Who will and who should voters blame?

Here's my further comments - the Democrats have proven just how weasely they can be. They have tossed the baby under the bus on the issue of a minimum wage increase because they just can't possibly admit that the death tax is a bad idea.

They know they've demagogued that issue (the death tax) to virtual death, and have sold the public on the idea that the only people that it really affects are the wealthy. Thanks to that class warfare they can claim to be protecting the government coffers in taking in a few million dollars in revenues that somehow escaped from the tax shelters (or never made it into them) that most of the super wealthy have hidden their money in.

Rather than letting the working poor enjoy the benefits of a higher wage, which by the way would lead to increased tax revenue coming back into the government coffers as people that are paid those wages earn more and are taxed on the higher income or are taxed on the purchases they make with their increased earning power, the Democrats would rather try to hold onto a political issue and keep a potential victory away from the Republicans.

Will the public see through it all and realize just how disgusting the political games the Democrats are playing are? I doubt it. As usual the Democratic talking points will continue to say they are *for* an increase in the minimum wage and Republicans aren't for one, even though in this just (failed to pass) taken vote in the U.S. Senate they were absolutely NOT for an increase in the minimum wage.

I hope that the GOP media machine is ready to put out new ads that will educate the public about this vote, including pictures and comments from the "poor" teachers, students and businessmen/women that were losers here. Perhaps the GOP can gain a few voters in the next election at the expense of the hypocrites in the Democrat party.

The only time the Dems will support a tax cut is if the Reps want an increase. They're all a bunch of idiots as far as I'm concerned. They care more about party politics than the nation.

Isn't the nature of compromise supposed to be that I get something, while giving something I didn't want to, and vice-versa. Compromise is exactly what this bill sounded like...

I frankly dont see this as an issue.  The only ones that care, are the extreme left.  Those making Minimum wages either dont vote, or are too young to.  And the rest of the country does not see it doing anything but rushing us to a new recession by stifling hiring.

#3 by Demosthenes Locke Fri, August 04, 2006 11:45 AM

Took the words right out of my mouth, well more or less. This is a group of people who's modo is "it's better to recieve than give". I say group of people because technically I would expect both parties to only want to egt what's good for them without giving anything in return. But in this case to actually go back on what they believe in just to not give a little to the Reps, now that is just plain wrong.

But in this case to actually go back on what they believe in just to not give a little to the Reps...

The working definition of partisan politics.

I'm sorry but the republicans were the ones playing politics with this. What reason is there to tie these two pieces of legislation together. It's funny how congress managed to pass raises for themselves without tying it to another issue.

You see the difference is that minimum wage workers don't have money for lobbyist and pacs, that's why it's been ten years since there's been a minimum wage increase.

The republican's succeeded in their goal which was to make the Democrats look bad for voting against a minimum wage bill.

We really need to cut those millionaires a break though. It's tough out there for a millionaire. What's wrong with those Democrats not giving another tax cut to the wealthy when we have a record deficit? Yep, it's their faults.

#7 by Locamama Fri, August 04, 2006 2:15 PM

There are precious few bills that don't have riders attached to them. Personally I would like to see that practice banned completely.

Millianaires are hardly the only people who would benefit from a reduction in the death tax.

It is a death tax specifically for millionaires.

It would also exempt $5 million of an individual's estate, and $10 million of a couple's, from estate taxes by 2015. Estates worth up to $25 million would be taxed at capital gains rates, currently 15 percent and scheduled to rise to 20 percent. Tax rates on the remainder of larger estates would fall to 30 percent by 2015.

Not exactly for the common working folk is it? Common working folks don't get Republicans re-elected.

#9 by Locamama Fri, August 04, 2006 2:45 PM [Locamama] It is a death tax specifically for millionaires. It would also exempt $5 million of an individual's estate, and $10 million of a couple's, from estate taxes by 2015. Estates worth up to $25 million would be taxed at capital gains rates, currently 15 percent and scheduled to rise to 20 percent. Tax rates on the remainder of larger estates would fall to 30 percent by 2015. Not exactly for the common working folk is it? Common working folks don't get Republicans re-elected.

So you somehow think people who's inheritances are worth less than $5 million/$10 million wouldn't benefit? It looks to me like it specifically designed to benefit those who's inheritances are worth under a set amount and taxes those above that amount. So in effect it's designed to give a break to exactly the people the Dems are claiming it won't benefit while still taxing those uber wealthy people, albeit at a lower rate.

It is a death tax specifically for millionaires.

No, it is a death tax for farmers. Land rich and cash poor. Have you ever wondered why there are so few farmers these days?

And another thing. Why should anyone who thinks we are enslaving the low income people care about a death tax? The elimination would not give them more money (indeed, it would only deprive the government of money).

So Again, why would a minimum wage proponent care? They are getting what they want, with a rider (SOP BTW) that would not hurt the beneficiaries of the legislation?

Why?

So Loca, you have no problems at all passing a bill that grants a right to more abortions provided that some pet project on the other side is given a free ride too, right?

As to who played politics, you seemed to again miss my point -- and the facts -- that the death tax brings in such a small amount of money (if any) from those that your side wants to aim at it -- "the rich" -- because those are people that have lobbied long and hard for every other tax break they can possibly find. Those "rich" people have shelter after shelter, trust fund after trust fund, insurance policies on top of insurance policies and more that help protect those assets so that the government never gets a dime of any possible inhertiance, or what little they do get is a drop in the bucket to the real value of the estates that are talked about.

Meanwhile the "millions" of poor Americans that could have benefited from the long demanded increase in the minimum wage saw theirselves tossed under the bus in favor of claiming that it was all a sham. If it was such a stinkin' sham then why block it. Why not pass it, or hell, here's an idea -- how about demanding an even bigger increase (say up to around $9 per hour) in the wage so that the Democrats really would have gotten something for their efforts.

Democrats are cold, heartless, cruel and callous individuals that don't give a whit about their constitutents. They care about maintaining power and as long as they can keep the poor enslaved to them and beholden to them for any possible increase in the minimum wage they know they'll have a voting block to count on. They'll use -- that's right *USE* -- those people over and over again until those people see through the smoke and b.s. and decide that being empowered is better than being enslaved.

That should be the new slogan from the right actually -- empowerment is better than enslavement: vote GOP! Let me contact a few strategists and perhaps we can really start doing away with that image of the right being the guys and gals that are so mean and cruel to Blacks and other minorities.

So Loca, you have no problems at all passing a bill that grants a right to more abortions provided that some pet project on the other side is given a free ride too, right?

No - not even close and that has nothing to do with this.

No, it is a death tax for farmers. Land rich and cash poor. Have you ever wondered why there are so few farmers these days?

It would benefit the top .3% of households. That is the super wealthy not 3% - .3%. They call it the Paris Hilton tax. I didn't know that farmers were that wealthy that they would be in the top point three percent of households in the us.

As to who played politics, you seemed to again miss my point -- and the facts -- that the death tax brings in such a small amount of money (if any) from those that your side wants to aim at it -- "the rich"

$267.6 billion in death tax relief - yep that's peanuts.

Democrats are cold, heartless, cruel and callous individuals that don't give a whit about their constitutents.

Nope that would be the republicans who only care about big business and the wealthy.

Will the public see through it all and realize just how disgusting the political games the Democrats are playing are? I doubt it. As usual the Democratic talking points will continue to say they are *for* an increase in the minimum wage and Republicans aren't for one, even though in this just (failed to pass) taken vote in the U.S. Senate they were absolutely NOT for an increase in the minimum wage.

It's interesting, but not at all surprising that you failed to mention the amendment that Kennedy introduced in the Senate in March to increase the minimum wage.

An amendment that only 4 Republicans voted for and that not one Democrat voted against.

Link

It would benefit the top .3% of households. That is the super wealthy not 3% - .3%. They call it the Paris Hilton tax. I didn't know that farmers were that wealthy that they would be in the top point three percent of households in the us.

You still just don't get it. It would eliminate the tax for everyone who's estates inherited are under that $5 million mark. That's the majority of people, including farmers. You're so focused on the fact that it reduces the tax for those top people that you fail to see how much benefit it gives to the lower ones.

It would benefit the top .3% of households. That is the super wealthy not 3% - .3%. They call it the Paris Hilton tax. I didn't know that farmers were that wealthy that they would be in the top point three percent of households in the us.

No, you are wrong again.  Did you see what Bill Gates and Warren Buffet did?  This will not affect them.

It will affect Ma and Pa Kettle.  I really wish you would research this more and see who you are denying.

It's interesting, but not at all surprising that you failed to mention the amendment that Kennedy introduced in the Senate in March to increase the minimum wage. An amendment that only 4 Republicans voted for and that not one Democrat voted against.

It is interesting you did not mention the Stoop Jackson amendment.  It actually has more relevance.

It is interesting you did not mention the Stoop Jackson amendment. It actually has more relevance.

How do you figure?

No, you are wrong again. Did you see what Bill Gates and Warren Buffet did? This will not affect them.

Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Ted Turner, George Soros and 1,100 other millionaires do not want the death tax repealed. They are part of a coalition called Responsible Wealth.

You still just don't get it. It would eliminate the tax for everyone who's estates inherited are under that $5 million mark. That's the majority of people, including farmers. You're so focused on the fact that it reduces the tax for those top people that you fail to see how much benefit it gives to the lower ones

Okay Mason, you convinced me. I am all for the break for small business owners and family farms but not for the super duper billionaires. I did look at many sites before I found one that actually mentioned the small business owners and family farms.

If passed as it was currently. The deficit would increase and at some point the government is going to have to cut services for people. Charitable gifts would decrease if there was no benefit in estate planning as their is now.

If passed as it was currently. The deficit would increase and at some point the government is going to have to cut services for people. Charitable gifts would decrease if there was no benefit in estate planning as their is now.

I have to disagree with these statements as well. Pure smokescreening. The amount of revenues of these death taxes are so relativly small that they would hardly cause a deficit increase even if they were totally eliminated, and the vast majority of charitable donations are made to avoid annual income/corporate taxes and not estate taxes.

Will the public see through it all and realize just how disgusting the political games the Democrats are playing are? I doubt it. As usual the Democratic talking points will continue to say they are *for* an increase in the minimum wage and Republicans aren't for one, even though in this just (failed to pass) taken vote in the U.S. Senate they were absolutely NOT for an increase in the minimum wage. It's interesting, but not at all surprising that you failed to mention the amendment that Kennedy introduced in the Senate in March to increase the minimum wage. An amendment that only 4 Republicans voted for and that not one Democrat voted against. Link

Now why don't you give them the "real reason" it was voted down? Because "Chucky Schumer" (D) added junk to the bill that was unacceptable. Go here and find out the rest of the missing info.
Link

Now why don't you give them the "real reason" it was voted down? Because "Chucky Schumer" (D) added junk to the bill that was unacceptable. Go here and find out the rest of the missing info.

Thanks for making my point for me.



Do you happen to have a valid link?

Thanks for making my point for me. Do you happen to have a valid link?

The link "is" valid. You just have to use your braincells and re-initiate the search.

Okay Mason, you convinced me. I am all for the break for small business owners and family farms but not for the super duper billionaires. I did look at many sites before I found one that actually mentioned the small business owners and family farms.

And that is who it would benefit! Did you not read my response? The Super Dupers already get around it. Through trusts and other dodges. They are not paying it. The Farmers are paying it. Land rich, and cash poor. they are the ones that are suffereing.

Yep a lot of family farms wind up being sold because the kids can't afford to pay the inherentance taxes.