Republicans value the rich more than jobless Americans

[deepatrax]

but not to extend jobless benefits for tens of millions of Americans.

I don't understand this argument...

Liberals say we can't afford to extend the tax cuts to all Americans and that taxes must go up for the "rich"...because if they're extended, they won't be paid for.

And yet, they're trying to pass an unemployment extension without paying for it...why?

I know it's politics and hypocrisy...and it's done by both sides.

I agreed with the last extension, but at some point, you have to turn off the spigot.

I saw a report showing how long Unemployment benefits lasted and when people got jobs. It was interesting that no matter if Unemployment was extended or it was cut off, right about the time it was to stop, many people actually magically found jobs!

At some point, you have to stop giving a man a fish every time he's hungry...and just give him a fishing pole and some bait.

 

[fuelair]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101118/pl_nm/us_usa_congress_jobs

Hmm..it appears that the GOP is willing to increase the deficit, by insisting on tax cuts for the rich, but refuses to increase the deficit by extending unemployment benefits for millions of lower and middle-class Americans.

How's this work again?

There has never, ever, in sixty plus years been a time that Republicker leaders had any concern for the non-wealthy. This is not news, it is just obvious truth. Which a large number of both hard working and not-working due to joblessness religious oriented conservatives cannot handle acknowledging so they pretend to themselves that it isn't really true. Their ignorant fears of being forced into gay marriages or into aborting their own unborn cause them to cling to republickers like a big conservative security blanket, though that blanket has no feeling for them, just naked desire to use them and their social insecurities .

 

[thaiboxerken]

People work, and they pay into unemployment insurance....But Republicans don't think those people deserve the payout when they lose their jobs.

That says it all there.

It's not about the economy. It's not about fairness. It's about protecting the wealthy from paying taxes.

 

[novice skeptic]

People work, and they pay into unemployment insurance....But Republicans don't think those people deserve the payout when they lose their jobs.

That says it all there.

It's not about the economy. It's not about fairness. It's about protecting the wealthy from paying taxes.

Cite?

I'd love to see a quote from a Republican that says someone who loses their job should receive nothing, ever.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Cite?

They just voted down unemployment extensions.

 

[Thunder]

I don't understand this argument...

Liberals say we can't afford to extend the tax cuts to all Americans and that taxes must go up for the "rich"...because if they're extended, they won't be paid for.

Liberals aren't saying this. YOU are.

 

[Random]

I think you're missing my point...

I agree that the richer you are, the more you could afford to pay, and in fact, in our system, you DO pay more already.

My argument is that the Democrats are describing EVERYONE who makes over 250k as "rich"...and in the same breath, they claim they are "Millionaires and Billionaires."

they are wrong on both counts...and that is why they will have to compromise here.

If they started the debate with "if you make over $1 million a year", then they may have a point...but they didn't and now they WILL be forced to compromise. book it.

$250k in income puts you in the top 2% of wage earners. If that not rich, what is it? It's certainly not middle class.

 

[rwguinn]

$250k in income puts you in the top 2% of wage earners. If that not rich, what is it? It's certainly not middle class.

250,000 < 1,000,000<<1,000,000,000.
Math is not your strong subject, is it?

 

[Random]

250,000 < 1,000,000<<1,000,000,000.
Math is not your strong subject, is it?

Are we discussing income or wealth? $250k is not a middle-class salary, and a few years of making money at those wages should put you well on the way to millionaire status.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Republicans value the rich more than jobless Americans

The Democrats, on the other hand, seem to really love jobless Americans; as they have been doing everything in their power to create more of them, and to help them become as comfortable and secure as possible in their jobless, unproductive state.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101118/pl_nm/us_usa_congress_jobs

Hmm..it appears that the GOP is willing to increase the deficit, by insisting on tax cuts for the rich, but refuses to increase the deficit by extending unemployment benefits for millions of lower and middle-class Americans.

How's this work again?

I would have to say that the Republican position is that rather than continuing to pursue policies that drag the the economy down and put more and more people out of work, and then spending even more money on supporting those that have thus been put out of work; government should instead be pursuing policies that promote the growth of business and industry so that more jobs will be created, so that there will be fewer people who need government handouts to survive.

Ultimately, it gets down to the sharpest, most defining difference between the two parties. The Democratic party is about making people dependent on government. Those who depend on government handouts for their survival can be counted on to vote for the party that supports extending these handouts.

The Republican party, on the other hand, stands for self-sufficiency; for creating opportunities for people to support themselves, so that they don't need government handouts.

 

[eeyore1954]

Originally Posted by thaiboxerken

People work, and they pay into unemployment insurance....But Republicans don't think those people deserve the payout when they lose their jobs.

reply from novice skeptic

Cite?

I'd love to see a quote from a Republican that says someone who loses their job should receive nothing, ever.

They just voted down unemployment extensions.

Voting down an extension is not the same as saying someone doesn't deserve a payout when they lose thier jobs. They have received a payout for a long time. Do you know how long unemployment insurance is supposed to cover?

Also I cannot say for all states but in general the employer pays the unemployment insurance not the employee.
Although it is probably correct to say any amounts paid on your behalf as an employee are really part of your total compensation package.

 

[eeyore1954]

Some thought on unemployment.
Years ago you used to have to verify you had looked for work and go the Unemployment office and usually take close to a day worth of your time in order to get your benefits. Now I think you can just get direct deposit.

I wonder how many people on unemployment are working off the books while they receive the benefits.

I would like to see some sort of work program for people on unemployment after a certain period.

 

[Magyar]

I refer you back to #1

1) Democrats define "rich" as individuals making $200K and couples making $250K...sorry, but that ain't rich.

Just out of curiosity WHAT would you consider rich????

The median income for a COUPLE in this country is $70K! That's TWO people working full time making and 50% of couples make LESS than that!

If according to you, this guy making THREE times (ok I rounded) that amount is not rich.

Just what does it take? I suspect that the compass is whack


http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...2008_3YR_G00_S1901&-ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_

 

[novice skeptic]

They just voted down unemployment extensions.

Ah so you were being hyperbolic and lying about what the Republicans believe and did because saying, "Republicans believe that people who lose their jobs shouldn't then have a lifetime of tax payer funded early retirement, no strings attached" isn't quite as rhetorically powerful as saying, "Republicans think people who lose their job don't deserve anything".

 

[deepatrax]

Just out of curiosity WHAT would you consider rich????

The median income for a COUPLE in this country is $70K! That's TWO people working full time making and 50% of couples make LESS than that!

If according to you, this guy making THREE times (ok I rounded) that amount is not rich.

Just what does it take? I suspect that the compass is whack


http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...2008_3YR_G00_S1901&-ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_

just quick thoughts on this...

250k = doing well

Rich to me means you could actually quit your job and live a very good life.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Ah so you were being hyperbolic and lying about what the Republicans believe and did because saying, "Republicans believe that people who lose their jobs shouldn't then have a lifetime of tax payer funded early retirement, no strings attached" isn't quite as rhetorically powerful as saying, "Republicans think people who lose their job don't deserve anything".

And they want to cut taxes for the wealthy. Stop they claim to be fiscally responsible for voting down unemployment benefits while wanting to sink the nation further into debt with a tax give-away to hhe wealthy.

 

[deepatrax]

And they want to cut taxes for the wealthy. Stop they claim to be fiscally responsible for voting down unemployment benefits while wanting to sink the nation further into debt with a tax give-away to hhe wealthy.

quit making up things...

taxes aren't going to be cut for anyone.

They will either stay the same...or go up.

 

[novice skeptic]

And they want to cut taxes for the wealthy. Stop they claim to be fiscally responsible for voting down unemployment benefits while wanting to sink the nation further into debt with a tax give-away to hhe wealthy.

No, no, no. One argument at a time. Do you now admit that when you said that Republicans don't want to give anything to people who lose their jobs that you were either a) wrong or b) lying? Let's clear that up, and then we can move on to your other errors in logic and facts.

 

[Thunder]

Extending unemployment for the middle class will continue the pumping of billions of dollars into the economy.

Extending tax cuts for the wealthy, will also continue putting money into the economy.

So, oh why, do the GOPers not support extending unemployment?

 

[novice skeptic]

Extending unemployment for the middle class will continue the pumping of billions of dollars into the economy.

Extending tax cuts for the wealthy, will also continue putting money into the economy.

So, oh why, do the GOPers not support extending unemployment?

Well first you haven't proven either claim, but let's let that slide. Here's the difference (assuming that your contentions are true):

Example 1 pumps money into the economy by taking money out of the pockets out of other people.

Example 2 pumps money into the economy without taking money out of the pockets of other people.


Seems like a pretty clear distinction to me.