Best, short description of the tax cut fiasco...

[Atman]

I read it last night on DU...my apologies to the OP, I can't remember who you are. But I repost it here in the hope that you'll use it anytime one of your GOP friends or family members repeats any of their lame-ass talking points about hurting "small businesses" and "job creators" (read: millionaires and billionaires). Here it is, in one sweet (slightly paraphrased) sentence:

The Republican "compromise" means they give us $30 billion for the needy and the working class if we give them $700 billion for absolutely nothing.

[polichick]

1. That's very succinct, and dead on. nt

[emulatorloo]

2. Pretty much. Worth noting though that the 700B figure covers 10 years of tax cuts for the rich

as I understand it. If the extention is really only for two years, it won't be 700B. (of course that is a really big if)

[TBF]

4. How long do you think the tax cut for billionaires has been going on?

It's not like it just began yesterday.

[emulatorloo]

11. 2003? But that money is gone already. I am talking about the current "deal"

which starts 2011.

Trust me I think this sucks.

Have you seen this . . .interesting, hope something comes of it:

Senate Democrats line up to oppose Obama tax deal
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4646622

[Atman]

8. That such a big "IF" that it's really not worth considering.

The only IF is that IF the GOP actually allows the tax cuts to expire, they'll make sure they expire for EVERYONE, especially those who can least afford it. And of course, they'll blame it on the Democrats.

They know how to play the game. We only know how to capitulate...er, compromise.

[Catherina]

3. Well said. It's 3D Monopoly or something Rec'd n/t

[TBF]

5. More like Russian Roulette. nt

[Fumesucker]

9. With a semi auto..

:(

[Catherina]

14. Even better! n/t

[Poboy]

6. recommend.

Chamberlin.

[me b zola]

7. Yeah, that really stuck with me when I read it

My analogy is not quite as good. The tax cut fiasco is like a burgler robbing you blind but leaves a breath mint on your pillow.

[Winterblues]

10. Why stop at $700 billion, why not say $ 7 trillion

The tax cuts for the wealthy coast about $70 billion a year. This is supposed to be for two years only. No one I know expects it to only last two years, so if it lasts twn years it is $700 billion but if it lasts 100 years it is $7 trillion and the odds of it lasting a hundred years are better than it only lasting two years, IMO

[Atman]

12. Exactly.

The GOP will make them PERMANENT, and when they do they'll be smart enough to add some sort of proviso that repealing or reversing them can't even be brought up in Congress, ever. Did Obama insert any such language into his "compromise?" That the billionaire tax breaks WILL, DEFINITELY expire in two years, but not those of regular Americans? Did he? If so, I missed it. But the GOP will do it. Count on it.

.

[emulatorloo]

13. Honestly, can tax policy be made "Permanent"? If so why aren't we under Eisenhower's rates?

Or Kennedy's or Reagan's or Clinton's?

I get a little hope out of this, but not a whole lot:

Senate Democrats line up to oppose Obama tax deal
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4646622

A non politico source:

Sen. Durbin: Dems could 'walk out' on tax cut deal
By Jordan Fabian - 12/07/10 05:45 AM ET
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/132313-sen-durbin-dems-could-walk-on-tax-cut-deal

[jp11]

15. I think what was meant was the rates wouldn't expire, so they would

be 'permanent' or the 'new' rates until they are changed again. Tax rates for the wealthy have been steadily dropping for decades and this is just the most recent drop we'll probably see made permanent in due time.

Real permanent tax rates I don't think could be implemented as laws can be changed/amended/repealed.