Seems to me politicians are constantly coming up with “New terms” to represent something that indicates “Lowered tax rate” or “Paying less tax” but doesn’t. We have “Tax credit”, “Tax relief”, “Tax break” etc and none of these appear to mean “Lower tax rates”.
The numbers being throw around for the Stimulus package of 288B in “Tax relief” seems AMAZINGLY misleading to me. For instance from their own website.
Tax Relief - includes $15 B for Infrastructure and Science, $61 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, $25 B for Education and Training and $22 B for Energy, so total funds are $126 B for Infrastructure and Science, $142 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, $78 B for Education and Training, and $65 B for Energy.
There 288B dollar “Tax relief” number includes 142B for “*$142 B for Protecting the Vulnerable, $78 B for Education and Training, and $65 B for Energy.”…*What does ANY of that have to do with “Tax relief”?
Depending on what source and who you believe the “Tax relief”, “Tax cuts” and “Tax credits” number is ALL over the place for this bill.
For me personally looking at these sources and parts of the bill itself I find next to NOTHING that resembles a true “Tax break”. There are billions in “Tax credits”, which is “if you spend money this way you will be re-reimbursed”. There is also billions in “Tax credit cuts”, which is a check being sent to “Qualifing” people, many of whom have an effective zero tax rate already…so that’s kind of like welfare. Then there are more billions in out and out “Welfare” including Food stamps, subsidized health insurance for the uninsured, extended unemployment benefits, increase in “federal medical assistance” and on and on.
Question is how does one “Define” these different terms and how much of each does this bill contain?
You mean “Kind of like a tax rate decrease.”? That would be a REALLY broad usage of “Kind of like”, wouldn’t it? That would be like saying “An apple is kinda like walnut…well because they both come from trees”
$142 B for Protecting the Vulnerable ???
**
**
**
1. capable of or susceptible to being wounded or hurt, as by a weapon: a vulnerable part of the body. 2. open to moral attack, criticism, temptation, etc.: an argument vulnerable to refutation; He is vulnerable to bribery. 3. (of a place) open to assault; difficult to defend: a vulnerable bridge.
I will get to the bottom of this after I consult my Ouija Board, I will report back asap
Actually, I was referring to your “kind of like welfare.” Would you say that a spade is kind of like a spade? I suppose that way you wouldn’t have to worry about offending anyone who thought differently.
I am finding the rhetoric from Barack far from the reality of what is actually taking place. I've actually never seen such a disconnect between what I hear from the podium and what is emerging in these documents. Still, he speaks in very open and inclusive terms, and it continues to bode well for his popularity. Soon more of the votes will be referendums on him, his popularity, much like in Venezuela with Chavez. Interesting times.
Actually, I was referring to your “kind of like welfare.” Would you say that a spade is kind of like a spade? I suppose that way you wouldn’t have to worry about offending anyone who thought differently.
Maybe I believe to strongly in the “You catch more bees with honey than you do vinegar”. I doubt you’re change any minds if you keep punching em’ in the face with the obvious
Odd thing about Obama’s “Popularity”. Seems he has higher disapproval rating and lower approval rating than GWB did at the same point in his first term.
I personally have a REALLLLYYyyy hard time believing this especially considering the chaos surround GWB’s first term election. I have not “Independently” verified this information, just heard it on Don and Roma on WLS this AM.
