With an average return of 4 to 5 percent I think you're full of shit.

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Dude, I possess enormous wealth and earn millions each year. The increase in my federal income tax rate, if the Bush tax cuts expire, wouldn't even come to close to taxing the hell out of me.

PS: I earn millions each year from municipal bonds, none of which is even subject to the federal income tax.

Not everyone has the millions you have.

With an average return of 4 to 5 percent I think you're full of shit.

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

Bullshit.

Below is the 5 highest yielding municipal bond funds in 2010

Mutual Fund SEC Yield

Lord Abbett High Yield Municipal Bond A 7.45%
Oppenheimer AMT-Free Municipals A 6.68%
Nuveen High Yield Municipal A 6.62%
Pioneer High Income Municipal A 6.58%
Waddell & Reed Municipal High Income A 5.90%

Top 5 Highest Yielding Municipal Bond Funds - Zacks.com

In order for you to make millions each year just on munies you would have to have ten of millions in bonds.

To prove me wrong list the munies you hold.

 

[asterism]

Do you split all profits equally? Or do they just share in the downturns?

No we don't split profits equally. However, they never showed up to work and had to bring some of their savings with them just to keep the doors open. I did. Their bonuses are small during bad times and big during good times. Their base compensation is based on the value they bring to the company which is still above comparable jobs in this area.

Ok, that's cool, and you seem like an owner who gets it. There are too many who want to lay off people, then want the rest of the workforce to take on those jobs. Others who call for sacrifice, yet in good times hire more people and cut everyone's hours in order to have part-time help, and the financial advantages that reaps.

And I do believe that wiretapping = more government control. It has a chilling effect. I have a relative overseas, non-military, and I do not feel comfortable talking politics with him any longer, through email or phone convo. How do I discuss U.S. foreign policy without discussing al Qaeda, etc.

If you want to lump "chilling effect" in, then I'll agree with that premise. But then we have to talk about the chilling effect on small businesses during this so-called recovery and then the chilling effect on corporate investments in the wake of the government's actions regarding GM.

 

[asterism]

Dude, I possess enormous wealth and earn millions each year. The increase in my federal income tax rate, if the Bush tax cuts expire, wouldn't even come to close to taxing the hell out of me.

PS: I earn millions each year from municipal bonds, none of which is even subject to the federal income tax.

Not everyone has the millions you have.

With an average return of 4 to 5 percent I think you're full of shit.

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

Why aren't you paying your fair share of taxes?

 

[Synthaholic]

No we don't split profits equally. However, they never showed up to work and had to bring some of their savings with them just to keep the doors open. I did. Their bonuses are small during bad times and big during good times. Their base compensation is based on the value they bring to the company which is still above comparable jobs in this area.

Ok, that's cool, and you seem like an owner who gets it. There are too many who want to lay off people, then want the rest of the workforce to take on those jobs. Others who call for sacrifice, yet in good times hire more people and cut everyone's hours in order to have part-time help, and the financial advantages that reaps.

And I do believe that wiretapping = more government control. It has a chilling effect. I have a relative overseas, non-military, and I do not feel comfortable talking politics with him any longer, through email or phone convo. How do I discuss U.S. foreign policy without discussing al Qaeda, etc.

If you want to lump "chilling effect" in, then I'll agree with that premise. But then we have to talk about the chilling effect on small businesses during this so-called recovery and then the chilling effect on corporate investments in the wake of the government's actions regarding GM.

Last year, the Republicans wanted to be able to deduct 50% of the cost of new equipment, as opposed to the 30-something that Democrats wanted. Last month, President Obama offered to make it 100%, and couldn't get one Republican on board. What does that say about Republicans?

Obama has been extremely pro-business. The record is clear.


From FOXNEWS.com:

Obama to Propose Massive Tax Breaks for Businesses to Invest in Growth


Published September 06, 2010
| The Wall Street Journal

AP
Monday: President Obama gestures as he speaks on the economy at the Milwaukee Laborfest in Milwaukee.




President Obama, in one of his most dramatic gestures to business, will propose that companies be allowed to write off 100 percent of their new investment in plant and equipment through 2011, a plan that White House economists say would cut business taxes by nearly $200 billion over two years.


The proposal, to be laid out Wednesday in a speech in Cleveland, tops a raft of announcements, from a proposed expansion of the research and experimentation tax credit to $50 billion in additional spending on roads, railways and runways. But unlike those two ideas, both familiar from Obama's 2008 campaign, the investment incentive would embrace a long-held wish by conservative economists that had never won support from either Republican or Democratic administrations.


"Temporary investment incentives like this can have big effects because they really pull investment forward," R. Glenn Hubbard, dean of the Columbia University School of Business and a former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. "This could have a big stimulative effect."


But the response Monday from business lobbyists hinted at uncertain political prospects for the idea: Many said a higher priority for their members remains extension of the Bush income-tax rates for higher earners that are set to expire at the end of 2010. Obama and many congressional Democrats want to let those breaks expire.




Read more: Obama to Propose Massive Tax Breaks for Businesses to Invest in Growth - FoxNews.com​

​

Any complaints from the fringe-Right about Obama being anti-business is just outright lies and distortions.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

Not everyone has the millions you have.

With an average return of 4 to 5 percent I think you're full of shit.

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

Bullshit.

Below is the 5 highest yielding municipal bond funds in 2010

Mutual Fund SEC Yield

Lord Abbett High Yield Municipal Bond A 7.45%
Oppenheimer AMT-Free Municipals A 6.68%
Nuveen High Yield Municipal A 6.62%
Pioneer High Income Municipal A 6.58%
Waddell & Reed Municipal High Income A 5.90%

Top 5 Highest Yielding Municipal Bond Funds - Zacks.com

The portfolio in question is not all invested in tax exempt municipal bonds, dude. In fact, municipal bonds are only 10% of the total portfolio.

In order for you to make millions each year just on munies you would have to have ten of millions in bonds.

I have accumulated enormous wealth. I could lose tens of millions and still have more wealth than one person should be allowed to have.

To prove me wrong list the munies you hold.

LOL

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

Not everyone has the millions you have.

With an average return of 4 to 5 percent I think you're full of shit.

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

Why aren't you paying your fair share of taxes?

Because the Republicans believe that the solution to every problem is to cut my income taxes.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

The U. S. is a great nation because it is a socialist utopia, a society with a rational social safety net.

 

[asterism]

The return on the asset portfolio managed by my wealth manager has averaged 11% per year for the last 15 years.

Why aren't you paying your fair share of taxes?

Because the Republicans believe that the solution to every problem is to cut my income taxes.

Ok, so you think we should pay more and you think the federal government is a worthwhile cause to support beyond your current level but you won't do it voluntarily why?