they're not "tax cuts." It's status quo. What the 'rats were proposing was a tax HIKE.As we stated here, tax cuts for the rich are only 3% of the deficit this year.
No, of course they're not tax cuts at this point but a battle over the status quo. I considered putting scare quotes around "tax cuts" in that statement, but I was quoting the original article, and the original article did not have scare quotes around that expression.The fact that the "Bush tax cuts" are the status quo, and all this deal does is maintain the status quo tax rates, implies to me that nothing in this would be expected to improve the economy. It only prevents destruction from being automatically increased.
As we stated here, tax cuts for the rich are only 3% of the deficit this year.
they’re not “tax cuts.” It’s status quo. What the ‘rats were proposing was a tax HIKE.
No, of course they’re not tax cuts at this point but a battle over the status quo. I considered putting scare quotes around “tax cuts” in that statement, but I was quoting the original article, and the original article did not have scare quotes around that expression.
The fact that the “Bush tax cuts” are the status quo, and all this deal does is maintain the status quo tax rates, implies to me that nothing in this would be expected to improve the economy. It only prevents destruction from being automatically increased.
______________________
True. The point of the libradex article is that the tax cuts on the “rich” are a very small % of revenue/deficit, yet Dems continue to lie and say the entire cause of the deficit is these tax cuts.
THey are just full of it. Same thing with war spending: http://libradex.noyveg.com/viewBlogWar.aspx?id=2