When Democrats extend the "Bush tax cuts" will they become "Obama's tax cuts"?

You completely misunderstand. The Bush tax cuts, which ALSO included middle class cuts, did what they were supposed to do nine years ago. After their implementation in mid-2003, unemployment dropped and kept on dropping into the 1st quarter of 2007 to a low of 4.4%.

These gains got wiped out by the mortgage meltdown and subsequent recession. After that, keeping the tax cuts in place was necessary to keep from HURTING the economy since eliminating the cuts would be equivalent to a tax hike. How does raising taxes help an economy.

Even Bill Clinton conceded this fact recently. It's this misguided Liberal thinking that cannot understand that the tax cuts are not some sort of "gift" for the rich. It they were, the rates would have lowered more than to 35% (starting at 39.5%).

The whole purpose of the tax cuts were to be a REAL stimulus to the economy. It worked. The job creators do tend to be rich however.

I'll let you ponder on why this is so. This also effects those making $250,000 on up. This includes 2/3 of ALL small business and their owners.

In case you haven't heard, there is a perfect storm of tax hikes that will take place on January 1st of next year, totaling half-a-trillion dollars. Expiration of the Bush tax cuts is part of this. This is part of what's causing business confidence to be rock bottom.

They see the storm coming and are battening down the hatches. Your blind subscription to Liberal talking points will forever allow you to be led by the nose by people who only want you to react to issues, not think about nor try to understand them. Here's a brief history of the effectiveness of tax cuts.

Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge cut the highest income tax rate from 70% to 29% and cut government spending 50%. The result: the Roaring 20's and unemployment of less than 2%. JFK's posthumously passed income tax cuts (90% to 50%) also had a good effect on the economy, creating the revenues for LBJ's Great Society spending.

Reagan cut the highest income tax rate from 70% (again) to 28%, plus 15% across-the-board tax cuts. He also had the courage to tough out reigning in the money supply that was causing the crippling stagflation. Both of these policies created a new, a solid foundation for the country that supported a 17 year booming economy.

Revenues during this time also doubled from $500 billion to $1 trillion. Unemployment dropped from 10.4% to 5%. Across the pond, Margaret Thatcher lowered the highest tax rate from a stifling 95% to mid-thirties with similar results.

Clinton cut the Capital Gains Tax, the already good economy went into overdrive. After implementation of the Tax Relief and Reconciliation Act of 2003 (part 2 of the Bush Tax cuts), unemployment dropped and kept on dropping into the 1st quarter of 2007 to a low of 4.4%. The increase of revenue this generated made his 2nd term deficits step down significantly, on track with the projection of a balanced budget in 2010.

All of Bush's gains were blown out of the water by the mortgage meltdown, unrelated to the tax cuts. When implemented correctly on a business environment that is fundamentally sound, tax cuts work well. It's like shot adrenalin the company needs to expand.

This expansion creates real, sustainable jobs not paid for by taxpayers. This increases revenues to the government. These tax cuts makes it easier for start-ups to flourish, adding additional revenue.

Rich people have one thing you don't, money. They can wait it out, how long can you wait for a job, years, months a week? Rich people can sit on their money, if they don't make any then nothing get taxed, do you see the problem.

You keep taxing the ones keeping the country going but sooner or later you'll have to tax them 100%. So instead of their money out there trying to make more money, it just sits in a bank or they buy gold while the dollar collapses to be worthless. Rich people have the luxury to live ANYWHERE in the world, they don't have to be here and their money can be transferred to another currency.

So the question should be how mad are you that those Rich people won't get their tax cuts and invest in America. You also complain that companies are taking their manufacturing to other countries, but you fail to see that yes it's true, but why? Because the cost to manufacture here with the unions is far to greater, even with the added cost of shipping it here from another country.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.