Our Economy Is Too Fragile To Lose Gerry Connolly Right Now

Comments

[kelley in virginia]

if the tax cuts are allowed to expire, it is not just the individuals who will suffer on April 15. Many small businesses are structured for tax purposes to run on an individual tax return (not just your mom & pop pizza parlors either--I know a few closely held businesses that run themselves on individual tax returns). These businesses will get crushed. These businesses employ people.

and i didn't realize that taxes on dividends would go up. To the extent possible, people will pull more money out of the stock market & that will hurt publicly traded businesses.

[Jack]

And how would Rep. Connolly's opponent differ with him on this issue?

[Not Jim Moran]

At least he knows who he represents...hard part about the 11th district is 50% of the ppl are never happy.

It's going to be a tough fight.

[BM]

Way to go Gerry!

[steve vaughan]

Probably a good vote for him politically. That's an affluent district.

[Tonto]

Smart little sob, isn't he?

Go on fox, support middle road affluent constiuents who vote, and take away votes from Fimian--all at the same time.

He'll win, and rightly so. Then he'll propose/push/vote for left-leaning policy(ies) to appease the far left and middle left in early 2011.

Political gamesmanship that Leslie and Larry could never understand in politics in 1994. Or now. Or ever.

[wow]

kelly kelly kelly,

obviously truth is not your friend. There is less than 1% of business structure this way that the owner's NET - NOT GROSS makes over $250,000. Because when the business is structure this way they GET TO WRITE OFF EVERYTHING AS A BUSINESS EXPENSE BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL IS TAXED.

Take a quick lesson please.

So if you want to put your argument on that - then I will be happy to rebuke you. No support the society with taxes that you make your wealth from is disgusting and quite UNAMERICAN!

[Jack]

Actually, there should be NO income taxes on corporations anyway. Corporations are merely associations of people. Tax the people when they take the profits in dividends. Just think of all the money US corporations spend computing their tax liabilities every year. That is wasted, unproductive labor.

[HisRoc]

Ben,

Since when did you become a Connolly admirer?

By any chance are you consulting for him now?

[kelley in virginia]

wow, there are several businesses in my small town that are taxed as individuals. I used to own such a company.

stop assailing the taxpayer with cries of "unAmerican" if the taxpayer seeks to reduce or hold steady their tax liability.

Bleeding the taxpayer dry, whether that taxpayer be an individual or a business, does not promote the American economy.

[Bob]

I seem to have trouble remembering all those poor business owners being "bled dry" as the economy was booming with these same tax rates in the 90's....

[kelley in virginia]

bob, maybe you are right. let's just stop small business altogether.

raising tax rates on persons or businesses will not spark this economy.

[Bob]

I hardly see how returning to the tax rates of our booming economy of the 1990's, where small businesses were doing pretty damn well, is somehow going to kill businesses. The tax cuts did NOTHING to spark more hiring, and I assure you, when the actual numbers come in, few to no small businesses will actually be affected in a noticeable way.

My family has an income over 250k, and frankly, the tax cut was barely noticeable, the tax increase will be the same. What was noticeable, however, is that before the tax cuts we were on pace to pay off the national debt by the end of this year, which would have wiped out 15% of our budget, leaving plenty of space for tax cuts AND reasonable spending. But no, now we're where we our because Bush wanted to give me money instead of helping people who actually needed help.

Small businesses were not suffering from taxes in the 90's, where's the evidence they'll suffer now?

[Jack]

"Bush wanted to give me money instead of helping people who actually needed help."

I'm sure, then, that you donated that money to the poor or gave it to the feral government to pay down the debt.

Thank you.

[Not Larry Sabato]

HisRoc, how did I become a "Connolly admirer"?

[change]

Jack,
I give a lot of money to charity, not including the money taken from me by the Gov't (who in turn take 80% and pass along 20% to where it should go).

Also,

I think I could support rolling back all the entitlement programs along with the tax rates. Any takers?
Can we return government spending to what it was in the 90’s?

Finally,
Connolly is talking this way up until november, in december he will be back in the fold.

[HisRoc]

Ben,

I took this item as supporting Connolly for re-election. Is that what you are doing or did I misunderstand?

[Not Larry Sabato]

Watch the video again, and you can probably see the sarcasm dripping in my title.

[HisRoc]

My sincere apologies, Ben. I'm a little slow on the uptake today.

I agree with several other posters. Connolly reminds me of the governor in "Best Little Whorehouse in Texas." He loves to dance a little sidestep when it is election time. Come January he will be sticking it to his own constituents to curry favor with Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership. This guy has never shown any concern for anyone but Gerry Connolly since he was Providence District Supervisor. The reason we are still stuck with him is because the Republicans keep blessing him with unelectable clowns like Michelle Brickner and Keith Fimian as opponents.

[Jack]

Seriously, the sarcasm did NOT come through.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Jack, I'm pretty sure it did for most people given the emails/IMs I got this morning after posting it.

[Martin Lomasney]

HIsroc

love the reference to "Whorehouse"

I catching hell from KathyinBlacksburg over on Blue Virginia for referring to Connolly as the "whore from Mantua." Maybe I'll use "dulcinea" instead. She was the woman of easy virtue in "Man of LaMancha".

Either way, this ploy is too obvious to move Rs or Is his way and will only serve to discourage his base. Well played, fool.

Nice to see I'm not the only one making the association.

[truthteller]

Kelley, knock off the small businesses are hit by taxes on the rich hyperbole -- First, it is utter fiction, a canard right up there with the laughable contention that tax cuts for the rich pay for themselves (They never have and never will) -- Second, tell me what you would cut to extend the tax cuts for the wealthy without busting the deficit? Are you going to propose to raise taxes on the middle class like the club for growth (aka club for greed)? Or are you going to slash services and cut funding to the states so that the states can go through another cycle of layoffs and cutting back essential safety net programs to the bone?

And the sad part is that the people that would be on the recieving end of the payfors so your pampered rich people don't have to tighten their belts a little bit (which you call devastatingA), might actually lose their ability to pay their mortgage or their health insurance expenses which actually IS devastating.

The elitist sense of entitlement of the already haves is shameful in a time where millions across the USA are just trying to stay afloat.

[truthteller]

I should add that economic collapse that was the fault of Wall Street's uber wealthy "geniuses" getting too greedy and nearly taking the whole US economy down with them.

[Jack]

"Or are you going to slash services..."

We start with everything that Congress does not have the power to do. That would probably cut half the budget right there.

"...and cut funding to the states..."

Let's see -- we cut the taxes that pay for payments to the States, then the States can get that tax money WITHOUT the useless bureaucracy of the feral government! Sounds like a win-win to me! Lower taxes AND more services, simply by cutting out the "useless third."
so that the states can go through another cycle of layoffs and cutting back essential safety net programs to the bone?

[change]

truthteller,
is a self proclaimed genius… too bad that he does not understand that “that which brought down the economy” was the likes of barny frank et..al..

it is very simple, if the government makes a bank give loans to someone who can not pay them back THERE IS A PROBLEM….

Bottom line is that the D’s got us into this mess….

You complain about the “pampered rich” but you fail to understand that they will move their money (or resourcised) to a place best beneficial to themselves. Look at Kerry and his multi million dollar yacht that he moved to avoid 500k payment in taxes.

You should be ashamed because you have been taken advantage of….

I am one who may be affected by the tax issue, I am not rich, I pay my bills, my house is “underwater” but I realize my responsibility to the commitment I made and I will abide by it. .

I am sick and tired of people who want to “take advantage” of the free gifts of government (my tax money).

You might like it but I do not…

[truthteller]

Hey Jack,

I love how the right wing deals in generalities
So what exactly doesn't Congress have the power to do that it IS doing now? Last time I checked THAT'S NOT YOUR CALL or the TEA PARTY's call but rather the COURTS

And so what would you have government not do? Protect against corporate robber barrons squandering people's lifelong savings? Educate our children? Ensure that people have retirement benefits so they don't die? Build roads? Provide for the common defense?

And as for CHANGE, Its my money too and my country too!

[HisRoc]

truthteller,

Taxes on the rich hitting small businesses is not a fiction or canard. The fact is that most small businesses (less than $1M gross revenue) file taxes as an LLC, an individual return. No less authority than President Obama pointed out this week that such businesses create three out of every four new jobs in this country. Raise the marginal tax rate on individual filers over $250,000 in net income and you will kill three quarters of all new job creation, ipso facto.

I know that ruins your liberal wet dream of soaking the rich to provide more government entitlements, but "the facts are stubborn things," as John Adams famously said.

[truthteller]

Change if you think Barney Frank had more to do with the collapse of the economy than the derivatives folks at AIG , and the morons at Goldman, Lehman and Bear who lobbied the SEC to allow them leverage their portfolioes 30 or 40 to 1 only to choke on their own debt , you are tripping on some pretty powerful drugs!

[truthteller]

HisRoc,

If the tax cuts were so great, why didn't they stop the economy from imploding in 2008-2009? They were there but I didn't see anyone out there hiring anybody -- au contraire, WE LOST ABOUT 8 MILLION JOBS before the economy began to turn somewhat this winter... And even before that the job market was downright anemic for the lions' share of the decade. How do you account for that? I Thought you said low taxes on the rich stimulated job creation.... Well, where's the beef? The Bush administration net LOST jobs during his tenure, tax cuts and all

So much for the low taxes job creation fiction....

[change]

truthteller,

I am only looking at the “truth”, it is out there for anyone “who had eyes” to see. Look at Frank’s (et.al ) support for loans. You can’t make this sh*t up, (or you could but you don’t have to).

Also,
I am not a “rich” guy, but I am considering closing my business, selling everything I have, and moving to a “safe” place for about 15 years, hoping our country will come to it’s senses. I hate to think of the consequences for my 150 employees, but I suppose you and whoever taxpayers are left will take care of them.

[HisRoc]

truthteller,

The economic implosion of 2008-2009 had many fathers. Not the least of them was the housing bubble which was a creation of both the Democrats, who wanted universal home ownership by people who couldn't afford it, and the Republicans who aided and abetted the financial institutions, who approved 'liar loans' and allowed them to be bundled in fraudulent investment packages.

The issue is not whether tax cuts in the boom years caused an economic failure. The issue is whether tax increases in a recession will retard the recovery.

[You Betcha]

Gerry is such a sleaze ball. Has his head so far up Obama's butt, he can't sneeze without giving him a hemorrhoid.

[truthteller]

You Betcha, go back and "refudiate" with your half-term mentor!

[truthteller]

HisRoc & Change

And you don't think that Wall Street's irresponsible practices with Credit Default Swaps or 30 and 40 to 1 leverage, the SEC's indulgence of such practices, or Greenspan's hawking of adjustable rate mortgages at the height of the housing budget contributed in a major way to the housing crisis? And exactly who was in charge of Congress and the Administration from 2000 to 2006 at the height of the bubble?

There are none so blind as those who will not see!

[truthteller]

Apologies to His Roc, you acknowledged the joint causality, so you should not be included in the most recent criticism -- on the other hand Change is still guilty of myopic vision on the causation of the fiscal crisis

[HisRoc]

truthteller,

You are a hysteric who is not to be reasoned with. If you think that all of this financial ruin can be packaged up and laid at the feet of one party, then you are a mindless lemming.

There is plenty of room for blame on both parties for the collapse of 2007, when the Democrats were in control of both houses of Congress and, BTW, increased pressure on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase lending to unqualified applicants.

Your bullheaded refusal to admit the facts is pathetic. Partisan idiots like you are the problem, not the solution.

[HisRoc]

truthteller,

I posted my 1:17 AM comment before your 1:07 AM comment appeared.

However, my comment stands. You are a liberal partisan who cannot grasp the complicity that both political parties have in this crisis.

A pox on all incumbents this November, regardless of their party affiliation.

Term limits now for Congress.

[change]

It’s sad that paid bloggers like “truthteller” comes into conversations with an agenda and not an open mind. I suppose we will see this ilk until November 3 and then they will disappear.

You are not fooling anyone, but blog on….

[HisRoc]

change,

Can you tell me where I can apply for one of these paid blogger positions? It sounds like a really good gig.

:)

[Peppy LePew]

When Gerry Connolly moves his lips about not raising taxes, I feel like I just passed wind through my anal orifice and soiled my pants. After eating peppers and drinking beer.

[truthteller]

Change, I'd like to see that "pay" to which you refer -- my comments are of my own volition and nobody has to pay me to say what I already believe

And win or lose, rain or sunshine, I'll be here keeping you honest (though I doubt you'd be able to distinguish fact from your partisan fictions if fact hit you on the head)

And btw, as for bullheaded partisans, that defines you to a "T" = you are very talented at projecting your character flaws onto others, but introspection and thoughtful analysis, not so much!

[truthteller]

HisRoc,

I regretted and still regret lumping you in with Change in terms of my critique on the causality of the 2008 collapse.

On the one hand, your followup comment seems to acknowledge my followup statement where I accepted that there is bipartisan responsibility, and that there were some Democrats too close to the mortgage industry, but on the other hand you went on to call me a blind partisan anyhow, which I do not understand. So I'm disappointed but I'll encourage you to reconsider...

Also, while I understand the pox on all houses with incumbents mentality you express, I do not necessarily deem it a fair frame of analysis, considering that the Tom Perriellos of the world came into congress as freshmen AFTER the financial collapse and the 2008 election and almost by definition could not be complicit in policy made prior to their arrival in Congress. How exactly could he be responsible for what came in the months BEFORE his election?

[wow]

Again Kelly the realty of your statement then is the individual business owners is actually making around $325,000 and all of the expense like rent / auto / gas / utilities can be paid and deducted before the indivudal is taxed.

The BUSH TAX cuts were a REBATE and the issue is to just let them expire and go back to the actual tax rate.

Again this is not a tax increase - the tax decrease was Temporary - so it was a rebate not a permanent change to the tax structure.

If someone that makes OVER $250,000 cannot afford 1 to 2% increase then we are all screwed. How many more BMW do you need versus the roads fix to drive them on?

[Jack]

"And so what would you have government not do? Protect against corporate robber barrons squandering people's lifelong savings? Educate our children? Ensure that people have retirement benefits so they don't die? Build roads? Provide for the common defense?"

The FEDERAL government has no place in education or retirement. Nor can you find any power given to Congress to give people money when they aren't working, or pay for their healthcare, or find them a place to live. If you want the government to do those things, then do them at the State level.

[Jack]

"If someone that makes OVER $250,000 cannot afford 1 to 2% increase then we are all screwed."

Whether they can afford it is not the point. The point is what will they would do with it, and what the government would do with it.

Generally, the wealthy either spend their money, or invest it. They do not get wealthy by squandering their resources. Conservatives believe that the wealthy have a better idea of what will grow the economy than the government does, because if the wealthy get wealthy by investing intelligently -- whether those investments are in time, talent, energy, or money.

The best way to become wealthy is to grow a company, or to invest in growing companies. The wealthy are wealthy because they do that. Not coincidentally, growing companies create JOBS.

The government CANNOT create jobs -- because every dollar that the government takes out of the economy is a dollar that cannot be spent or invested on PRODUCTIVE labor.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

This is hilarious.

[change]

wow,
So you are the judge of how much money one should make? I would bet that those making 20k believe those making 40k make enough, and those making 40k believe 80k is enough.. get the point.
Those like you and tt should spend more time trying to make something of yourselves instead of complaining that those who have made something should have it taken away.

[Jack]

Most of those who "make something of themselves" do so by making jobs for others.

[change]

Thats a fact Jack.

[HisRoc]

truthteller,

I stand by my accusation that your are a blind liberal partisan, solely because of your defense of Tom Perriellos if nothing else. He is exactly what I am talking about.

He was elected in the Obama wave on a promise of "hope and change." What change have we seen in his votes in Congress? The $4.3T that Bush added to the national debt in eight years is projected to be beaten by an additional $6.5T by the end of Obama's first four years. At the current burn rate, if Obama serves eight years, he will add over three times as much national debt as Bush did with his tax reductions and wars. And Perrillos, along with Connolly, voted right down the line for every dollar of it.

I'm not blaming the freshman incumbents for what happened before they were elected; I'm damning them for their votes since they were elected.

Out with all of them.

[wow]

Jack
You obviously have not been paying attention.

Trickle down economics and the myth that the weathly will put their money back into the economy for all is also a joke. Take about 2 minutes and read the news today in the New York times.

Reagan OBM director says Republican polices have screwed us!

Just saying

[wow]

Most of those who "make something of themselves" do so by making jobs for others.

Another delusional statement.

[Jack]

Let's see, wow...
"U.A.E. Is to Bar BlackBerry E-Mail Over Security Issues"
"To Help Democrats in the Fall, Obama May Stay Away"
"Clinton’s Gown Spoke Beyond the Silence"
"Space Station Error Prompts Shutdowns"
"The Mexican Border’s Lost World"
"Is Italy Too Italian?"

Sorry, man, not seein' it. Perhaps you could provide a link to the article.

[Jack]

So, how do YOU think most people "make something of themselves"?

[LAS]

Jack, if the tax cuts for the wealthy are all about creating jobs, what the hell happened?

I mean this as a serious question, because from where I am sitting, it looks as if these tax cuts failed to accomplish the stated mission.

We were sold on the Iraq War by bogus claims of WMDs. It seems to me we were sold on these tax cuts with bogus claims of job creation. It didn't happen. So doesn't that mean the tax cuts were a failure? Or do you have another interpreation of the data?

Conservatives said the auto bail-out would not only fail but would dangerously threaten our economy. Are you guys still of this opinion?

And what about the deficit? You've been hollering about the deficit--not without reason, I might add--but suddenly the deficit isn't so important as wealthy people getting to keep a little extra money?

[change]

Jack,
You really need to understand the thinking of those like wow. They believe that people somehow come into money (through no hard work of their own), and when they get the cash they take it and bury it in their backyard.

You are dealing with a childish mentality, one who cannot think beyond one move in a chess match.
Give a moron a computer and access to the internet and what do you get?? wow…(which btw, when inverted names the person with which he relies on for sustenance, as those like him are not able to provide for themselves; therefore are always partial to government taking care of them when mom is gone).

I only pray that our country has more young people with common sense and commitment than those like “wow”.

[LAS]

Over the last several weeks there have been reports in the WaPo and NYT (probably others as well) about corporations and businesses sitting on large cash reserves and still NOT hiring people. It seems they are nervous or not particularly confident.

Personally, I would like to see a big ol' tax credit given to those who actually give a person a job. A full-time job in America for a person already living in America, btw. And then I'd like to see a big ol' tax penalty for all those who keep shipping jobs overseas or bringing them in on visas with the pathetic excuse "we can't find the people we need here."

I know these things already exist, but perhaps not to the degree where it would be helpful. IMHO, of course. I wonder if that is something on which we can all agree?

[change]

LAS,
I would agree with that.

[Jack]

"[From] where I am sitting, it looks as if these tax cuts failed to accomplish the stated mission."

LAS, we got a boom in jobs after the Bush tax cuts. The crash was caused by the housing issue, not the Bush tax cuts.

Iraq is not the issue here -- only a diversion.

"Conservatives said the auto bail-out would not only fail but would dangerously threaten our economy. Are you guys still of this opinion?"

I am.

"And what about the deficit? You've been hollering about the deficit--not without reason, I might add--but suddenly the deficit isn't so important as wealthy people getting to keep a little extra money?"

And YOU've been hollering that JOBS are the most important thing. Rich people create jobs. For the government to "create" jobs (generally non-productive labor) it must first take money out of the economy. Doing so prevents that money from creating other (generally productive) jobs.

Furthermore, many of these program are already run by the States. The "feral" government merely takes money from the States' taxpayers, takes a bit off the top, and gives it back to the States in the form of bribes -- do things our way or you don't get your money back.

"...corporations and businesses sitting on large cash reserves and still NOT hiring people."

They have to have some productive work for the people to DO. Corporations are not government, and need to turn a profit to survive.

Anyway, the Bush tax cuts are not about corporate taxes, but personal taxes.

[truthteller]

Jack, so who is supposed to provide for public education if not government? And do you not recall that one of the founding principles of our Government was to provide for the "common welfare"? Recall the "neccessary and proper clause" or the Commerce clause of the constitution?

Seriously, some of you tea party crazies require remedial constitutional law education 101, as you seem to think that the Founding Fathers were Social Darwinists, wanting the American people to fend for themselves and embody the principles of "survival of the fittest" !!! Or is it the fattest?

Also, Jack, your economics are DELUSIONAL! Last time I checked, the BUSH ADMINISTRATION LOST JOBS OVER HIS 8 year tenure! Thats right -- tax cuts for the rich produced NEGATIVE JOB CREATION! Where were the rich people creating their promised jobs in response to a series of tax cuts and regulatory sweetheart deals? Nowhere to be found

David Stockman, Reagan's budget guru has now said that the GOP's fiscal policies have been extremely destructive -- and you have shown ZERO evidence to suggest otherwise! Apparently being a tea partier means that statistics, evidence, and reading comprehension are dismissed as high-fallutin intellectualism and are to be rejected at all costs!

[truthteller]

HisRoc

Maybe I shouldn't have invested so much effort in giving you the benefit of the doubt -- since you seem to have such a short term memory that you forget that Obama & Perriello inherited an economy in freefall with a destabilized financial sector, collapsed housing and automotive industries, which was hemorrhaging hundreds of thousands of jobs a month and tens of thousands of families were being foreclosed upon.... What were they supposed to do? Stand back, spend nothing and do nothing as the free market failed to right itself? No less an authority than Mark Zandi of Moody's who advised John McCain said that the stimulus was absolutely essential to stabilizing the job market and the industrial sector. He's even argued the stimulus should have been larger. Most of the TARP has been repaid, GM is on the road to recovery and while we aren't creating jobs the way we need to be, we've created about 600,000 jobs since the economy bottomed out.

In short, we were on the brink of Great Depression part II and Obama and this Congress stopped us from entering a death spiral which would have taken decades to recover from. Your party prescribes austerity on the one hand, but on the other hand full throatedly embraces preserving budget busting taxcuts for the rich that are absolutely unaffordable. When John Boehner gets called on this contradiction by FOX News of all places, Boehner's analysis was that he doesn't care what the statistics or the economists say.... This iz what passes for ideas on how to create jobs, turn around the economy and stabilize the deficit on your side.

Too bad! I thought we could have a reasonable dialogue....

[Jack]

"[Who] is supposed to provide for public education if not government?"

The STATE governments have that responsibility. Do you really want your school system to look like DC's? When DC has a decent school system, I will reconsider my aversion to having the feral government get involved in MY kids' education.

"And do you not recall that one of the founding principles of our Government was to provide for the 'common welfare'?"

Of course. Allow me to quote it IN FULL: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."

You will notice that it is the "to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States," not the PERSONAL welfare of individuals. The feral government has no more power to look after my personal welfare than it does to pay my personal debts or provide for my personal defense.

Recall the "neccessary and proper clause" or the Commerce clause of the constitution?

What does the Commerce Clause have to do with it? Are you one of those who believe that any action (or inaction) that in any microscopic way may affect interstate commerce comes under the power of Congress? Or are you one of the rational people who believe that "regulate" means "to make regular."

"Last time I checked, the BUSH ADMINISTRATION LOST JOBS OVER HIS 8 year tenure!"

When did you check? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bush came into office in Jan 2001, and total non-farm employment was 132,469,000. When he left in Jan 2009, there were 133,549,000 non-farm jobs.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet

The peak employment was in Dec 2007. So for FIVE years after the Bush tax cuts, employment increased. So, on two counts -- that overall employment increased, and that it increased substantially for five years after the tax cuts took effect -- we can dismiss the theory that the tax cuts resulted in decreased employment.

[Jack]

Sorry for the crappy link. You have to go here, and navigate from there. I used the Top Picks, selected Total Non-farm Employment, and clicked the "Retrieve data" button at the bottom.

[Jack]

Darn, the blog didn't take the href.
"here" is http://www.bls.gov/data/#employment

[change]

Jack,
Real facts are lost on morons.
tt has his own set of facts and although his name may say “truth” his words speak the opposite.