Bush Tax Cuts here to stay

• Writerbuckeye

  

  I don't think it's a stretch to say that most folks who got themselves into trouble with the housing crash probably fell into one of two groups: (1) either they "qualified" for a loan they should never have been approved to receive, because Congress was trying to create social policy with an economic situation; or (2) they stretched themselves to the limit to get into a better house or neighborhood, leaving themselves vulnerable if the economy went sour.
  
  It's also not a stretch to say that most Americans are not smart with their money. They don't tend to save enough or be prepared in case things really go bad. Too many live basically paycheck to paycheck, and they do it because they like being consumers rather than savers.
  
  Now, does everyone fall into this category? Nope. There are folks who did everything right and still lost it all because of the housing crash and the economy tumbling. But I'd venture to say this doesn't represent the majority of folks who found themselves struggling. My point here isn't to point fingers and blame folks for what happened to them, so much as to indict the way of life most of us have chosen.
  
  If you took a poll of everyone here and we were all honest, I bet you'd find most of us fall into one of these same categories, where we live to the limit of our means, don't save enough, and are totally unprepared for a sudden economic disaster.
• tk421

  

  Writerbuckeye;593499 wrote:I don't think it's a stretch to say that most folks who got themselves into trouble with the housing crash probably fell into one of two groups: (1) either they "qualified" for a loan they should never have been approved to receive, because Congress was trying to create social policy with an economic situation; or (2) they stretched themselves to the limit to get into a better house or neighborhood, leaving themselves vulnerable if the economy went sour.
  
  It's also not a stretch to say that most Americans are not smart with their money. They don't tend to save enough or be prepared in case things really go bad. Too many live basically paycheck to paycheck, and they do it because they like being consumers rather than savers.
  
  Now, does everyone fall into this category? Nope. There are folks who did everything right and still lost it all because of the housing crash and the economy tumbling. But I'd venture to say this doesn't represent the majority of folks who found themselves struggling. My point here isn't to point fingers and blame folks for what happened to them, so much as to indict the way of life most of us have chosen.
  
  If you took a poll of everyone here and we were all honest, I bet you'd find most of us fall into one of these same categories, where we live to the limit of our means, don't save enough, and are totally unprepared for a sudden economic disaster.

  
  It's a double edged sword, though. We have the majority of people who don't save and are unprepared for any kind of financial struggles, balanced against the economy of this country. What would happen to our consumer economy if the majority of Americans started saving a significant balance of their paychecks? We'd be in worse shape then we are now. It's fine for people to save and I recommend it, but it's also a little hypocritcal of anyone in government to tell the American people that they need to start saving when spending is what our economy is based on.
• believer

  

  tk421;593565 wrote:It's a double edged sword, though. We have the majority of people who don't save and are unprepared for any kind of financial struggles, balanced against the economy of this country. What would happen to our consumer economy if the majority of Americans started saving a significant balance of their paychecks? We'd be in worse shape then we are now. It's fine for people to save and I recommend it, but it's also a little hypocritical of anyone in government to tell the American people that they need to start saving when spending is what our economy is based on.

  Writer has some valid points and so do you.
  
  Let's face it....our semi-free market system is strongly tied to easy credit and massive consumerism based on buy now and pay later...hopefully.
  
  One of the topics the "experts" are pontificating about right now is the need for consumers to start spending again in order for the economy to rebound and unemployment to ease. In other words they WANT people to pull out their checkbooks and their credit cards.
  
  This, of course, leads to living from paycheck to paycheck.
  
  Like it or not we as a society have all collectively agreed to build our economic system on this paycheck to paycheck mentality. And you're right...even our government operates this way....or WORSE! The Feds have no right to lecture the American people on how to handle their pocketbooks.
  
  So if this is what we've all decided to do, then we are doomed to these periodic moments of drastic economic meltdowns, bailout's, and massive public assistance (unemployment extensions, welfare, food stamps, etc.) when the bubbles burst. The Feds, Wall Street, and the banking system benefit from the paycheck to paycheck mentality when times are good, but if that's what we want then these entities also need to be prepared to fill in the gaps during the downturns.
  
  The post WWII generations have been born and raised on rampant "buy now" consumerism.
  
  It will take generations to develop a new American mindset of thrift and savings that this country hasn't seen since the Depression-era generation passed on. Quite frankly I think it's way too late for that.
• gut

  It's true that the economy is geared to a certain level of spending, but it wasn't always that way. As consumers demanded more and started saving less, companies ramped up capacity to meet demand. Once you do that, you usually need the sales to be there to pay for the investment. Companies are levered just like consumers.
  
  There will be an adjustment period. Savings was good for decades and the economy did just fine. Don't know the exact number off the top of my head, but globally in other developed economies the savings rate is probably closer to 6%, and we were probably around that at one time. But before the recession savings rates went NEGATIVE!!! Now that is partially skewed with the housing boom and it actually made sense at low interest rates to convert rent into a mortgage payment, it's a deferred form of savings. Problem was two-fold: many people stretched too far on their payment and then you have people who had sizeable [paper] equity gains refinancing and then spending the cash foolishly.
• fan_from_texas

  gut;592072 wrote:1) Not my responsibility and no one has asked. If a friend was down on their luck and asked for help I would most likely say yes.
  
  2) It takes money to raise a family. If a family takes in $30k annually they probably can't afford to have 5 kids.
  
  Don't get me started on housing. Most people way over-extended. Your post does nothing more than to drive home my point that Americans not only live beyond their means but think they are entitled to. There is no perfect solution for everyone. Such safety nets are good programs but there shouldn't be need for more than a year of unemployment benefits. It really is not my responsibility as a taxpayer to fund your poor choices into perpetuity, and again that 95% of Americans save irresponsbily it does go back to the fact that just like the person who bought too much house or the McD's worker with 5 kids, many of these people don't have the financial resources because they live beyond their means.
  
  I empathize for someone like Believer but as I said 95% or more of people in financial difficulty can point squarely at poor decisions living beyond their means.

  
  Excellent post. Gut has been on a roll lately.
• tk421

  

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tax_cuts
  
  Not so fast on the Bush tax cut compromise. It looks like not all is well in Democrat land at the moment. House Dems voted today to refuse to pass Obama's deal unless it was significantly changed.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  tk421;593992 wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tax_cuts
  
  Not so fast on the Bush tax cut compromise. It looks like not all is well in Democrat land at the moment. House Dems voted today to refuse to pass Obama's deal unless it was significantly changed.

  
  Jesus F'ing Christ.
  There is no way the President could get a better deal. The policy option of just work them harder and they will cave will not work as R's can simply say the D's did not work with us to make and American taxes went up. Plus, unemployment insurance would end for people as a result.
  The liberal base of the D's is being so stupid right now.
• BoatShoes

  tk421;593992 wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tax_cuts
  
  Not so fast on the Bush tax cut compromise. It looks like not all is well in Democrat land at the moment. House Dems voted today to refuse to pass Obama's deal unless it was significantly changed.

  
  Unbelievable. The first time any modern democrats in congress attempt to show any type of balls is when they have 8 days left before they get thrown out on their asses. If Jim Demint doesn't like it then it's a good thing. So frustrating.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  And the light is turning on...
• Belly35

  

  ptown_trojans_1;594046 wrote:Jesus F'ing Christ.
  There is no way the President could get a better deal. The policy option of just work them harder and they will cave will not work as R's can simply say the D's did not work with us to make and American taxes went up. Plus, unemployment insurance would end for people as a result.
  The liberal base of the D's is being so stupid right now.

  
  "The liberal base of the D's is being so stupid right now" .... Liberals are alway stupid they just don't know it
• BGFalcons82

  

  ptown_trojans_1;594046 wrote:Jesus F'ing Christ.
  There is no way the President could get a better deal. The policy option of just work them harder and they will cave will not work as R's can simply say the D's did not work with us to make and American taxes went up. Plus, unemployment insurance would end for people as a result.
  The liberal base of the D's is being so stupid right now.

  
  This is the first time in this presidency, that there is a visible divide between Obama and the liberal Left wing. Yes, there have been skirmishes over Don't Ask Don't Tell, Gay Marriage, and Gitmo, but this is the Left's bread and butter...Class Warfare on the evil scum rotten satanic infidel rich and their leader isn't playing along with it for the very first time. It's very interesting to watch how it's playing out as Obama is using "Pass this or else will have a double dip recession" much in the same way he sold his "stimulus" package by saying, "If we don't pass this, unemployment will go over 8%." He's trying to act like a pragmatist and it's kinda fun to watch the reactions.
  
  Having lived through GWB saying he was a conservative and govern like a liberal, I know how they feel....betrayed. Carry on, Wiener, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, et al.
• Belly35

  

  Obama under the bus…………….
  
  In the past two years Obama has thrown many Democrat under the bus to protect his ass. past mid term election many supporter of Obama are now out of office and many of the few remaining are angry of the Obama Administration.
  
  Is the refusal to support Obama now to the Bush Tax Cuts and Unemployment that he and the GOP have agreed…. retaliation? Are they throwing Obama under the bus now?
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Was reading through some Yappi stuff this morning, and came across this. IF this is true, the democrats must gain better control of themselves.
  
  Profanity, Anger Spill Over in House Democratic Caucus Meeting : Roll Call
  
  There is one thing about the article that I appreciated:
  

  
  Berkley is one of the few Democrats publicly supporting the package. While she said it wasn’t necessarily how she would have written it, the bill should go forward in her estimation because it is “chock full” of tax cuts that will help the working class in her state.
  “I’m not willing to play Russian roulette to see who blinks first,” Berkley said.

  
  Seems like she's got some sense about herself!
• Ty Webb

  

  http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/10/breaking-clinton-supports-tax-deal/
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Bernie Sanders just made an complete fool of himself with an 8 hour filibuster.
  Get the deal done so the Senate can move on to the other big thing.....the New START Treaty.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  What the heck up was with the Obama/Clinton press conference today? Did Obama just hand the Presidency off? (BTW, Gibby - the real Gibby's reaction was hilarious).
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Obama was being upstaged and he wasn't going to stand there and take it.
  
  His ego wouldn't let him.
  
  So he left.
  
  This is the most thin skinned, egotistical ego maniacal president in my lifetime -- and perhaps in our history.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Writerbuckeye;595880 wrote:Obama was being upstaged and he wasn't going to stand there and take it.
  
  His ego wouldn't let him.
  
  So he left.
  
  This is the most thin skinned, egotistical ego maniacal president in my lifetime -- and perhaps in our history.

  
  I don't think ego has much to do with it, he's just unqualified and can't handle the position. That was truly bizarre, the entire event - I've heard folks praise Clinton stepping up, but from the clips I saw he just rambled. He took some hard questions but his comments about banks/lending made no sense whatsoever.
  
  God help this country.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  What you've written and what I wrote are not in conflict -- at all.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Writerbuckeye;595888 wrote:What you've written and what I wrote are not in conflict -- at all.

  
  Yeah, I'm trying to keep an open mind but who the hell voted for this guy? Admittedly McCain/Palin wasn't an overly attractive option but we're falling into an international laughingstock.
• believer

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;595884 wrote:I don't think ego has much to do with it, he's just unqualified and can't handle the position. That was truly bizarre, the entire event - I've heard folks praise Clinton stepping up, but from the clips I saw he just rambled. He took some hard questions but his comments about banks/lending made no sense whatsoever.
  
  God help this country.

  If everyone can recall the political board banter back in the summer of 2008, many of us were discussing BHO's lack of experience. Remember the "what the hell is a community organizer and how does this qualify this man for POTUS" talk?
  
  Several of the Obama supporters who were gleefully lapping up the media-driven kool-aid on this guy were lambasting us for having the audacity of not embracing the "hope & change" mantra...that we were all just haters who got our marching orders from Limbaugh and who didn't like the fact that BHO was a black man with a "new vision" for this country.
  
  Look at him now. He's getting a lot thinner, his hair is turning increasingly gray, and he's deferring to Slick Willie to keep his own party in line.
  
  Obama is in way over his head....just as we had predicted.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  I think I joined the political boards in '08 and Believer - that's exactly the talk that was going on!
  
  If somebody didn't like BHO, it was because of "blah blah blah" and not for any of the rational reasons that were given. The name calling is still going on today as we have seen.
  I wish Obama supporters would step up to the plate and tell us exactly WHY we should vote for him or why we should have voted for him, instead of the juvenile name calling that we get.
  
  I don't agree with Boat Shoes or Pants or Ptown sometimes, but at least they give well thought out answers as to why they're supportive of the President, rather than the usual noise. Cbus would be included in that list as well. He doesn't just call everybody bigoted racists. He gives, or rather has given, his reasons why he voted for BO.
  Others... not at all.
• believer

  

  CenterBHSFan;596044 wrote:I think I joined the political boards in '08 and Believer - that's exactly the talk that was going on!

  Uh yah...good catch!
• Belly35

  

  WTF.... have the politician learned nothing from the mid term election. ......... Loaded with addition deals and spending......... Everyone on both parties that are in Congress and Senate need to be brow beaten by the citizens and reminded of their obligation to the citizen and that they are just Public Servants.
  
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/11/tax-cut-loaded-deals-lobbyists-lawmakers/
  
  My new Public Servant (have to earn the title of Congressman) and I have already spoken and I can tell you he will not be seeing the last of Belly....
• BGFalcons82

  

  The more I think about the Bush Tax Cut Extension Act, the more I wish they'd just fail altogether. This Congress was fired last month and when compelled to actually get something done where they both have to work together, they fail. Totally emblematic of this Cogressional version...utter failure. I'm not worried about the tax rates being extended for all because on January 3 the new Congress will indeed get it done, albeit retroactively. I find it both black-humor style funny and sad all at the same time to watch them try one last time to get every morsel, kickback, earmark, payoff, and entitlement-society check for their benefactors back home. This shit has got to stop and we'll be measuring the next Congress on how they git r dun.