Strange times: Republicans block tax credits -- as a protest

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   

(CNN) -- It is a rare, strange day when Senate Republicans vote to block billions in tax cuts. But that's what happened Thursday when they chose to freeze a massive tax credit package in order to protest how Democrats are running the chamber.

By a vote of 53-40, the EXPIRE Act, which would extend $85 billion in tax credits, failed to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

Only one Republican, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, voted with Democrats to advance the measure. The rest of the GOP votes were "no," as Republicans vented anger that Democrats have refused to allow votes on their amendments to this and most other bills in the past year.

CNN

This was to help all classes of people, the poor, middle class and the rich, but the republicans can't have any of that. They wouldn't have blocked this bill if it catered to the rich. Republicans can't help but show there true colors in this election year. Talk about failure to lead, what are they doing in Washington? There certainly not working.

Republicans voting against tax breaks, how interesting.




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
I guess they are tired of the democrats playing unfairly. Turnabout is fair play.

It wouldn't be American politics unless both sides were acting like children.
edit on 2014/5/16 by Metallicus because: eta



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

I'm kinda shocked the Republicans would vote this down. It had tax breaks for mortgage debt forgiveness, teacher expenses, tuition and even small business expenses.

What a bad time to make a stand on principle.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   
The only fair tax .... a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. No tax credits. No loopholes. No off shore accounts. No 'get out of paying taxes' for ANYONE, be they rich or poor. Flat tax for all. IMHO.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   
don't worry about people complaining about stepping into others rights in this thread.

Republican Hypocrisy at work.

oh a deflection post....already.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan
This isn't what they were voting for and last time I looked there have been no proposals for a flat tax submitted by anyone.

The across the board tax breaks would have been good for all, so republicans voted against it.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Let's be honest, it doesn't matter what the Republicans do. Democrats here will criticize them for passing it or criticize them for not passing it. So much like the elected Republicans I pretty much don't care what their opinion is.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Here is a link to the SFC Expire Act page. The summary is worth reading as it outlines the many different tax breaks that are affected.

www.finance.senate.gov...



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

According to the U.S. Senate website, this was a vote on the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on Amdt. No. 3060 to H.R. 3474.

Is this correct?

I bet there's some sneaky amendments that would surprise everybody !!

Senate Votes

Warning ! ....Research required.

See if you see what I see.




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
The only fair tax .... a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. No tax credits. No loopholes. No off shore accounts. No 'get out of paying taxes' for ANYONE, be they rich or poor. Flat tax for all. IMHO.


Yeah let's tax a single mother of 2 that is barely scraping by the same percentage we tax a billionaire hoarding money in off shore accounts.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

If there was sneaky amendments then republicans would voice it then have there excuse for screwing over the people, as it stands they don't need a excuse.
edit on 16-5-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
This isn't what they were voting for ...

I know. I'm just saying ... I think that would work out the best.


originally posted by: muse7
Yeah let's tax a single mother of 2 that is barely scraping by the same percentage we tax a billionaire hoarding money in off shore accounts.

With a flat tax with no loop holes and no tax credits, the billionaire wouldn't be able to hoard money in off shore accounts. So everyone would have a lower tax rate. And yes ... everyone should pay taxes. People who get themselves into financial situations shouldn't get to not pay taxes. Everyone pays the same ... no one gets rewarded/penalized for making bad choices and no one gets rewarded/penalized for being able to make money. Flat tax = only fair tax.
edit on 5/16/2014 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7
Weak argument.
Nobody forced her to have 2 kids.

Also 10% of nothing is still less then 10% of a million.
edit on 16-5-2014 by thesaneone because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: muse7
Weak argument.
Nobody forced her to have 2 kids.

Also 10% of nothing is still less then 10% of a million.


Let's say a minimum wage employee and a CEO both lived in the same building, paying $1,000 for rent. Now let's say they both had the flat tax of 20%. Which one would starve to death? Which one would be homeless?

That is why a flat tax wouldn't work. In order to do it, you would have to determine a minimum amount of expenses that would be exempt in order to just survive and stay out of soup kitchens. Make the first $2,000/month income completely tax-free, and I'll be more on board with a flat tax.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: muse7
Weak argument.
Nobody forced her to have 2 kids.

Also 10% of nothing is still less then 10% of a million.


Let's say a minimum wage employee and a CEO both lived in the same building, paying $1,000 for rent. Now let's say they both had the flat tax of 20%. Which one would starve to death? Which one would be homeless?



The one who did not plan for their future.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: muse7
Weak argument.
Nobody forced her to have 2 kids.

Also 10% of nothing is still less then 10% of a million.


Let's say a minimum wage employee and a CEO both lived in the same building, paying $1,000 for rent. Now let's say they both had the flat tax of 20%. Which one would starve to death? Which one would be homeless?



The one who did not plan for their future.


Oh, I forgot. Being born into wealth is a solid plan. Those idiots born to single moms on welfare really should have thought their decision through before being born.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

Why is a minimum wage employee living in the same building as the CEO? If they can't afford rent that high move to a different building, or get a roommate. This is common sense stuff.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Strange times. The democrats want to alter the Bill of Rights surreptitiously by hiding it in a bill. No surprise there.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
More taxes for the rich!!!

It's not like they will go hungry!





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join