Simple Numbers and Merry Friggin’ Christmas Middle Class from Sen. Kyl

by jhwygirl

A friend of mine told me it was unfair to say “conservatives” when talking about the…well…conservative side. “No one’s in control anymore,” she said. “They’re not ‘the GOP’, they’re not ‘the Tea Party’ and they’re not ‘conservatives’, she said – “I don’t know what they are.”

Realizing I’m not an expert on the GOP, I’m still quite a bit peeved at the hypocrisy of the GOP or whomever, exhibited in Sen. Kyl’s appearances on the Sunday talkies saying that the payroll tax cut (to the middle class) would not be extended, wherein the Bush tax cuts to the top 1 or 2% would remain because they were the job creators and we shouldn’t be increasing their taxes”. If you have the patience, I recommend watching the video, especially where Wallace cuts in there (as if he wants to muddy up Kyl’s comments, but then realizes how crystal clear Kyl was, as in no-turning-back crystal clear) with “If I may, Senator Kyl, just to cut this short, are you saying no deal on extending payroll tax cuts?”

Kyl was proud to say he was all for increasing taxes on the middle class, while the honorable Sen. Dick Durbin patiently explained the impact of a tax increase on the middle class would have on the economy.

On another show Norquist – to whom all Republicans kow, even though Chris Wallace tried to dispel that on his show – went on saying that the payroll tax cut was meant to be temporary, and he spent a bit of time emphasizing how those were only supposed to be temporary.

Obviously, to Norquist, those Bush tax cuts are engraved in marble on the White House and the halls of Congress.

How, exactly are those Bush tax cuts to the top 1 or 2% creating jobs? Where are those jobs? Or are those top 1 or 2% just making money on money and not creating any jobs at all?

Seriously – where all those jobs those Bush tax cuts for the top 1 or 2% are supposedly creating?

There are how many millions of people in the middle class? As opposed to the number of people in that 1 or 2%. Isn’t it simple numbers here? If you’re running a business, do you raise the cost of your product by 10% or do you lay off 90% of your workforce?

Ford raised it’s prices…didn’t take a bailout..and look where it is now.

How Kyl or Norquist can sit there and parrot off “no tax increases” while allowing the payroll taxes to expire (which could be paid for if they really wanted to) – and pretend that increasing taxes on the middle class won’t have a deafening affect on the economy is pure malfeasance.

These guys couldn’t run a coffee shop.

I can agree with a little bit here of what Kyl feigns as his concern: The payroll tax cut is borrowed against social security. I’m still surprised by the many that don’t realize that.

Keeping the tax cuts to the middle class can be paid for, though…

Not to mention the Republican’s loved this payroll tax holiday…until now the’re being asked to pay for it.

How odd we only have to pay for the middle class payroll tax holiday, but for some reason the Bush tax cuts to the top 1 or 2% don’t have to be paid for. I just don’t get the Republican logic (or lack thereof), try as I may. It’s their false reality of the ‘job creators’ that screws them all up, if you ask me. Facts clearly don’t get in their way, I suppose.

It seems to me that the politicos- regardless of where their loyalty label lies – need to use some basic math that they should have learned in high school and figure that the middle class isn’t hoarding their money – they’re spending it creating jobs. They need to look at the numbers of the 1 or 2% affected by the loss of a Bush-era tax break and the 98 or 99% that would lose an extra few grand a year.

Simple numbers.

It’s pretty plain and simple. Bush’s secret is out – his bail out of Wall Street took trillions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer money and not only ‘saved’ Wall Street, it made those fat cats over $13 billion bucks in profit. I won’t begrudge anyone their profit – but that profit was made in a system that rewarded their bad behavior with our – my – tax dollars.

Banks have NOT been made too big to fail, unfortunately, and where banks used to make money on good investments, these guys nowadays are making money on keeping my money and charging me for accessing my money. They aren’t making money by investing in America and creating jobs here in America – they’re making money by investing in countries like China who think nothing of starving their critics and their citizens who dare to speak in support of basic human rights.

America was a better place when we built our own things which established a baseline for decency the world around. A weak middle class is a weak American.

Simple numbers people…simple numbers.

  1. Ingemar Johansson

    Really, the rich stole all the middle classes money?

    The numbers tell another story.

  2. ladybug

    How long can Soc. Security and Medicare payroll contributions be suspended before another bait-and-switch move by Democrats and Republicans puts both on the deficit/debt-reduction chopping block? Oh, I almost forgot, they already are. Be careful what you wish for.

  3. ladybug

    Yes, we can! But will we is the question? I am not seeing the linked strategy. At the moment, the links seem to be confined to arbitrarily-selected tradeoffs between “entitlements” in general, defense, and taxes affecting middle-income, the rich, and the uber-rich. A classic base-vs.-base (union bosses vs. big business), tv-ad-dependent election in 2012 pretty much throws fixed-income seniors, single mothers, working poor and jobless, etc. under the bus. So not looking forward to this one.

  4. You’re overlooking the 800 lb Gorilla in the room jhwygirl – this is Obama’s economy, not the Congress, or President Bush’s.

    He’s had nearly 3 years, and he had complete control of the Govt for the first two years of his term.

    Why has your dem ‘savior’ forsaken us ?

    • JC

      “Complete control?” Hardly. Other than the obvious filibuster for most of his first term, and blue dog dems voting as often republican as dem, there’s a lot of political and administrative largesses left over from both Bush and Clinton.

      Of course, that’s just the politics. If you want to look at who’s had “complete control of the Govt”, look no further than the almighty corporate campaign dollar–the “savior” of the political class.

      And of course, how you can assume that the executive branch has “complete control” over congress and the judiciary is beyond me. Even Bush only had part control–but I guess one supreme court justice in his pocket was enough to get him appointed. And threatening dems in congress with being traitors assisting terrists if they didn’t give him the votes he wanted was pretty controlling, i guess…

      You need to work on your meme some more. It’s still got a lot of holes in it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,675,945 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,737 other followers

  • November 2011
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

%d bloggers like this: