Out of Work? Republicans send their smypathy!

[NoCalMike]

http://gazettextra.com/news/2010/jul/20/out-work-republicans-send-their-sympathies/

Dear Unemployed Person or Persons:

These are tough times for Americans. They're especially tough times for people like you who have lost your jobs, and who still can't find new ones, because of the Obama Recession, which started at approximately 12 noon on January 20, 2009, after eight years of nonstop growth and prosperity under President George W. Bush.

We sympathize with your situation, and we know how hard it must be to be without a job as the bills pile up. (Technically, we don't really know how hard it must be, because we all have jobs -- with lots of great benefits, too -- but we can certainly imagine how hard it must be. We'd hate to be in your shoes right now.)

Anyway, we sympathize with what you and your loved ones must be going through -- although why unemployed people still deserve to have loved ones when they're not doing a single thing to help them is a total mystery to us.

We're writing to set the record straight after weeks of misinformation put out by the Obama administration and their friends in the liberal media. You may have heard that Republicans have been opposed to extending unemployment benefits for the millions of Americans whose benefits have already run out.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The truth is: Republicans haven't been opposed to extending unemployment benefits. We've been opposed to letting the Senate vote on extending unemployment benefits -- that's a totally different thing.

You may also have heard that some of us have had some unflattering things to say about unemployment benefits in general, and about how receiving unemployment benefits is a whole lot easier than looking for work, and only encourages people to stay unemployed.

We weren't talking about you. You're almost certainly not the kind of person who'd sit on his duff for week after week and take advantage of the generosity of hardworking, taxpaying, real Americans.

You know the kind of person we mean.

The other thing you might have heard about us is that we're "hypocrites," because now we oppose extending unemployment benefits, when we used to be in favor of them when George Bush was president.

Or maybe you've heard us called even bigger "hypocrites" because we insisted that any extended unemployment benefits be paid for, rather than adding to the deficit -- even though we aren't insisting that extended tax cuts for wealthy Americans be paid for, and even though those particular tax cuts add much more to the deficit than unemployment benefits would.

We have a very simple answer to these charges: Where's Obama's birth certificate?

Besides, those are just numbers -- we have the facts on our side. And the No. 1 fact is this: Everyone knows that Republicans stand for fiscal discipline and responsible budgeting. In fact, whenever fiscal discipline has broken down and the budget has gotten out of control, Republicans are the first ones to say who's responsible. (Hint: Not us.)

Mitch McConnell, our Republican Senate Leader, put it exactly right the other day when he talked about the dangers of excessive government spending to help people who can't even hold a job. "At what point," he asked, "do we pivot and start being concerned about our children and our grandchildren?"

To Republicans, the answer is perfectly clear: We pivot when there's a Democrat in the White House.

:D :beatdeadhorse:

[Redskins Diehard]

SMypathy is what those people need.

[Landryslegend]

More silly lies and smears. Meanwhile the utterly braindead libs eat it up like candy. So predictable. They werent against the unemployment benefits, they simply wanted them paid for instead of passing on the debt YET AGAIN.

[Smoot Point Really]

Ps. Earn some money and stop being a damned parasite... :)

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

More silly lies and smears. Meanwhile the utterly braindead libs eat it up like candy. So predictable. They werent against the unemployment benefits, they simply wanted them paid for instead of passing on the debt YET AGAIN.

The Republicans were against them just to be asses....to believe otherwise is asinine.

[Burgold]

Funny. I thought when you said silly lies and smears you were talking about the first paragraph, esp. this ... "because of the Obama Recession, which started at approximately 12 noon on January 20, 2009, after eight years of nonstop growth and prosperity under President George W. Bush."

Really a pretty despicable letter.

[IONTOP]

Oh now I understand... It's not that they're against the extension, it's that their against the VOTE for extension... Sign me up...


(But I have a really sneaky suspicion this was tongue in cheek)

[sacase]

Funny thing is I know 3 people who all of a sudden found jobs the month their unemployment ran out. Coincidence? Doubt it.

[IONTOP]

Funny thing is I know 3 people who all of a sudden found jobs the month their unemployment ran out. Coincidence? Doubt it.

I bet at least 2 of them were coincidence....

[Landryslegend]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6syRRHTTic

[twa]

The Reps simply took Pelosi at her word that unemployment payments are a form of Stimulus.

If it is true,then taking the funds from those already set aside for Stimulus is only right.....or Left as the case appears:ols:

Certainly many long term unemployed seem to be "shovel ready projects"

[Landryslegend]

Heres some more lefty brilliance, but go right ahead, believe everything they say as absolute TRUTH



Moron 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JTncsZcvAg
Arizona doesnt border Mexico??


Moron 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK3rTUgoQD4
Doesnt know there is NO north or south Vietnam anymore?

And THIS is what leads us? Unreal.

[Park City Skins]

Heres some more lefty brilliance, but go right ahead, believe everything they say as absolute TRUTH



Moron 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JTncsZcvAg
Arizona doesnt border Mexico??


Moron 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK3rTUgoQD4
Doesnt know there is NO north or south Vietnam anymore?

And THIS is what leads us? Unreal.
And just what,pray tell,does any of that have to do with the topic of the thread?

[Zguy28]

There are those with wisdom and good intentions on both sides. There is also those without a wit of common sense on both sides.

Kind of like the ES Tailgate.

[Landryslegend]

And just what,pray tell,does any of that have to do with the topic of the thread?

Your right. Sorry bout that, wont happen again.

[Destino]

And just what,pray tell,does any of that have to do with the topic of the thread?

He just wanted to stupid libruls to know that conservatives are smarterer.

[Landryslegend]

He just wanted to stupid libruls to know that conservatives are smarterer.


Nope, thats already common knowledge. :D

[Hubbs]

*sigh*

http://babble.com/CS/blogs/droolicious/2008/10/01-07/everyone_poops.jpg

[Mickalino]

Funny thing is I know 3 people who all of a sudden found jobs the month their unemployment ran out. Coincidence? Doubt it.

Except for the millions of people who simply cannot live off of a $275 a week unemployment check.

[killerbee99]

And just what,pray tell,does any of that have to do with the topic of the thread?


Please :banhim: , dude has been trolling all day, hijacking threads with his constant BS.

Anyways the letter is pretty funny....

[Landryslegend]

Its all the conservative republicans fault I tell ya. Conservatives=pure evil. Liberals=salt of the Earth. Its true you know, the conservatives wanted to deny unemployment benefit extentions for no other reason than just to be mean spirited. They love death and destruction, Honest. Every time a baby starves to death from malnutrition, a conservative gets their HORNS. Oh wait, theres another set of horns handed out. whooopie!!! Yes, everything is that black and white, if your a simpleton that is...

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Its all the conservative republicans fault I tell ya. Conservatives=pure evil. Liberals=salt of the Earth. Its true you know, the conservatives wanted to deny unemployment benefit extentions for no other reason than just to be mean spirited. they love death and destruction, Honest. Every time a baby starves from malnutrition, a conservative gets their HORNS. Oh wait, theres another set of horns handed out. whooopie!!! Yes, everything is that black and white, if your a simpleton that is...

Please stop embarrassing conservatives.

[Park City Skins]

Please :banhim: , dude has been trolling all day, hijacking threads with his constant BS.

Anyways the letter is pretty funny....
It was obviously a rhetorical question that didn't,and doesn't,need or require an answer,(except the one I received earlier). Now back on topic.

[killerbee99]

Please stop embarrassing conservatives.


I still respect some conservative views on this board, except for his views. They sound like the nonsensical ramblings of a loon.

[THEREALTOR1]

Please stop embarrassing conservatives.

Thank You R4L21 :thumbsup:

[Landryslegend]

As I posted earlier, the republicans were not against extending the benefits. They simply wanted them payed for instead of passing on the debt yet again. They wanted the money to either come out of the failed stimulus program, or by cuts somewhere else. This has been a matter of public record for awhile now, I thought everybody knew. Big dustup over nothing. Purely political in every sense of the word.

[Landryslegend]

I still respect some conservative views on this board, except for his views. They sound like the nonsensical ramblings of a loon.


Cool. Im young, I'll get over it. Im sure Ill be o.k. Not everyone can agree on everything. Hey, isnt it a general rule of thumb on the net to attack a posters ideas but not attack the poster?

[killerbee99]

Cool. Im young, I'll get over it. Im sure Ill be o.k. Not everyone can agree on everything. Hey, isnt it a general rule of thumb on the net to attack a posters ideas but not attack the poster?

Well buddy, like it was said in another thread, you are lacking in reading comprehension, I said I don't respect YOUR views, which sounded like ramblings from a loon. Never said YOU were a LOON.

Reading is fundamental !!!

[killerbee99]

But seriously, did Boehner really send that out? Wow.....

[Kilmer17]

Out of work? Republicans send their sympathies

By RICK HOROWITZ

Speaking of reading being fundamental.

It was a satire piece, written by a liberal in an attempt to smear the position of the GOP.

[Landryslegend]

Wife......" Honey, we have to pay the mortgage right away but we have a big problem, we have no money"

Husband..." No problem honey, just take the money out of our vacation slush fund we have been saving for"

Wife...." But I dont want to use that money, we MAY still go on our trip, I want you to run down to the clip joint and take out a high interest loan to pay our mortgage payment"

Husband...." But honey, thats insane, a trip is a luxery, our mortgage is a true NEED, besides, who in the world pays a loan with a loan??


Wife,..." I dont care, now go borrow the money or were gonna be homeless!"

Husband..." But honey, we have the money right there,.......ahhhhhh forget it!"

[killerbee99]

Out of work? Republicans send their sympathies

By RICK HOROWITZ

Speaking of reading being fundamental.

It was a satire piece, written by a liberal in an attempt to smear the position of the GOP.

That was why I said it was funny, and was clarifying if Boehner really wrote it, so calm down with trying to stick up for you "buddy" over there Kilmer. Why don't you follow the thread and conversation before jumping in with your 2 cents with aint worth squat in this conversation.

[Landryslegend]

But seriously, did Boehner really send that out? Wow.....


Ummmmm, WOW is right.

[Landryslegend]

well buddy, like it was said in another thread, you are lacking in reading comprehension, i said i don't respect your views, which sounded like ramblings from a loon. Never said you were a loon.

Reading is fundamental !!!


Wow, IS THIS EVEN FOR REAL? You are just playing, RIGHT??......

[Kilmer17]

LOL. Youre just bitter because two posts after telling someone that reading is fundamental, you showed your own ass by failing to read the OP.

If Boehner wrote it, it would have said "BY JOHN BOEHNER".

Its still a disgusting display of the liberal playbook.

[Landryslegend]

That was why I said it was funny, and was clarifying if Boehner really wrote it, so calm down with trying to stick up for you "buddy" over there Kilmer. Why don't you follow the thread and conversation before jumping in with your 2 cents with aint worth squat in this conversation.



Says the man who's very 1st post in the thread was off topic.

[Park City Skins]

That was why I said it was funny, and was clarifying if Boehner really wrote it, so calm down with trying to stick up for you "buddy" over there Kilmer. Why don't you follow the thread and conversation before jumping in with your 2 cents with aint worth squat in this conversation.
You're not exactly lighting up the thread with responses that are worth anything near 2 cents yourself. I'd recommend easing up. A lot.




Geez. . It's almost Friday. It's Summer. Relax folks.

[Landryslegend]

Im also going to cut back on my sarcasm too. I can sometimes get carried away, but I DO mean MOST of it to be all in fun. I would like the chance to debate, discuss, and maybe get a good laugh or two.

[twa]

Geez. . It's almost Friday. It's Summer. Relax folks.


OXE-vP15cug

[capt1an chaos]

The GOP is trying to paint itself as having supported the idea of unemployment extensions with fiscal responsibility. Yet this is the same party that embraced fiscal irresponsibility when the economy was powerful — at the end of the Clinton era, when Bush took office and we had one of the greatest budget surpluses in history.

[killerbee99]

LOL. Youre just bitter because two posts after telling someone that reading is fundamental, you showed your own ass by failing to read the OP.

If Boehner wrote it, it would have said "BY JOHN BOEHNER".

Its still a disgusting display of the liberal playbook.

I read the opening piece and I said I thought it was funny, so calm down, I am not bitter.

[capt1an chaos]

Hey, GOP, A crisis is not the right time to cut back. Rich people — and nations — stay rich by not spending money, but poor people have to spend in order to stop being poor. As individuals, we spend what we can scrounge up on getting enough gas to get to interviews, clothes to wear to said interviews, and babysitters to watch the kids while we interview. As a nation, we have to spend on unemployment extensions so that as individuals we have something to spend. Your financial timing is completely backwards.

[killerbee99]

Please :banhim: , dude has been trolling all day, hijacking threads with his constant BS.

Anyways the letter is pretty funny....

That was what I posted and I did stay on topic, Landryslegend

[killerbee99]

Ummmmm, WOW is right.

Guess I should have put my sarcasm meter on......never mind

[twa]

Hey, GOP, A crisis is not the right time to cut back. Rich people — and nations — stay rich by not spending money, but poor people have to spend in order to stop being poor. As individuals, we spend what we can scrounge up on getting enough gas to get to interviews, clothes to wear to said interviews, and babysitters to watch the kids while we interview. As a nation, we have to spend on unemployment extensions so that as individuals we have something to spend. Your financial timing is completely backwards.

Funny Dems were preaching fiscal responsibility until it became inconvenient

Wonder why?

http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_Id=ba781dfa-82ef-46bf-97cf-9d7213d7ade8

The President, Democrats Previously Praised Fully Offset Unemployment Benefits, But Last Month Rejected Offset Benefits Proposed By GOP Four Times

FLASHBACK NOVEMBER 2009: OFFSET UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS “FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE”


PRESIDENT OBAMA: “It Is Fully Paid For, And So It Is Fiscally Responsible.” “Now, it's important to note that the bill I signed will not add to our deficit. It is fully paid for, and so it is fiscally responsible.” (President Obama, Remarks, 11/6/09)

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “These Benefits Are Fully Offset…” “Summary of Reid-Baucus Amendment: Extended Unemployment Benefits. Provides unemployed workers in all states who have exhausted benefits with an additional 14 weeks of benefits. Authorizes an additional 6 weeks of benefits for workers in high unemployment states (those with unemployment rates of 8.5% or higher). These benefits are fully offset...” (Sen. Reid, Press Release, 11/4/09)

WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET: “It Is Fiscally Responsible, Paid For.” It is fiscally responsible, paid for by postponing tax provisions benefiting U.S. multinational corporations and other measures.” (“Fact Sheet: The Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009,” The White House, 11/6/09)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA): “This Adds Up To A 20-Week Extension Of Unemployment Benefits For Those In The Toughest Job Markets. The Legislation Is Fully-Offset, And Would Not Increase The Deficit Or National Debt.” (Sen. Feinstein, Congressional Record, S.10910, 10/29/09)

[Landryslegend]

Guess I should have put my sarcasm meter on......never mind

When talking about a SARCASM METER, that is a term used to describe someone who has read a post and failed to see that the original poster was being sarcastic. It is not a term used to describe someone who MADE a sarcastic post. Its o.k, you dont have to invent a STORY about how you were really only just being sarcastic when you asked if Boehner actually sent the letter out. Especially since in an even earlier post you said you were CLARIFYING if Boehner really wrote it or not. Makes it look like you made a dumb mistake, got called on it, felt foolish, then lied about it. Not good, honesty is always the best policy. We just had a thread on a story similar to this moral situation about the lady giving the speech at the NAACP. Alot can be learned from that story.

[GSF]

Funny thing is I know 3 people who all of a sudden found jobs the month their unemployment ran out. Coincidence? Doubt it.

I'm calling bull**** on this one. The max you can get from unemeployment is something like 1200 per month, and you had to be making pretty decent money to get that much. Nobody is laying around living on unemployment. It's not enough to live on.

[Landryslegend]

I'm calling bull**** on this one. The max you can get from unemeployment is something like 1200 per month, and you had to be making pretty decent money to get that much. Nobody is laying around living on unemployment. It's not enough to live on.

Not here in Wisconsin. Im a small contractor with 4 employees. Had to temporarily lay off a couple guys last winter for 2 months, they were collecting 375.00 each per week. Not all that much money, but not too bad either when needed as a safety net.

[SnyderShrugged]

I support unemployment benefits, (I was within a month of needed them myself)especially now, but there does have to be a point where the hard fact that they have to be paid for somehow.

Why is it to much to ask for spending in other areas to be reduced in order to pay for this needed service?

[The Evil Genius]

I support unemployment benefits, (I was within a month of needed them myself)especially now, but there does have to be a point where the hard fact that they have to be paid for somehow.

Why is it to much to ask for spending in other areas to be reduced in order to pay for this needed service?


Why the concern for all of the sudden? It wasn't a problem for you (not you SS, the collective you's) 19 months ago.


:evilg:

[SnyderShrugged]

Why the concern for all of the sudden? It wasn't a problem for you (not you SS, the collective you's) 19 months ago.


:evilg:

I definitely think there was concern for all spending for many years and throughout many admins. Just depends who you are looking at (I dont believe that the general neo-con R cared too much, which I think was probably your point)

[The Evil Genius]

I definitely think there was concern for all spending for many years and throughout many admins. Just depends who you are looking at (I dont believe that the general neo-con R cared too much, which I think was probably your point)

Exactly. The GOP is being obstructionist because that is the their only true power these days. They hope to punish the american people, so that those people will turn on the DEMS and Obama.

It's a gutsy play - but it looks like its working.

[Burgold]

LOL. Youre just bitter because two posts after telling someone that reading is fundamental, you showed your own ass by failing to read the OP.

If Boehner wrote it, it would have said "BY JOHN BOEHNER".

Its still a disgusting display of the liberal playbook.

Well, that's not even true and you know it. How many documents authored by a Congressmen are actually written by staffers. By John Boehner doesn't mean by John Boehner.

[Kilmer17]

Well, that's not even true and you know it. How many documents authored by a Congressmen are actually written by staffers. By John Boehner doesn't mean by John Boehner.

I dont believe that you wrote this either. Probably some intern at NPR doing your bidding.

[Burgold]

Rats! I've been sniffed out. Can you delete that so I don't get fired please.

[Ax]

Exactly. The GOP is being obstructionist because that is the their only true power these days. They hope to punish the american people, so that those people will turn on the DEMS and Obama.

It's a gutsy play - but it looks like its working.
Of course, no way the D's passed this in hopes of buying those 3 million votes. Which is the only depth of their concern for those, "American people."

Just like the R's, it's all about getting elected.

[The Evil Genius]

Of course, no way the D's passed this in hopes of buying those 3 million votes. Which is the only depth of their concern for those, "American people."

Just like the R's, it's all about getting elected.

I am sure they did.

Of course, they did by helping people out - not buy punishing them.

So when did punishing the needy become the GOP strategy for winning? January 2009?

[Ax]

So when did punishing the needy become the GOP strategy for winning? January 2009?
Yeah, I guess. About the same time the D's claimed paying for it mattered.

[twa]

I am sure they did.

Of course, they did by helping people out - not buy punishing them.

So when did punishing the needy become the GOP strategy for winning? January 2009?

Nice spin that ignores the GOP submitting unemployment extensions 4 times.(with the stipulation it will be paid for,a stance the Dems used to push)

When did punishing the taxpayers become the Dems strategy for winning?:silly:

Some of us realize who will foot the bills for all spending excess...be it R or D.

[killerbee99]

When talking about a SARCASM METER, that is a term used to describe someone who has read a post and failed to see that the original poster was being sarcastic. It is not a term used to describe someone who MADE a sarcastic post. Its o.k, you dont have to invent a STORY about how you were really only just being sarcastic when you asked if Boehner actually sent the letter out. Especially since in an even earlier post you said you were CLARIFYING if Boehner really wrote it or not. Makes it look like you made a dumb mistake, got called on it, felt foolish, then lied about it. Not good, honesty is always the best policy. We just had a thread on a story similar to this moral situation about the lady giving the speech at the NAACP. Alot can be learned from that story.

Was trying to be sarcastic but failed in that respect, you got me there

[HailGreen28]

Well, if we're going to mock stereotypes: http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/wp-content/gallery/random/vote-democrat-its-easier-than-working.jpg

[NoCalMike]

The Republican party's line of "Make sure it is paid for" is a joke. How is that War On Terrorism that just topped 1 Trillion dollar being paid for? How about those tax cuts to the top 1% under Bush, how exactly were those paid for?

So now when the small guy is hurting, suddenly it is time to be "fiscally responsible" and sorry, go away!

Riiiight. "Has to be paid for" that is the lamest excuse.

Let the Bush tax cuts expire. That would be one easy option, as that would probably bring in more than unemployment insurance is dishing out.

[Landryslegend]

The Republican party's line of "Make sure it is paid for" is a joke. How is that War On Terrorism that just topped 1 Trillion dollar being paid for? How about those tax cuts to the top 1% under Bush, how exactly were those paid for?

So now when the small guy is hurting, suddenly it is time to be "fiscally responsible" and sorry, go away!

Riiiight. "Has to be paid for" that is the lamest excuse.

Let the Bush tax cuts expire. That would be one easy option, as that would probably bring in more than unemployment insurance is dishing out.

I dont think you understand. I dont even like to use the words "GIVING ME A TAX CUT" because it infers that the govt is GIVING me something. BALONEY, they arent GIVING me a darned thing. They didnt earn the money....I DID, they didnt work for it....I DID, so how can they GIVE ME a tax cut? They cant, its MY money. It is ME that is GIVING THEM something when I pay my taxes. Dang, people are SOOOOOOO brainwashed.

[Landryslegend]

Then there is the other segment of society, right around 50% mind you, that get back far more than it ever pays in, in fact....as it works out they pay no taxes at all. I suppose folks like that could give a darned less about tax rates and such. TAKE TAKE TAKE .

[jnhay]

More silly lies and smears. Meanwhile the utterly braindead libs eat it up like candy. So predictable. They werent against the unemployment benefits, they simply wanted them paid for instead of passing on the debt YET AGAIN.

Or maybe you've heard us called even bigger "hypocrites" because we insisted that any extended unemployment benefits be paid for, rather than adding to the deficit -- even though we aren't insisting that extended tax cuts for wealthy Americans be paid for, and even though those particular tax cuts add much more to the deficit than unemployment benefits would
Are you lying then? Considering what you mentioned was in the "letter."

[Landryslegend]

The Republican party's line of "Make sure it is paid for" is a joke. How is that War On Terrorism that just topped 1 Trillion dollar being paid for? How about those tax cuts to the top 1% under Bush, how exactly were those paid for?

So now when the small guy is hurting, suddenly it is time to be "fiscally responsible" and sorry, go away!

Riiiight. "Has to be paid for" that is the lamest excuse.

Let the Bush tax cuts expire. That would be one easy option, as that would probably bring in more than unemployment insurance is dishing out.


Furthermore, I dont think you fully understand what letting the Bush Tax cuts expire means, it very well could also directly effect YOU!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"House Democrats recently adopted a budget with massive tax hikes, many of which are directed at those Americans who can least afford them. By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, this budget will raise income taxes not only on those in the highest income brackets, but raises the lowest bracket from 10 percent to 15 percent as well. Estates would again be taxed at 55 percent. The child tax credit would drop from $1,000 to $500. Senior citizens relying on investment income would be hurt by increases in dividend and capital gains taxes. It's not just that the Democrats want to raises taxes on the rich; they want to raises taxes on everybody."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no idea how this will effect you personally, BUT.....you STILL want those tax cuts to expire?????

[Landryslegend]

Are you lying then? Considering what you mentioned was in the "letter."


Tax cuts PAID FOR???????LMAO, Again, like the govt is actually GIVING them something...It is THEIR MONEY, how hard is that for people to understand. The Govt isnt actually GIVING them ANYTHING....we give to the govt, no matter what the tax rate, NOT the other way around.

[jnhay]

Tax cuts PAID FOR???????LMAO, Again, like the govt is actually GIVING them something...It is THEIR MONEY, how hard is that for people to understand. The Govt isnt actually GIVING them ANYTHING....we give to the govt, no matter what the tax rate, NOT the other way around.

Though I didn't intend for that to be the point I was trying to make, they're pretty much the same thing when you want to refer to the deficit. One takes away a requirement that helps with the deficit, and the other doesn't impose a requirement that would help with the deficit.

I actually don't see your point, because it sounds like you want the benefits to be "paid for", but say that "paid for" isn't the right phrase when talking about taxes the rich pay? "Paid for" is referring to balancing out the difference in this case.