Pelosi wants more tax rebates

JaJae · 07-16-2008, 07:03 AM

Nancy Pelosi wants to be responsible for getting us new stimulus checks. Can you tell it's an election year?

``We will be proceeding with another stimulus package, and we once again hope we will work in a bipartisan way,'' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said after House Democratic leaders met with a group of economists to discuss the spreading housing crisis and rising gas prices.

Pelosi and other House Democrats said that in addition to more rebates a second stimulus package would probably include additional spending for roads and other infrastructure, expanded unemployment benefits, home-heating assistance for low-income families and aid for states struggling with budget deficits.

Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

So basically they want to mail out new stimulus checks, however, this time they want to include billions in spending as well. I don't so much mind the government giving us some of our money back to put into the economy. She doesn't mention just how much extra spending she would like to include, but following her "most transparent and most ethical congress in history" standard we can presume there will be billions added in spending as well as billions added in earmarks.

I don't understand what's so difficult about the concept of lowering taxes AND lowering spending. The two should go hand in hand. Yet for people like Pelosi it's simply an idea she can't fathom.

lew · 07-16-2008, 09:24 AM

Why can't people in Washington understand that cutting taxes and increasing spending is one of the major reasons we are in the mess we are in today?

How about lowering spending AND lowering taxes?

7960 · 07-16-2008, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by lew

Why can't people in Washington understand that cutting taxes and increasing spending is one of the major reasons we are in the mess we are in today?

How about lowering spending AND lowering taxes?

they understand it, they just don't care.

it's an election year. it's time to do whatever it takes to get elected. THAT'S what they care about.

Ardentfrost · 07-16-2008, 09:37 AM

I'm all about more of my money back, but it doesn't really mean shit unless they cut back spending. We'll either have to make it up later or our dollar will devalue by that amount.

thewise1 · 07-16-2008, 10:47 AM

Lots of truth to this vid:

JibJab - Funny eCards, Birthday Cards, and More at JibJab

Donkey® · 07-17-2008, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Nancy Pelosi wants to be responsible for getting us new stimulus checks. Can you tell it's an election year?

Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

So basically they want to mail out new stimulus checks, however, this time they want to include billions in spending as well. I don't so much mind the government giving us some of our money back to put into the economy. She doesn't mention just how much extra spending she would like to include, but following her "most transparent and most ethical congress in history" standard we can presume there will be billions added in spending as well as billions added in earmarks.

I don't understand what's so difficult about the concept of lowering taxes AND lowering spending. The two should go hand in hand. Yet for people like Pelosi it's simply an idea she can't fathom.

"People like Pelosi" huh? Last I checked, the 1st round of stimulus checks didn't mean an end to the blatant overspending by the Republicans from what I saw.

7960 · 07-17-2008, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by thewise1

Lots of truth to this vid:

JibJab - Funny eCards, Birthday Cards, and More at JibJab

video makes me sad

"NAOUGHW!" made me laugh

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

"People like Pelosi" huh? Last I checked, the 1st round of stimulus checks didn't mean an end to the blatant overspending by the Republicans from what I saw.

First round of stimulus checks were handled with a Democratic Congress controlling most of the spending. I do recall Bush attempting to veto a bill this week and having it overturned. In any event, you'd be hard pressed to find a Republican or libertarian on this forum who isn't critical of overspending by both parties, Republican and Democrats alike. So this is a straw man argument. I don't think the Republicans should overspend and I don't think the Democrats should overspend.

However, I do believe that if you're proposing a significan tax reduction to impact our economy or handing out money such as stimuls checks to impact our economy it should be coupled with decreased spending... or at the very least equal spending. But proposing tax relief for everyone and significantly increased spending is a completely niave idea. If Bush or a Republican were proposing it I would be saying the same thing. But it's not one of them, it's Pelosi so she is going to be criticized and she deserves it. I really can't come up with a defense of looking to hand out money again just before an election AND increased spending to target the lower class (popular Democratic voting base). It's an economy damaging political move and nothing else.

Donkey® · 07-17-2008, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

First round of stimulus checks were handled with a Democratic Congress controlling most of the spending. I do recall Bush attempting to veto a bill this week and having it overturned. In any event, you'd be hard pressed to find a Republican or libertarian on this forum who isn't critical of overspending by both parties, Republican and Democrats alike. So this is a straw man argument. I don't think the Republicans should overspend and I don't think the Democrats should overspend.

However, I do believe that if you're proposing a significan tax reduction to impact our economy or handing out money such as stimuls checks to impact our economy it should be coupled with decreased spending... or at the very least equal spending. But proposing tax relief for everyone and significantly increased spending is a completely niave idea. If Bush or a Republican were proposing it I would be saying the same thing. But it's not one of them, it's Pelosi so she is going to be criticized and she deserves it. I really can't come up with a defense of looking to hand out money again just before an election AND increased spending to target the lower class (popular Democratic voting base). It's an economy damaging political move and nothing else.

That's great and all...but I didn't see the title of this thread as "Congress wants more tax cuts but won't cut spending" It singled out a particular person....which seems ridiculous to me.

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

That's great and all...but I didn't see the title of this thread as "Congress wants more tax cuts but won't cut spending" It singled out a particular person....which seems ridiculous to me.

Because she is the spokesperson for this. It was Pelosi and some other House Democrats who aren't even named, nor is the number of Democrats. It's Pelosi's idea, she is the speaker for it and she is the ringleader of the group. She also has been known to take issues and present them to the media as having full Democratic support when in reality it's just her and a few other people making a stand and speaking for all Democrats. So until there's evidence that it's "Congress" and not just Pelosi and a few of her friends (as it usually is when she's the spokesperson and no other person is named) I'm going to put the blame on her. She's taking responsibility for the proposal so she's going to get the blame.

Donkey® · 07-17-2008, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Because she is the spokesperson for this. It was Pelosi and some other House Democrats who aren't even named, nor is the number of Democrats. It's Pelosi's idea, she is the speaker for it and she is the ringleader of the group. She also has been known to take issues and present them to the media as having full Democratic support when in reality it's just her and a few other people making a stand and speaking for all Democrats. So until there's evidence that it's "Congress" and not just Pelosi and a few of her friends (as it usually is when she's the spokesperson and no other person is named) I'm going to put the blame on her. She's taking responsibility for the proposal so she's going to get the blame.

Yes, but Pelosi and a few of her friends have no control over spending by themselves, correct?

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Yes, but Pelosi and a few of her friends have no control over spending by themselves, correct?

Not necessarily, which again is all the more reason to criticize her for HER proposals that aren't economically sound. If it were the entire Congress I'd have no problem criticizing all of them. But right now the spokesperson for the proposal and the only name released to support and promote it is... Pelosi. Until that changes, she and the people who apparently support her on this gets full blame. Hence the comments.. "Pelosi" and "People like Pelosi."

On a side note, I'm not too sure what point you're making in this thread? Are you just upset that Pelosi is being criticized? Do you have an opinion to bring to the thread?

Donkey® · 07-17-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Not necessarily, which again is all the more reason to criticize her for HER proposals that aren't economically sound. If it were the entire Congress I'd have no problem criticizing all of them. But right now the spokesperson for the proposal and the only name released to support and promote it is... Pelosi. Until that changes, she and the people who apparently support her on this gets full blame. Hence the comments.. "Pelosi" and "People like Pelosi."

On a side note, I'm not too sure what point you're making in this thread? Are you just upset that Pelosi is being criticized? Do you have an opinion to bring to the thread?

The point is and has been that you've narrowed your sights to a singular target when that singular target really isn't in control of anything in this situation. Mainly because this is another person you dislike. Pelosi is NOT the only one who wants more tax rebates. Period.

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

The point is and has been that you've narrowed your sights to a singular target when that singular target really isn't in control of anything in this situation. Mainly because this is another person you dislike. Pelosi is NOT the only one who wants more tax rebates. Period.

Another straw man. As I said in the first post, I don't necessarily have a problem with tax rebates. What I do have a problem with is tax rebates AND increased spending being in the same bill! That's absurd. And until I have another name to attach to this the spokesperson and inventor of this idea gets the blame. As soon as I have more factual evidence to throw around I'll include those people on my hit list. Until then the only people I can blame are Pelosi directly and the people who support her on this.

Boerg · 07-17-2008, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Yes, but Pelosi and a few of her friends have no control over spending by themselves, correct?

I think it's noteworthy that Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and therefore one of the more powerful people in Washington.

Boerg · 07-17-2008, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Another straw man. As I said in the first post, I don't necessarily have a problem with tax rebates.

I do have a problem with rebates. It's like the car thief coming back and giving you back your CD collection from your stolen car. The whole premise of Congress helping us by returning some of our tax money is frustrating to me. I'm in favor of making use of these tax return mechanisms, but I'd rather just pay less in the first place.

Donkey® · 07-17-2008, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by Boerg

I think it's noteworthy that Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and therefore one of the more powerful people in Washington.

Yet she can not do a single thing by herself...nobody can. That's the way the founding fathers designed our government.

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by Boerg

I do have a problem with rebates. It's like the car thief coming back and giving you back your CD collection from your stolen car. The whole premise of Congress helping us by returning some of our tax money is frustrating to me. I'm in favor of making use of these tax return mechanisms, but I'd rather just pay less in the first place.

I agree and would rather pay less in the first place, however, taxing isn't illegal so your analogy doesn't seem to work. This really is basically a means of lowering taxes per se, which is something I support. The problem I have in this instance is that if we're going to reduce taxes and government income we need to reduce spending. If we reduce government income and increase government spending we are only causing economic problems. All we're doing is increasing the debt our country is in. Knowing Pelosi's political history she's banking on raising taxes for the wealthy after the elections to pay for all this which again is going to negatively hit the economy again.

Boerg · 07-17-2008, 09:19 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Yet she can not do a single thing by herself...nobody can. That's the way the founding fathers designed our government.

Hopefully that spirit can be re-introduced to another branch of our government.

JaJae · 07-17-2008, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Yet she can not do a single thing by herself...nobody can. That's the way the founding fathers designed our government.

That's not necessarily true. She is a very powerful politician and she has managed to keep the Blue Dogs in line on many issues that their constituents don't support. While she isn't an all-powerful politician, she has a lot of power and connections regarding budgeting and she blackmails her own party to get her way. If you're a new Democrat in Washington and you cross her you you'll have a hard time getting earmarks, funding and other such measures to your district which will in effect harm your chances for re-election. Pelosi isn't someone the Democrats can easily discard.

An example of Pelosi's power is over the Fairness Doctrine. A lot of Blue Dog Democrats have voiced stress within their party from their constituents wanting them to sign on to the Broadcasters' Freedom Act. But they can't because Pelosi adamantly opposes it. They have 197 supporters for the BFA so far and they need 218 to get around Pelosi's blockade, but not a single Democrat has supported it despite strong pressure from their districts and expressing stress over the situation to Republican counterparts. She has more power than you're giving her credit for. Now I'm not saying she has com