Not really. Romney proposed to expand the Bush tax cut,

the spin was he is NOT reducing tax for the rich, but rather NOT increasing for them. The problem was that tax cut for the rich was not necessary to start with, and certainly can't be afforded now.

Obama's proposal was to extend the cut for the majority, but not for those over 250K. Numbers can be argued and "rich" can be defined differently, but the concept seems to be right to me.

所有跟帖： 

• ok. the key is whether bush tax cut should be extended for all -quantnj- ♀ (438 bytes) () 10/24/2012 postreply 21:11:31

• Strong partisan grid-lock certainly has both parties to thank fo -Warsteiner- ♂ (280 bytes) () 10/24/2012 postreply 21:18:48

• why not just dissolve the congress? -:) -quantnj- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/24/2012 postreply 21:30:58

• Need more parties to form coalitions, so they can learn to compr -Warsteiner- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/24/2012 postreply 21:32:39

• ou forget the 10% already paid more than other developed country -sleepdonkey- ♂ (196 bytes) () 10/25/2012 postreply 07:46:13