April 6, 2011 in Nation/World

Obama administration: Shutdown would hurt economy

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Warning of economic repercussions, the Obama administration said today that a government shutdown would halt the processing of tax returns and limit small business loans and government-guaranteed mortgages during peak home buying season.

The administration said that the Internal Revenue Service would suspend the processing of paper tax returns, though it would continue to deal with electronic returns. The Federal Housing Administration, which guarantees about 30 percent of home mortgages, would stop guaranteeing loans.

Social Security and Medicare beneficiaries would continue to receive benefits.

The administration described shutdown planning as congressional negotiators continued to work to strike a deal that sets spending limits through the end of September. Negotiators have until Friday to reach an agreement before triggering a shutdown.

The administration sought to put a human face on the fallout of a shutdown, casting it as a potential blow to the economic recovery.

Among other consequences cited by the administration:

—The Environmental Protection Agency would cease issuing permits and stop reviewing environmental impact statements, slowing approval of projects.

— Military personnel would not get paid beyond Friday but would continue to earn money that would be paid to them once the government resumes.

— National parks would be closed.

— Most government websites would not be updated, unless they were deemed essential.

48 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

mikeln on April 06 at 9:40 a.m.
Military personnel would stop being paid…untill? Some of our military families get food stamps to get by on already, lets kick them in the face some more. I bet the haliburten contract workers will still get their paychecks. Look at history, once a country can no longer provide for its military…well, you can guess the rest. All in all, this is just more crap being piled on us by elected officials that are crapholes in the pocket of the already too wealthy.
Dazzeetrader11 on April 06 at 9:49 a.m.
Continuing on would hurt more. Somebody has got to stop this spending!1 Ryan has a good plan. Obama has no plan.just keep spending. Military won’t be affected. Quit whining Mike…you don’t mean it anyway.
Wealthy people and your limited brand of class warfare won’t hurt or help this. Ryan’s plan will. Or is he the wrong “color” for you Mike?
Diana on April 06 at 10:06 a.m.
Tammy Faye Boehner initially demanded about 33 billion dollars in cuts to the budget as a condition to get Republicans on board to pass the 2011 budget. After much wrangling, Obama submitted a proposal to cut the budget by about 33 billion dollars.
So what does Boehner do? He REJECTS the amount of cuts to the budget he had previously endorsed.
It is not hard to see what is going on here. Poor Boehner. Being led by a bunch of teabaggers.
Shadedmuse on April 06 at 10:15 a.m.
If the republican-teabagger party wants to get series on debt elimination they need to do three things.
1 return to eisenhower tax levels and stop the bubble economies of consumerism.
2 end the military industrial spending at Pentigon
3 end the Iraq and Afganistan wars, they are what has ran up the debt with out the rich and corperations paing their share and getting a free ride, thiose, cheap free loaders.
SpokaneLiberal on April 06 at 10:19 a.m.
DAZZEE, Ryan’s plan is not awful, but the devil is in the details. The capping of tax rates at 25% when many big companies like GE already get tax benefits in the billions - without closing some of the deductions they use to get those is ludicrous.
And speaking of class warfare - the wealthy have been engaged in it for decades. They demonize nonexistent lifetime welfare people, they claim the stifling of economic growth by taxes even as the rates reach all time lows, and then demonize teachers as too well paid while the CEOs of dozens of companies make more than those companies pay in dividends. They push balancing the budget on the back of a 55 year old teacher rather than leaving the tax rate the same for a billionaire. The teacher, not the billionaire is supposedly responsible for the deficit.
You also show your ignorance of economics. Stopping spending will hurt the economy. It might not hurt it over the next 30 years more than our deficit but it will damage the economy for the next 1-5 years.
The military will be affected, they won’t get paid until the shutdown ends.
hawken on April 06 at 10:29 a.m.
Democrats decide whether or not the government shuts down.
Republicans have all kinds of short term and long term budgets on the board. None of which, of course, are acceptable to Democrats who are more concerned about posturing politically than real solutions to our monstrous problems.
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” Rahm Emanuel: Former chief of staff to Obama. Now, newly elected Mayor of Chicago.
jddavis on April 06 at 10:30 a.m.
Why wasn’t a budget passed in the previous session? Political reasons?
SpokaneLiberal on April 06 at 10:41 a.m.
The effective tax rate of US corporations is among the lowest in the developed world. The moderate statutory rate is more than mitigated by hefty deductions. I will consent to lowering the statutory rate to 21% if we also eliminate all deductions and depreciation.
terrymr on April 06 at 10:45 a.m.
It’s not about how much to cut but rather ensuring that the republicans pet hates are defunded, that being public radio / television, family planning, anything for the poor, education etc.
mikeln on April 06 at 11:06 a.m.
I have a friend in the military who, two weeks ago recieved a e-mail telling him and his family to be prepared for a shutdown. Does that mean plastic and duct tape? I would reconize dazzee and hawken on the street, the impression of the keyhole they peer out from impressed on their face. Haliburton stole trillions from the american people with their contract workers who were paid up to 3 times as much as a american soldier for the same work. Dicky boy is still chuckleing about the treason he and his buddies commited against us, profiting all the way to dubia. We need to get that money back and give these men their day in court, then hang those scumbags on the lawn of the capital building as a warning to all the other scumbags now serving as bought and paid for elected officials.
Charlie on April 06 at 11:22 a.m.
The democrats have the ultimate blame if the government shutdown occurs, they, the democrats “failed” to pass a constitutionally require fiscal budget. After all, they had a super majority in both houses and could have easily done so, but I guess for political reason chose to vote “present.”
greenlibertarian on April 06 at 11:26 a.m.
History offers us lessons; of course the teabagger zealot crusaders are unable to learn from such.
Congress signed off on a deal to keep the government funded through mid-March. But what happens next? The debate over raising the debt ceiling could be “nothing more than old-fashioned political theater,” says Capital Economics chief U.S. economist Paul Ashworth. Let’s hope.
A similar spat in 1995 between President Clinton and Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich led to a 26-day shutdown, during which 800,000 federal employees went on unpaid leave. Government spending fell 14.2% in the fourth quarter of that year, shaving a full percentage point off GDP growth. Note to politicians: with the recovery this shaky, that’s a loss we can’t afford.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2056717,00.html#ixzz1IlvDk3A2
IHike4Fun on April 06 at 11:31 a.m.
Government spending is a false indicator of the GDP since it don’t really produce anything.
Dazzeetrader11 on April 06 at 11:33 a.m.
It really IS up to Obama and his friends. Ryan’s budget, while difficult in terms of cuts, is the only way to reduce spending and debt. For far too long, the Dems have spent..Bush did his share as well..but it’s time buckle down.
Google would have been generating jobs like crazy in Spokane but the incentives simply weren’t there and the corp tax structure in this St and in Spokane precluded it. WHen will the pols learn?
I do hope the USA citicens understand the stakes involved.
There never will be payback to the large corps for what some have done. Obama can demonize all he wants but it’s HIM who promised much and has done nothing.not so much as a controlled budget. US needs business back in the US. If the incentives are there, things will swing back our way. It’s business, not unions, who produce jobs.
There might have to be a shutdown. Hope not but the Repubs look pretty serious.
MrNatural on April 06 at 11:34 a.m.
These are interesting times…when a cult of ideologues can so effectively threaten the function of this nation and adversely affect the well being of so many.
hawken on April 06 at 11:48 a.m.
Natural: The cult of “ideologues” controlled the house, senate and presidency, for two years and still chose not to pass a 2011 budget, due in October 2010.
greenlibertarian on April 06 at 11:51 a.m.
But again, the teabagger zealot crusaders couldn’t care less about reasonable government and compromise, in fact, they DESIRE and LONG for the US to “CRASH”: Traitors.
With the government set to run out of money on March 4, House Republicans and Senate Democrats began to look for a short-term solution. Boehner’s refusal to offer a temporary extension of current spending levels was backed by the freshmen (teabaggers), who insisted they would not accept any measure without a down payment on the deeper cuts to come.
“I will say no and I will shut down government,” Walsh vowed to a group of his constituents in late February. Democrats caved, but the next battle already looms as the rebels make noises about voting down an increase in the federal debt limit this spring, even if it means the U.S. defaults on obligations to its creditors.
Walsh estimates 20 to 25 freshmen (teabaggers) believe, as he does, that the nation’s fiscal woes are “so serious that this country needs to crash.” (continues)
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2056588-2,00.html
Did you catch THAT? The teabagger zealot crusaders WANT this country to “crash”.
Stinking rotten traitors is what they are, and those who support them are as well. Traitors. Lock ‘em up in Gitmo in general population.
valleyman on April 06 at 11:54 a.m.
Riddle me this MrNatural:
1) Why did Democrats refuse to propose or pass a budget for two years?
2) Is everyone who believes there is another way other than yours a member of the “cult?”
3) Are you any less of an “ideologue” than someone who disagrees with you?
4) If we hold up a mirror does it show the reflection of the Democrats who have been threatening the function of this nation and the well being of so many?
I’m really curious since the Democrats had their shot and did nothing, are they now the ‘Party of No’ since they have yet to posit one counter suggestion and instead say this will kill jobs and kill the country?
The tune of the fiddlers in the Senate and the White House has soured and Rome continues to burn…
valleyman on April 06 at 11:55 a.m.
Greenlib - Are those who spend money they borrowed from the Chinese traitors as well?
Ninch on April 06 at 12:12 p.m.
The decision to not pay military personnel was made by the Obama administration and is not automatic because of the shutdown. Obama controls what are termed “essential services.” All politics on his part.
But good incentive for people to e-file, which means a refund deposited directly in one’s bank account.
Re: Ryan’s proposal for cutting corporate tax rates… This is the same recommendation by Obama’s debt commission… and both propose simultaneous tax reform that removes the “loopholes” that benefitted Obama’s pal’s business, i.e. GE.
hawken on April 06 at 12:18 p.m.
Republicans have sponsored a bill to insure that our military gets paid in the event of a government shut down.
[Republican] Congressman Louie Gohmert Introduces Bill to Guarantee Military Gets Paid On Time if Government Shuts Down
March 31, 2011
Washington -
Today Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) introduced the Ensuring Pay for Our Military Act. This legislation ensures that members of the United States Military get their paycheck on time in the event that Congress cannot pass a budget.
“The men and women of the United States military are among the most heroic of Americans. These true patriots place their lives on the line to protect this country and ensure security for our future. If Congress cannot pass a budget, it’s not right for these valiant warriors and their families to suffer through a late paycheck. This is about paying those who protect us and defend our freedom,” said Rep. Gohmert.
“Ensuring the troops are paid on time is essential to the morale of our soldiers. No military member should have to worry about the financial situation of their family back home. The families of our service members act as a lifeline—one that supports, encourages, and impels American soldiers to defend this country with passion.”
This bill will appropriate necessary funds to ensure that members of the military, including reserve components, continue to receive pay and allowances for their service when a funding gap occurs. That could be caused by the failure to enact interim or full-year appropriations for the Department of Defense, which results in many members serving without a paycheck until the shutdown is over. It is not enough for the military to know they will receive back pay after the shutdown is over. They need to know that their paycheck will arrive on time.
Congressman Louie Gohmert is the Vice Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Prior to being elected to serve in Congress, Louie was elected to three terms as District Judge in Smith County, Texas. He also served as Chief Justice of Texas‘12th Court of Appeals.
http://gohmert.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=233274
Let the Democrats shut it down.
MrNatural on April 06 at 12:45 p.m.
Hmmm…me thinks I’ve hit a button…
Let’s see…for years I’ve suffered the ideological boorishness of Republican obstructionist in both house and senate…when approached by the president or democrats for bipartisan solutions they continue to be the party of no to further their incessant megalomania…to spin this shutdown as the fault of democrats is ludicrous…but then again the cult of tea-o-con ideologues is impregnable to criticism to a fault, in constant denial about the damage they cause to this nation and make counter accusations and assertions with fallacious self aggrandizing…I’d imagine if the tea-o-cons soiled themselves they would demand to know which democrat caused it…
Selfish myopic conservative ideologues are ruining this country…plain and simple…good day
johnclarke on April 06 at 12:57 p.m.
You know what would be awesome? A GOP example in black and white, so we can all understand where our “conservative” budget experts are coming from. After all, they are the experts. Please study this chart. Note who increases the debt, and who decreases it. Then look at the next chart. Notice how spending increases every year, and please really take notice under which Presidents spending increased the most.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
I have to assume that everyone on the GOP posting team is seeing this information for the first time, since it completely undermines everything you believe in, and defeats all of your so called arguments in one little click.
valleyman on April 06 at 12:59 p.m.
Me thinks you condemn the millions who voted for these “tea-o-cons” as if you are their superior in intellect and human standing. Now that is the definition of hypocrite…
Problem Solver on April 06 at 1:12 p.m.
I know people that own a business in a National Park gateway community which depends on tourism revenue just like thousands of other businesses across the country. Shutting down the National Parks will be absolutely devastating to them and they will probably have to close and lay off all of their employees. This will add even more people to the already absurd number of unemployed. It will be a huge ripple effect. The National Parks help to generate over $13 billion dollars for these communities.
If Republicants want to get serious about making some cuts why don’t they take a hard look at the defense spending? The National Parks budget isn’t even a fraction compared to the over $700 billion thrown at the huge military complex. Defense spending seems to be the “sacred cow” that has an open check. We already spend more on our military than the rest of the countries on this planet combined. And who is paying for all of that? Two wars started under George Bush were put on a credit card which is the main reason we are in this mess we are in today.
Next, how about ending the Bush tax cuts? It certainly did not help us during the Bush Administration as our country was hemorraging 800,000 job losses per month before he left office. The wealthiest 2% got even wealthier and still are. Also during that time, corporate America closed 40,000 factories and sent those jobs ourseas to save on labor costs. And where is the tax revenues from these corporations? We don’t really have spending problem, WE HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM! Even my taxes keep going down. Take a look at the history of the Federal Tax brackets sometime. They are the lowest they have ever been since 1953! What we have now is an oligarchy running the country. The Corporate States of America which belong to the few.
At a time when our economy is starting to gain some momentum and the unemployment numbers are going down, lets save our National Parks and all the businesses and employees that depend on them. We also need to save our agencies that help protect the poor and the elderly and take care of our own people and our environment. A country that spends more on war than life will surely die a spiritual death.
MrNatural on April 06 at 1:21 p.m.
…No valleyman that is where you and a few are sadly mistaken…I am no more superior than the next person…but I still call them the way I see them tea-o-cons…myopic-selfish…and grouchy too…
johnclarke on April 06 at 1:28 p.m.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/19/big-government-gets-bigger/#
Here is another fun link for the GOP fan club. Guess who increased the size of government the mostest ?
Listen - if you guys are tired of reading the facts that vaporize your entire line of thinking - go out and find a conservative candidate. Look harder, because so far you have yet to find one.
Dazzeetrader11 on April 06 at 2:03 p.m.
Clarkie..go read the 73 page budget and plan released yesterday. It’s in black and white PLUS it’s out there so you can read it with plenty of time to digest it..unlike the Dems who never let anyone read until it’s voting time.
Military aren’t threatened by this. Pubs like strong military. it’s the social entitlements we cannot afford any more. I do wonder why the Dems let the older folks ( 55-58) retire so young. Must be matching the unions again. These are very productive people.those oldsters….they offer superior job performance and shouldn’t be paid to retire so young. Greece has done that and look what’s happened to the handouts? Hand are now cut off.
Kids go to school.and I mean REAL school so you can produce something besides a “handout nation”. Military payouts are in Obama’s hands. NOT the repubs. He’s asuch a fraud and he fools you. FLim flam man with no substance.
Bomb that Obamacare too. Defunding is about the only way to stop that mess and save money instead of spending trillions on something few like.
jddavis on April 06 at 2:08 p.m.
IF both houses of Congress and President passed a budget last year, while Democrats were in the majority, there wouldn’t be a threat of a govt shutdown now.
Are any of you who continually complain about the Republicans at all upset about that? Why or why not?
Clearly the failure to pass a budget last year was for political purposes; many Democrats did not want their name associated with increased spending because it would make them more vulnerable to losing an election.
johnclarke on April 06 at 2:09 p.m.
You are not speaking to my point, as usual Daisy-do. My point is the GOP should lead by example. Any historical example will do, so I’m waiting for for an example of a Republican president that has actually shrunk the size of government and has not increased the debt. *crickets*
EdubU on April 06 at 2:24 p.m.
WE DON’T HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM, WE HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM……….how many times must it be…………………….oh forget it!! How do you all like that
middle finger Boehner and McConnell are giving us??
MrNatural on April 06 at 2:25 p.m.
jddavis…you know…you might be right about the failure to pass a budget last year was for political purposes…even as a dedicated progressive I will concede to that notion and in truth I was a bit frustrated with democrats for not taking a stand.
james_l on April 06 at 2:45 p.m.
While it sounds good in the sound bites and plays well to the base, Rep. Gohmert’s bill does nothing to address the other military issues, such as ammunition and supplies.
Since Social Security, Medicare, and military pay will not be impacted by the shutdown, they really are talking about shutting down about 1/3 to 1/2 of the government.
Let me put it in terms even the simple minded hyper-neocons on this board can understand: there are 3 people in a very large room with many people, Mr. President, Mr. House, and Mr. Senate. Mr. House is holding a very powerful bomb in his hand and telling the other two that if he doesn’t get exactly what he wants, he will blow up the room, seriously maiming or killing all around him and that it will be the sole fault of Mr. President and Mr. Senate.
johnclarke on April 06 at 2:49 p.m.
Have you guys completed your research yet? Still waiting.
Yeah, so the Democrats did not pass a budget last year. That’s cool by me since George Bush passed a budget then simply ignored it by not counting all the spending on two wars. So, just for argument’s sake, once Obama started actually “counting” that money on the books, did everyone thing spending would go down or something ?
Yes, for everyone pointing out the super obvious (we have a revenue problem) you are right ! You win ! In the tradition of my last question, when Bush cut taxes did everyone think revenue would go up ? Wow, math is not my strong suit but I think I know the answer.
greyhound2 on April 06 at 2:53 p.m.
In December, Republicans held unemployment benefits hostage to tax cuts for the very wealthy. Now, they want to throw Grandma out of the rest home to support some idea about “liberty” and “freedom” for people on the other side of the globe who hate our guts. And the incumbent President wants to spend $1 trillion dollars for a job which pays only $400,000 for only four years. This makes sense?
jddavis on April 06 at 2:59 p.m.
James—your terms are abstract, but I understand what you are trying to say. The problem with your scenario is that Mr. President can’t do what either of Mr House or Mr Senate want, he can only suggest and condone.
Mr House was sent in the room by the landlords of the premisis, demanding that since he is on their payroll, he do what they hired him to do. Mr Senate is much like Mr House, but he hasn’t quite come to terms with the desires of the landlords. Mr Senate didn’t listen too well last fall, and got his hand slapped. Now, Mr House had to convince Mr Senate to do the will of the landlords or they will both be unemployed. Meanwhile, Mr President wants them both to “grow up” and take care of business because if they don’t, he will be joining them on the unemployment line.
crazyivan44 on April 06 at 4:04 p.m.
I haven’t had time to peruse all of the above links in depth yet, but do any of them being presented here recognize that spending in a specific year is not directly attributed to the particular President that was in office during that year? If initiatives and bills are made into law and set up for the next 5 years or 10 years you cannot always simply choose not to fund something in a subsequent year. Republican or Democrat, it does not matter, much of our spending is predetermined before the yearly budget.
I’ll throw in my two cents that a rise or fall in spending and deficits cannot be explained away by a simple line or bar graph unfortunately, you would have about 500 footnotes explaining what it is attributed to.
johnclarke on April 06 at 4:21 p.m.
Well crazyivan44, at least you responded - and guess what? I agree with you. I agree that the Obama budget and spending is a direct result of the adminstration prior to his. If you cut revenue (taxes) and drastically increase spending and the size of government, then you get today. If you closely study the data, it takes years to undo Republican tax cuts and spending increases. In my mind, considering the TARP, the wars and all the other reckless expansion of the government - I gave Obama 3-4 years to get things moving. I was wrong. Until taxes are adjusted back to sane levels, we are boned.
What I will not agree with you on is everything else. You will find my facts and data on those links. Again, thanks for at least responding. Every time I post this information the GOP fan club seems to disappear like they caught some logic spray in the face.
crazyivan44 on April 06 at 4:54 p.m.
Hi John,
Long time no talk. Well, we know we have differences of opinion that we have been able to discuss in civil fashion in the past, and I make no effort to hide my disdain for our current President, but I will agree with you that we got royally screwed with TARP and a number of other expenditures, and I am less than pleased with how much of the economy was handled in the last decade.
Thanks again for the info, I’ll read up on it. I will readily admit I haven’t put as much time into researching our current financial situation as I would like to. At this point I don’t care who comes up with the dang idea, we’re going to kill our country with politics if we keep writing blank checks if we haven’t passed that point already.
jddavis on April 06 at 5:01 p.m.
Johnclarke; I too agree with crazyivan with the caveat that Congress controls the money. With President Obama in office and having both houses of Congress in the Democrat majority, spending increased greatly. When President Bush was in office spending also increased (to a lesser degree) particularly when both houses were in the Democrat majority.
When you say “until taxes are adjusted back to sane levels…” I agree, however, I assume you mean that revenue should be increased through higher taxes while I support lower spending and lower taxes—forgive me if I misread your position.
In an earlier post, you seemed indifferent that a budget hasn’t been passed for this FY because President Bush passed a budget but ignored it “by not counting all the spending on two wars.” Not sure what you mean by that…please explain. Congress approved appropriations for funding the “wars”, so I am not sure where in a/the budget funding for it would exist. Funding / budgeting for the military is in the budget, as required by the Constitution.
Shadedmuse on April 06 at 5:16 p.m.
The Republican-Teabagger party Budget plan is the real Death Panel for Grandma.
bdr on April 06 at 5:51 p.m.
Obama has all the tools he needs to reduce the entire deficit in a few hours.
1: Declare war on China
2: open bag with ICBM codes alert NORAD 25% of usa’s warheads directed at coordinates 35 00 N, 105 00 E
3: Give directive to scramble go go go.
14 trillion Deficit GONE by Friday 100% obliteration of China
USA carries on as normal (tea party disbands Monday)!
johnclarke on April 06 at 6:37 p.m.
Hello jd and crazyivan;
May I say what a pleasure it is to actually have an adult discussion on this board.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/us/politics/20budget.html?_r=2
I have to make dinner for my posse, but in short the evidence is pretty easy to find with a little searching. I will dig up some more facts later.
I guess in short, the hardcore GOP are simply frauds in my opinion. The statistics speak for themselves, they spend more and tax less. Duh. Also, the United States is getting bigger. Government services cost more. The previous President led a stunning increase in the size of government under the heading of “Homeland Security”. I can tell you from access to the world of military contracting that it has been a river of money from your pocket - and the results are quite questionable.
Corporate profits are at a record high, personal wealth in certain tax brackets have increased at a huge rate, and you and I paid off Wall Street - and guess what ? The market is right back where it started. Don’t get me wrong, I blame Obama big time for employing people like Larry Summers, and for not dealing with the financial crisis with real reform. But, I’m off topic.
Cheers gentlemen.
Dazzeetrader11 on April 07 at 1:18 a.m.
BDR..might be easier to get the money back Obama and his types sent from the fed to other countries. Wonder why he did that!!! We owe China $800 billion……get the money back and write them a check. A lot more sense than funding the United Auto Workers as they pillaged GM. Call the notes and get the money back……or maybe he wanted to plunder the treasury and the fed…..it didn’t happen by accident. He had a plan in mind.
Anyway… back to the thread. Cut taxes to where Ryan wants. Nothing gets cut . Flat tax of 25% with no loopholes….individuals and corps alike.
johnclarke on April 07 at 9:04 a.m.
Yes Daisy, cutting taxes has a history of working so well.
eagleproducer on April 07 at 9:13 a.m.
I always love it when Dazee posts when she is past the PINT of no return… (props to Misjustice)
The UAW conceded billions in legally contracted salary and benefits when their masters needed to be bailed out. Those are the facts, not that they received government funds.
Placing taxes at 25% for EVERYONE would not be a tax decrease, but a massive tax increase. No one in your party has the sack to do that and you know it. The flat tax is just tossed around to keep simpletons confused. The last group of people who want the tax code reformed are the ones who helped write it: The wealthy and corporations.
eagleproducer on April 07 at 9:15 a.m.
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2011/04/michael_c_ormsby_us_attorney_c.php
Where is this story, Spokesman Review staff?
misjustice on April 07 at 6:24 p.m.
Eagle; wish I could take credit for the “pint of no return” but it was the Daze herself which coined the phrase. It was one of her typos, I knew she meant point but I ran with it; as did others! Good Times!
; )
Gourd head, shut down the gubmint. It worked so well in 1995, right Newt?
; )