Yes, the TEMPORARY tax cuts that WERE ALWAYS legally intended to expire in 2009. They clearly didn't do what was claimed, in fact they caused the deficits of the Bush Years and helped to crash the economy. Yes, Obama extended them TEMPORARILY because of the recession. It would have worked against the stimulus. But the recession is over and we have to return to paying our fair share of taxes. Clinton was simply making the straight-forward Keynesian argument that it's a bad idea to take money out of the economy, whether through spending cuts or tax increases, when you're in a fragile recovery. He did not support extending the tax cuts forever and he has made that clear that he was talking about extending the middle class tax cuts, not the tax cuts for the very wealthy, which he supports ending.
Neither was it prohibited. Obviously, auto liability insurance is mandated. The Constitution allows the Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
So if they didn't do as claimed, why double down on stupid? Oh, so when Obama doubles down, its not stupid anymore? And yea, when Clinton says it too, its just simply a straight-forward Keynesian argument not more stupid?
People still have an option with auto insurance. An option that the Obama care failed to provide. You don't have to buy a car...
looking at clintons percentage there. who controlled congress during his years? the speaker of the house must've been pretty adamant about a balanced budget.
Different circumstances. Bush did it when we were posting surpluses because he said it would help the economy. It did the opposite and crashed the economy. Obama will get rid of it, but doing it in the middle of a recession would have taken money out of circulation, which is bad economics.
You don't have to live in America either. Clearly, the Constitution allows Congress to regulate commerce without restrictions.
Its not as simple as you make it out Red. The government cant force you to buy anything. IF they could, they'd set the price of gas, cars, housing, and a entire grip of EVERYTHING. Regulation is far different from a mandate and the mandate for auto insurance isn't even on the same planet as the Obama care mandate. Also, the minimum insurance that you are required to purchase isn't even for yourself, but rather the other people around you. That's not the case with Obama care. Not everyone needs health insurance nor does everyone want it. Cute point about not living in the US. That also isn't an option for many Americans. Vastly those in the 18-25 range and those who actually like this life. Furthermore, I have seen no distinction for where you actually live but rather if you are simply an American citizen. So by your thoughts, just as I can be an American citizen and work over seas and pay taxes, I can live over seas and still be forced to have American insurance that I will never use. Seriously, if you think that the government should force you to buy a car to then buy auto insurance so its cheaper for all drivers even though people that live in large cities don't need a car, then you are more far gone than I originally thought.
