Leahy, Sanders, Welch spurn tax deal

Leahy, Sanders, Welch spurn tax deal

There are 257 comments on the Bennington Banner story from Dec 7, 2010, titled Leahy, Sanders, Welch spurn tax deal. In it, Bennington Banner reports that:

Vermont's congressional delegation rejected a compromise struck between the White House and Republicans as the president hosted a news conference Tuesday to defend the deal that will extend tax cuts to all Americans, including the wealthy.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Bennington Banner.

First Prev
of 13
Next Last

“Proud American and Vermonter”

Since: Feb 09

Bennington

#1 Dec 8, 2010
"There are two fatal flaws to the President’s plan. First, it will put our country in a fiscal straightjacket by adding $900 billion to the national debt, severely limiting our ability to fight for middle class priorities next year. Second, it will empower the Republican leadership to fight every last one of our progressive priorities, arguing that the country can’t afford it," Welch said. "Ironically, the President will be proving them right."

At 113 billion more then the stimulus package the GOP and the Tea Party are OK with this, why. I'm guessing because they get they want, extensions of the tax cuts to the top 1-2%. I didn't take long for the them to go back on what they ran on during the campaign did it.
Bandit

Bennington, VT

#2 Dec 8, 2010
How can anyone that supported the three wingnuts know anything about how we need to help this country. How many of their friends are staying on unemployment? Didn't hear any compliant about that extension. Maybe someone should ask to see the net worth profile of our three friends.
LSU

United States

#3 Dec 8, 2010
Scott05201 wrote:
"There are two fatal flaws to the President’s plan. First, it will put our country in a fiscal straightjacket by adding $900 billion to the national debt, severely limiting our ability to fight for middle class priorities next year. Second, it will empower the Republican leadership to fight every last one of our progressive priorities, arguing that the country can’t afford it," Welch said. "Ironically, the President will be proving them right."
At 113 billion more then the stimulus package the GOP and the Tea Party are OK with this, why. I'm guessing because they get they want, extensions of the tax cuts to the top 1-2%. I didn't take long for the them to go back on what they ran on during the campaign did it.
Scooter, are you taking mom's medication again? You sure drink allot of Cool-Aid boy!
Crazy Bernie

Cranberry Twp, PA

#4 Dec 8, 2010
Scott05201 wrote:
"There are two fatal flaws to the President’s plan. First, it will put our country in a fiscal straightjacket by adding $900 billion to the national debt, severely limiting our ability to fight for middle class priorities next year. Second, it will empower the Republican leadership to fight every last one of our progressive priorities, arguing that the country can’t afford it," Welch said. "Ironically, the President will be proving them right."
At 113 billion more then the stimulus package the GOP and the Tea Party are OK with this, why. I'm guessing because they get they want, extensions of the tax cuts to the top 1-2%. I didn't take long for the them to go back on what they ran on during the campaign did it.
Because unlike the left, the GOP and Tea Party understand economics. Leaving more money in the hands of the productive job creators (those evil rich, probably the same rich that employ most of the readers on this board) will fuel growth and eventually lead to more jobs and more tax revenue. Just like every other time over the past 50 years.

Tax cuts (or in this case no tax increase) vs. stimulus is pretty simple. Would you rather have the money in the hands of the Americans who create jobs or in the hands of bureaucrats trying to decide where to waste, er I mean spend it??? Pretty simple choice!!!

Now if we could cut corporate tax rates and then cut spending by 30% we would be on the right track.

The fact that Bernie, Pat and Pete all oppose this should be enough to let you know that it must be a good idea.
Crazy Bernie

Cranberry Twp, PA

#5 Dec 8, 2010
Scott05201 wrote:
"There are two fatal flaws to the President’s plan. First, it will put our country in a fiscal straightjacket by adding $900 billion to the national debt, severely limiting our ability to fight for middle class priorities next year. Second, it will empower the Republican leadership to fight every last one of our progressive priorities, arguing that the country can’t afford it," Welch said. "Ironically, the President will be proving them right."
At 113 billion more then the stimulus package the GOP and the Tea Party are OK with this, why. I'm guessing because they get they want, extensions of the tax cuts to the top 1-2%. I didn't take long for the them to go back on what they ran on during the campaign did it.
And the fact that Welch would even say "Progressive Priorities" should be enough to get him thrown out of office. Americans don't want "Progressive Priorities", they want job creation through low taxes, hard work and the proper incentives....none of which fit into the "Progressive" plan.
married4eva

Hudson, NY

#6 Dec 8, 2010
Dear Senators Sanders, Leahy and Welch,
Thank you for standing up the middle class. Please stand firm and do not allow the Bush tax cuts, another catch phrase for trickle down economics, to pass. Do whatever it takes to win. These tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not create jobs, as has been proven factually, and will create a $700 to $900 billion increase in the deficit.

Once again, the bullying Republicans and the in-another-world Tea party fanatics, backed by the same millionaires and billionaires who will benefit from this money-grab, have led an absurd, fiscally reckless, irresponsible and morally bankrupt policy like the lies that led up to the war. Stand up! Fight this! I will not bear the burden for rich people in the country’s worst recession of our life times… hell no!
Exactly

Bennington, VT

#7 Dec 8, 2010
married4eva wrote:
Dear Senators Sanders, Leahy and Welch,
Thank you for standing up the middle class. Please stand firm and do not allow the Bush tax cuts, another catch phrase for trickle down economics, to pass. Do whatever it takes to win. These tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires do not create jobs, as has been proven factually, and will create a $700 to $900 billion increase in the deficit.
Once again, the bullying Republicans and the in-another-world Tea party fanatics, backed by the same millionaires and billionaires who will benefit from this money-grab, have led an absurd, fiscally reckless, irresponsible and morally bankrupt policy like the lies that led up to the war. Stand up! Fight this! I will not bear the burden for rich people in the country’s worst recession of our life times… hell no!
Well said.
Vermont Resident

Avon, MA

#8 Dec 8, 2010
Crazy Bernie wrote:
<quoted text>
Because unlike the left, the GOP and Tea Party understand economics. Leaving more money in the hands of the productive job creators (those evil rich, probably the same rich that employ most of the readers on this board) will fuel growth and eventually lead to more jobs and more tax revenue. Just like every other time over the past 50 years.
Tax cuts (or in this case no tax increase) vs. stimulus is pretty simple. Would you rather have the money in the hands of the Americans who create jobs or in the hands of bureaucrats trying to decide where to waste, er I mean spend it??? Pretty simple choice!!!
Now if we could cut corporate tax rates and then cut spending by 30% we would be on the right track.
The fact that Bernie, Pat and Pete all oppose this should be enough to let you know that it must be a good idea.
I beg to differ Crazy Bernie. Leaving more money in the hands of job creators? Where are all the job creators? Oh there they are...creating jobs for people overseas so they can put even more money in their own pockets! The company I work for is no different than the majority of campanies these days. Five years ago we employed about 200 people. The "powers that be" here decided they could make even more money by buying the product overseas. The company now employs about 60 people AND has higher sales than they did five years ago. They have their supervisors on pay cut because they say sales are down. Supervisors believe this because they do not see the product being made overseas. All the while the "powers that be" get pay increases. And these are the people that will benefit most from the tax cuts. You see it every day...corporate welfare.
estanson

Windsor, VT

#9 Dec 8, 2010
married4eva wrote:
Please stand firm and do not allow the Bush tax cuts, another catch phrase for trickle down economics, to pass. Do whatever it takes to win.
yup, the new party of no...
"we compromise, but not about anything we believe in!"

why isnt this proposal the best of both positions? ya know...a good compromise?

extension of what you want, extension for the r's proposal..

its your ideas or nothing making dems the new PARTY OF NO!

Frankly, IMHO we should have ended the tax cuts and the extension!

Also, Dems are out....so said the voters....so in a few months if you do not get what you want, you never will...
in short, this was a good call to get what you could get while you could...

lastly, i am amazed at how close to actual wealth redistribution dems are talking...i honestly thought politicians would be shot if they talked as Dems are this week...
BY ALL AMERICANS,not just the right...
estanson

Windsor, VT

#10 Dec 8, 2010
Vermont Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
Five years ago we employed about 200 people. The "powers that be" here decided they could make even more money by buying the product overseas.
One VERY important question...was it a union shop?
this might account for how labor priced itself out of the market...

either way, the enviromnental regs would do it...
thank those D's good intentions for your loss of jobs...
not the company.
Vermont Resident

Avon, MA

#11 Dec 8, 2010
estanson wrote:
<quoted text>
One VERY important question...was it a union shop?
this might account for how labor priced itself out of the market...
either way, the enviromnental regs would do it...
thank those D's good intentions for your loss of jobs...
not the company.
Not union.
Crazy Bernie

Cranberry Twp, PA

#12 Dec 8, 2010
Vermont Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
I beg to differ Crazy Bernie. Leaving more money in the hands of job creators? Where are all the job creators? Oh there they are...creating jobs for people overseas so they can put even more money in their own pockets! The company I work for is no different than the majority of campanies these days. Five years ago we employed about 200 people. The "powers that be" here decided they could make even more money by buying the product overseas. The company now employs about 60 people AND has higher sales than they did five years ago. They have their supervisors on pay cut because they say sales are down. Supervisors believe this because they do not see the product being made overseas. All the while the "powers that be" get pay increases. And these are the people that will benefit most from the tax cuts. You see it every day...corporate welfare.
So it would be better of the government just took the money and handed it out to the 140 people??? How would that help?? Guess what would happen...the company would have to lay off more of the 60 to pay the higher tax bill. Or in your world the owners should just admit that they have enough and be happy sending the rest to the government....sounds like a fun Utopian (socialist) plan, but that is not how humans operate (certainly not Americans, which is why we are the best....well we were until the left decided to start apologizing for our excellence).

Maybe we should lower the corporate tax rate so companies would keep more of their operations and income here. Some of the other job creators are keeping their money on the sidelines until they figure out when the progressive job killings policies (Obamacare, Cap and Trade, CAFE regulations, food nannies, etc.) will finally end.

Since: Dec 10

Avon, MA

#13 Dec 8, 2010
estanson wrote:
<quoted text>
One VERY important question...was it a union shop?
this might account for how labor priced itself out of the market...
either way, the enviromnental regs would do it...
thank those D's good intentions for your loss of jobs...
not the company.
Not union and not enviromental regs. I see the P&L reports in detail. I know where the money is going. The officers are just greedy. They don't care about American jobs. They sent the American jobs overseas so they could make money for themselves. There needs to be a higher import duty so they will think twice about outsourcing.

Since: Jan 09

Arlington, VT

#14 Dec 8, 2010
Vermont Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
Not union and not enviromental regs. I see the P&L reports in detail. I know where the money is going. The officers are just greedy. They don't care about American jobs. They sent the American jobs overseas so they could make money for themselves. There needs to be a higher import duty so they will think twice about outsourcing.
Jobs overseas As you have a New York address And ours is Vermont if we are being honest we support this policy. Remember Clinton signed NAFTA on December 8 1993 which our states must love as we only elected Democrats to keep up this kind of good work.
estanson

Windsor, VT

#15 Dec 8, 2010
Vermont Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
They sent the American jobs overseas so they could make money for themselves. There needs to be a higher import duty so they will think twice about outsourcing.
please explain how sending the work abroad saved money except that labor costs here are too high?

and how about instead of taxing outside companies to compete...we just COMPETE!

Maybe labor valued its time more than the company?
Is this skilled labor?
Free is free

Albuquerque, NM

#16 Dec 8, 2010
I love the mindset. It's like "their" money is being taken from them. Here's a lesson, fellas:

You're going to be given less. That's because we don't trust you to spend *our* money wisely.

I'd suggest that you start thinking of ways to cut spending, so you don't exhaust what you're given in 9 months and have to resort to printing money we don't really have.

“Proud American and Vermonter”

Since: Feb 09

Bennington

#17 Dec 8, 2010
Crazy Bernie wrote:
<quoted text>
Because unlike the left, the GOP and Tea Party understand economics. Leaving more money in the hands of the productive job creators (those evil rich, probably the same rich that employ most of the readers on this board) will fuel growth and eventually lead to more jobs and more tax revenue. Just like every other time over the past 50 years.
Tax cuts (or in this case no tax increase) vs. stimulus is pretty simple. Would you rather have the money in the hands of the Americans who create jobs or in the hands of bureaucrats trying to decide where to waste, er I mean spend it??? Pretty simple choice!!!
Now if we could cut corporate tax rates and then cut spending by 30% we would be on the right track.
The fact that Bernie, Pat and Pete all oppose this should be enough to let you know that it must be a good idea.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/r...
Iknowhim

United States

#18 Dec 8, 2010
Scott05201 wrote:
Listen to Scooter, he lives at home with his mother in her house and works at Walmart as a greeter! He's so smart........

“Proud American and Vermonter”

Since: Feb 09

Bennington

#19 Dec 8, 2010
Iknowhim wrote:
<quoted text>Listen to Scooter, he lives at home with his mother in her house and works at Walmart as a greeter! He's so smart........
Did you watch the video? If you did prove her wrong if you can that is.
House of Alex

Santa Clara, CA

#20 Dec 9, 2010
Vermont Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
Not union and not enviromental regs. I see the P&L reports in detail. I know where the money is going. The officers are just greedy. They don't care about American jobs. They sent the American jobs overseas so they could make money for themselves. There needs to be a higher import duty so they will think twice about outsourcing.
Ummmm, let me get this straight, when top execs find ways of creating a larger profit
margin it's called GREED, but when a 12 IQ floor sweeping union employee is being paid
$35 an hour that's called an honest days work.... Very interesting, NOT......

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 13
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bennington Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll What type of town is Bennington (Sep '13) Tue Elmer 331
News Frustrated (Nov '13) May 22 the real Elmer 143
21 Countries May 22 the real Elmer 47
News Transfer station redesign could be included in ... May 20 TellTHE Truth 1
News Route 9 closed after tractor-trailer accident (Nov '08) May 20 Markey Fife 275
News Wal-Mart opening slated for late summer Apr '16 Elmer 18
News Doctors learn ways to prevent tooth decay at 'F... Apr '16 markey fife 10
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Bennington Mortgages