Obama calls for tax hikes on the rich…
…otherwise known as letting the so-called “Bush tax cuts” expire for those making over $250,000.
Are these really “rich” people? Was Charles Schumer (he’s a Democrat, but he’s from New York) correct when he said last year that, “in large parts of the country, that kind of income does not get you a big home or lots of vacations or anything else that’s associated with wealth in America”?
And whether they are “rich” or not, will this really help the economy? Mitt Romney certainly doesn’t think so, with a spokesman saying, “Gov. Romney understands that the last thing we need to do in this economy is raise taxes on anyone.”
As usual, Obama’s idea of “cooperation” is to have his opponents do what he says, even though (or especially when) it is against the policies they advocate:
The president, speaking in the East Room of the White House, said he wants to break through the “stalemate” over taxes in Congress.
“We don’t need more top-down economics,” Obama said. “We need policies that grow and strengthen the middle class.”
His advisers are calling it the “tax fairness” argument, capitalizing on the idea that in order to be “fair,” the rich must foot even more of the very considerable bill they already pay. Republicans believe that $250K is not the dividing line that defines “rich; that those “rich” are not only already paying at least their correct share already, or more; and that the increase will have a chilling effect on small business and on the economy in general.
And even Obama himself used to agree with those Republicans; back in 2009 he said that letting any of the tax cuts expire would be “the last thing you want to do” because it would “take more demand out of the economy.”
But it’s different now. Many pundits believe the real purpose here is not to pass the bill, but to propose it, drive home the message that Obama is the champion of the middle class and Republicans are elitist fat cat champions of the rich, observe the GOP fight the bill, have it fail to pass, and then say the reason the economy is still stalling is Republican intransigence. Obama is a master at this, but I sure wouldn’t call it “cooperation.”
[ADDENDUM: And in a move that should surprise absolutely no one, Schumer changes his mind and now agrees with Obama:
“[Schumer] still believes that the millionaire strategy is the best one. But he believes more that party unity at this time is even more important,” a person close to Schumer told POLITICO, who emphasized that any daylight between the White House and Hill Democrats was tactical, not philosophical.
“He’s going to be a team player for the president.”]
“Many pundits believe the real purpose here is not to pass the bill, but to propose it, drive home the message that Obama is the champion of the middle class and Republicans are elitist fat cat champions of the rich, observe the GOP fight the bill, have it fail to pass, and then say the reason the economy is still stalling is Republican intransigence. Obama is a master at this, but I sure wouldn’t call it “cooperation.””
Exactly. Obama is in full bore campaign mode…as usual.
Neo, Neo, Neo…
You’ve missed it again. Obama will do what he always does – give the rich what they want.
There will be a compromise, both sides will get tax cuts (the the wealthy will inordinately benefit as always over the past 20 years) and Obama gets a small boost – note I said small – going into the election.
He’s always agreed to compromises that give Republicans some of what they want.
Note also that someone making $250K who has to fund his own retirement will have considerably less discretionary income than someone (a government employee or tenured professor) who has a retirement plan substantially funded by his employer.
With nearly half of the people in the US not paying any income tax at all, why does Barry get away with telling anyone to pay their “fair” share?
With the dinosaur media covering for him, he is able to distort, demagouge any issue that will fit his narrow narative without fear of contradiction.
The Republicans are going to have to figure out how to deal with this tactic or be beat up with it until the election. It’s hard to come up with a pithy response. There has to be a way of explaining that when you take a dollar away from someone it does not get spent or invested the way it would have. Poor people don’t hire people or spend on things that result in employment like houses, cars, boats and airplanes.
Tell me what Anna Wintour makes, and then i’ll think about what she shoud pay.
I have a grudge against progressive taxes. On the surface, aren’t they unfair? What is the justification for making someone pay more as they make more? Does one person use the bathroom more, use police and fire protection more, use national defense more? The money maker pays more in property taxes and sales taxes and other indirect taxes, so why should he pay a progressive income tax?
The real reason: Socialism. Envy. Laziness. All at record level.
I wonder how the poor, especially the accusing poor, would handle their wealth if they had any?
Poverty is Nature’s way of rewarding behavior. Despite Obama’s arguments and despite Obama’s funding of unions and unemployment and disability and food stamps, we’re all getting poorer. His policies are both cause of and continuance of our slide. At the root of 2008 is the extension of free money to people. Doesn’t even really matter whether they deserved it or not. Free money for houses or anything will never have a good result. Then to continue to support the poor from the labor and property of those who made their own wealth?
There’s no way for prosperity to appear under such policies. And there is no way Obama’s policies have not caused damage for some time to come. I wish we could do a parallel universe experiment and for one side show what the next Obama presidency would result in. I believe it would be heinous but a lesson would be learned for at least a couple of generations. On the other side, a Romney presidency would inherit the damages and after four years another Obama type elected because enough progress hadn’t been made.
Are these really “rich” people?
Yes. In fact, all Americans are rich. Take a look at history and the rest of the world. Guaranteed most of humanity outside the US or anyone at any other time in history would choose to live in the US at this time.
This is the primary reason the class warfare rhetoric spoken by the likes of idiots like Obama is that he doesn’t really mean it. If he did, he would be forced to drain the US of resources and ship them over to Africa, Asia, and South America. To spread the wealth of course.
In fact, all Americans are rich.
Absolutely right.
Tell a European that many American high school students have their own cars, and watch the reaction.
Curtis,
Did you hear that MD governor O’Malley wants to charge people with higher incomes higher rates for water and sewage? It never ends.
Even if they raise these taxes it will not make a dent in the deficit..in fact, someday they are going to have to let the payroll taxes go back up. People will just love that.
Americans are like a herd of cattle in a big corral, with B Hussein on one side of the fence and Romney on the other , at the 3 and 9 o’clock postions of the corral. Hussein yells “Boo!” and the herd moves away, toward Mitt, who yells “Nay!”, so the herd shies away from him, ending up milling, crowded, restless and confused in the center of the corral.
But they will come to whoever pours grain into the feed troughs.
How to respond? Most non-political people these days have a reflexive mistrust of BOTH big government AND rich people and corporations.
So I’ve found it effective to play up to people’s mistrust of big government.
You argue — a tax may start out as a tax on the rich, but soon becomes a tax on nearly everyone; and, a tax may start out as a minimal fee, but soon takes a substantial bite out of the household budget.
Unlike most conservative positions, which seem to require a counter-intuitive bent of mind, this is an argument that is not only easily grasped, but also seems intuitively to be true.
Very nice, Don Carlos.
The rebuttal is a Far Side cartoon where a cow stands up and declares “Hey this is grass. We’re eating grass.”
(I looked but could not find the cartoon on line.)
“Yes. In fact, all Americans are rich.”
and affluence delays maturity, which lays the groundwork for Obama who gets rid of the affluence.
The system is self-correcting.
The Boy King, a cheap punk par excellance, is simply playing shuck & jive=political horsepoop. When those Evil Repubs in the House tell him they ain’t’a’gonna play his punk game, he’ll get all howley about them “not compromising” with him. Mr.Messiahship: Please dial 1-800-Bite-Me.
expat,
On the other side of things, with the poor that is, they were overpaid 14 billion (billion, brad!).
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/government-overpaid-14-billion-unemployment-085800667.html
Indiana made more incorrect payments than correct ones.
“”In fact, all Americans are rich.””
It strikes me that if the American poverty stricken moved to Haitii and became subjected to their own political viewpoints, they’d be taxed at around 90% and be called the filthy rich privledged who’ve never known life without electricity.
I hit the floor barking on this one:
http://www.wmur.com/news/politics/Obama-calls-for-extending-middle-class-tax-cuts/-/9857748/15453320/-/o08oqrz/-/index.html
Obama, the man with an online forged birth certificate, with a mouth that lies more than it tells the truth, tells us it is proper that the American people know their President and that Joe Biden couldn’t have been a better Vice-President.
It was either hit the floor barking or crap my pants, so I chose the former and leave the latter for another day.
Curtis Says:
July 9th, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Very nice, Don Carlos.
The rebuttal is a Far Side cartoon where a cow stands up and declares “Hey this is grass. We’re eating grass.”
(I looked but could not find the cartoon on line.)”
Do you remember Art Baker?
Well, You Asked For It!
http://www.tecnodacta.com.ar/azul/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/cows-eating-grass-718884.bmp
This is one of many.
You gave up too soon.
“Gary Larson Cow Eating Grass” typed into google.
Occam’s Beard Says:
July 9th, 2012 at 4:03 pm
In fact, all Americans are rich.
Absolutely right.
Tell a European that many American high school students have their own cars, and watch the reaction.”
Quite right!
If you go to Heritage.com youi will find some very surprising data:
http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2011/07/plugged-in-poverty-half-of-americas-poor-have-computers
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty
Two, just for starters.
Does anybody in the political arena remember the actual purpose of taxes? It is to raise revenue for public expenditures–police, fire department, defense, roads, airports, a court system, printing of the currency, a social safety net–that we decide we want, and are adopted by our elected representatives, from the city council to the U.S. Congress. To talk about “raising taxes” or “tax fairness” without a discussion of what the tax revenues are to be used for is to put the cart before the horse. Whether $250,000 constitutes being “rich” or not (it doesn’t in my view) misses the larger point of first deciding what we want our tax dollars to buy, then figuring out how we’re going to pay for it.
Thank you rockribbedrushy.
Marx and Engels…
each according to their ability each according to their needs…
(as determined by someone in state who doesn’t know them reading a report whose numbers have been gamed)
back when we remembered that progressives were socialist/communist/fascist, we knew that this progressive tax was a plank of the communist manifesto
that alone should tell you that the public reason for it, is not the actual reason for it.
Plank 2 of the communist manifesto:
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
why not look at all the others and see what we have equivalents to… (as i said, i have been pointing to whats in front of you that we refuse to see and put together to see clearly)
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
[Obama and them will change this to what? and HAVE changed it… but while we pay attention to other things, they are erecting a reward for ending your life early… the acquisition of your assets before you can use them for yourself!]
Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
[ever hear of the federal reserve? a bank owned by the most wealthy people? the only bank that can print money, set all interest rates and so on?]
Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
[you may imagine that only punitive centralization counts, but thats not true. centralization is what it is, and if all the press state the same lie, well. your experiencing soviet media, and complaining about it – not understanding it]
Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
[and you thought helping the delta smelt, the empowerment of the EPA (unconstitutional as powers not owned cant be delegated. so if the state is delegating, the people have no more power). ]
Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. [minimum wage, and other things make this real… as would the new law to put everyone in a union that can use their money to oppose themselves]
Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
[isnt that causing the school bubble? and other things? ]
you guys dont get WHY or the points… you dont see cradle to grave education as fulfillment of a plank
you also dont see them driving the different points into a brick wall purposefully to get you to sign on to the nationalzied state version.
ie. houseing cant run on its own, now the state controls it. and you can be sure that my wife and me cant get a home… we are trying. but with ameridream giving a down payment that then amounts to 200k with the other programs, and its a GRANT… the banks wont look at my wife and I.
so soon the school cant run on its own… and 66% nationalizxed womens studies will side with free state aid to make them relevent.. rather than realize that men didnt educate in what they wanted, but in what they could do. while women educated in entitlement took courses there were no jobs in and we didnt need people in…
we have paralleled a lot of it.
and no one cares to listen to that, and oppose it
years on, we are in the SAME place that germany was on the verge of the war
loosened morals and unability to tell right from wrong (see abortion and after birth abortion now)…
women voting for the solidarity of despotism and socialism as they did before… (see 1930, not prior elections)
destruction of family to prevent morals and willingness to stand up for whats right (mom didn’t, why should the kids?)
normalization of homosexuality, and perversions. funny but they are now moving to polygamous marriage… so what they hate in the mormons and others they now love in themselves? (no… that was heterosexual polygamy… this is homosexual polygamy… ie. 5 mothers can live as one family with 5 salaries from the men they tapped for kids. you can read papers musing that as far back as the 1980s)
you only have to look to the goals of communism to understand whats going on. ignorancev of them dont change reality…
just makes it easier to erect something you wont have the common sense to protedt and prevent… not even in the social spehere between you and others
expat Says:
Tell me what Anna Wintour makes, and then i’ll think about what she should pay.
The current editor in chief of Vogue magazine, Anna Wintour, has a net worth of $35 million.
not bad for convincing women to exterminate their own families… eh?
Now wait just a dang minute! The Won been tellin’ us them BUSH!!!111!!!!11!! tax cuts were only for the rich for 3 (THREE!!) years, and now he says he gonna PRE-serve the middle class tax cuts and only cchop off tax cuts for the rich?
He been lyin’ again!
Sam L…He assumes–and, might be right–that his ‘target audience’ is collectively dumber than a sack of rocks. He lies, double talks, flim-flams to his heart’s content knowing most of his supporters don’t read anything whatsoever. Flat Liners,’Yo.
The others–ya’know the allegedly literate ones–don’t give a flying doo-dah what he says. They be on-board,’Yo. Press airheads, university vapidity brigades and lib-lefty pinheads just want the Boy King some mo’. Carnage, catastrophe and America diminished massively is all goooood, don’tcha know.
Independents don’t seem to be buying swill, Thank God. At this point in the 1980 race, Jimmah was way ahead of Ronaldus Magnus in the polls and, happily, was beaten in a Tidal Wave that November. Works for me.
It’s not so much the paying of more in taxes. It’s that the money isn’t used to pay down the debt, it’s just used as funding for additional expenses.
We owe 10, we pay 8, we still owe 2.
If we pay two more, you’d think we would be caught up. But no. We owe 10, we pay 10 they spend three more, so now we owe three.
Neo-neocon is such a Bitch
Somebody probably made her out of a Rib.