Thread: So the Republicans want to cut unemployment yet keep helping the Rich with tax cuts?

So Republican logic is basically: "The more you have.. the more we will give you. The less you have.. the more we will take from you."

History has proven tax cuts for the rich don't help the economy. The economy has always boomed when the rich payed the highest taxes. How many jobs is Paris Hilton creating with her tax cut?

So now we will throw everyone without a job out on their a*s for the holidays and continie lining the pockets of Donald Trump? This is what Republicans believe in?

I don't get it.

The GOP is the party of the rich and those that think they will get rich. Their goal has always been to concentrate wealth and protect the wealthy. They latch on to other issues like religion, guns and abortion to get votes even though they don't give a rats ass about them. Wall Street owns the GOP.

Originally Posted by Singularity

In the right circumstances, tax cuts stimulate the economy. It's a simple fact. Businesses paying less taxes and thus making more money will more likely than not hire more employees. .

No, tax cuts mean more dividends for stockholders, bonuses and pay for the owners. Demand for products and services determines optimum workforce levels. The Bush tax cuts have been in place for years and did nothing to add to employment. When demand declined so did employment. The rich got richer while the poor slobs lost their jobs.

Originally Posted by mertex

This should definitely show American citizens who Republicans favor. The rich and wealthy - over the poor and unemployed.

The most disgusting thing, they are able to do it right before Christmas, at the same time they are cackling loud and clear about wanting tax cuts for the upper wealthy to become permanent!

Geez, I hope those unemployed that voted Republican will think long and hard over their choice.

I hope so too. Some people have to learn things the hard way. But I'm sure Glen Beck or Rush will find a way to spin it so the Republicans look innocent. If Glen Beck told one of these sheep to eat their own poop they would do it.

Unemployment is managed by the states. People that qualify for unemployment will still get it.

This is referring to federal unemployment extensions, people that have run out the clock on their unemployment benefits. Sorry, but this isn't the UK. We don't keep handing out cash forever.

In the meantime, the federal government isn't supposed to hand out any of the unemployment cash. It's supposed to be paid in-state by the employer. If you want them to last longer, advocate for larger unemployment payments in your state.

Originally Posted by Singularity

Again with this comparison of unemployment insurance to welfare. It's not welfare, and it's not an entitlement system. They paid into it.

I didn't say that. I even spoke specifically about what unemployment is and how it works...

But you know what? The comparison IS apt now that you mention it.

"Extensions" aren't unemployment insurance anymore. They ARE welfare, they ARE entitlements. The employers of each state pay for said insurance, and said insurance is available for a set period of time. If you go beyond that period of time, you no longer qualify for unemployment payouts.

If those programs needed to be longer, then those unemployment payments would have needed to be proportionately larger. I guess that's a matter that should be resolved by the state-managed unemployment insurance agencies, and I'll note, "Hey, government failed at doing something the private sector could be doing better, what a shock."

The government has a responsibility

It doesn't even have the power, let alone the responsibility.