• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

My proposal on the Bush-era tax cuts . . .

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'm a Right-leaning moderate and the issue for me is the $250,000 number. There are dramatic differences in cost of living across the country and while $250,000 is rich in some parts, it's clearly middle-class in other parts. If Obama were smarter, he would propose extending the Bush tax cuts to everyone except for those making over $1,000,000.
 
Zhaoan said:
I'm a Right-leaning moderate and the issue for me is the $250,000 number. There are dramatic differences in cost of living across the country and while $250,000 is rich in some parts, it's clearly middle-class in other parts. If Obama were smarter, he would propose extending the Bush tax cuts to everyone except for those making over $1,000,000.
Click to expand...

so if some "middle class" making 260K in lets say NYC, gonna suffer when he has to pay 3% more on that 10K difference? meaning what he is paying now for $250K still stays the same, he only pays an increased percentage for whats over the 250K..
 
You don't raise taxes in a recession, on any one, period. Then again, Democrats never were the brightest. Obama may end up making Carter look great!
 
shira said:
Obama should schedule face-time on national TV. On the air, he holds up TWO documents:

"My fellow Americans, in my left hand, I have the '98% Tax Act of 2010'. This act keeps income tax rates for those making less than $250,000 taxable income at the rates enacted by the Bush administration, from now into the future. Both Democrats and Republicans tell us they want this bill passed. I'm submitting it to Congress, and will sign it the day it's passed by Congress.

"In my right hand, I have the '2% Tax Act of 2010'. This act keeps income tax rates for those making MORE than $250,000 taxable income at the rates enacted by the Bush administration, from now into the future. The Republicans tell us they want this bill passed. I'm submitting it to Congress, and will sign it the day it's passed by Congress.

"Two SEPARATE bills. To be separately debated and separately voted on by Congress. The Democrats will not hold either bill hostage to the other. I cannot, however, speak for the Republicans."
Click to expand...

He'd never, in a million years, get away with the lie in your second tax act statement I've underlined above. Those are the rates encted under the Clinton administration.

Worse, his opponents would characterize it, and accurately so, as nothing but a tax increase on those making $250K. That's what it is, that's exactly the effect. Further, they could also claim Obama was threatening to hold the middle class hostage to get taxes increased on the wealthier. And by doing so also jeopardizing the economy. IMO, not popular, not at all.

I think it too risky.

Fern
 
JS80 said:
Stick to guitar playing. Economics isn't your strong suit.
Click to expand...

It's not yours either. There isn't one reputable economist that thinks letting these tax cuts expire would lower government revenue.

We probably shouldn't be taking budgeting advice from someone who can't accumulate wealth while having a household income of $250k+, either because you're that stupid with money or because you were lying about your income.
 
eskimospy said:
It's not yours either. There isn't one reputable economist that thinks letting these tax cuts expire would lower government revenue.

We probably shouldn't be taking budgeting advice from someone who can't accumulate wealth while having a household income of $250k+, either because you're that stupid with money or because you were lying about your income.
Click to expand...

The word 'either' is not correct. GuitarDaddy does not belong in that group.
 
Fern said:
He'd never, in a million years, get away with the lie in your second tax act statement I've underlined above. Those are the rates encted under the Clinton administration.

Worse, his opponents would characterize it, and accurately so, as nothing but a tax increase on those making $250K. That's what it is, that's exactly the effect. Further, they could also claim Obama was threatening to hold the middle class hostage to get taxes increased on the wealthier. And by doing so also jeopardizing the economy. IMO, not popular, not at all.

I think it too risky.

Fern
Click to expand...

So, Fern, if your employer says, "I'm giving you a bonus - for the next 6 months, you will get an extra $1000 a month", then when that ends, are you getting a pay cut?

The 'Bush tax cuts' have never been permanent tax rates. They have always been temporary rate adjustments scheduled to end. When they do, it's not a "tax increase".

Rather, it's the always-planned end of a tax reduction.
 
jrodson69 said:
You don't raise taxes in a recession, on any one, period. Then again, Democrats never were the brightest. Obama may end up making Carter look great!
Click to expand...

OK, then let's not raise taxes; let's redistribute them. Move all the tax cuts from the top 2% where the rich just own even more, to the bottom where they help the economy.
 
Zhaoan said:
I'm a Right-leaning moderate and the issue for me is the $250,000 number. There are dramatic differences in cost of living across the country and while $250,000 is rich in some parts, it's clearly middle-class in other parts. If Obama were smarter, he would propose extending the Bush tax cuts to everyone except for those making over $1,000,000.
Click to expand...

I heard an interesting proposal - raise the $250,000, but gradually move up to the top Eisenhower rate of 91%, something like going up 1% per million earned.

So maybe you keep the $250,000 paying 35%, but at a million a year, the rate is 39.6%, and increases 1% for each million above that.

I haven't crunched the numbers to check the revenue, just heard the suggestion, but it's an interesting idea.
 
jrodson69 said:
The average American, when they lost their job, their house, their vehicles, and basically their entire lives.

If you need some "panel" to tell you the current state of the economy...
Click to expand...

trough, yes. depression, maybe. recession, no. recession is the downhill part. we're not headed further downhill at the moment. expansion is an uphill part. you can still be in a trough during an expansion.
 
jrodson69 said:
Doesn't take long to see who the far-left spinners are around here. 😀

When taxes go up, it is a tax increase. Period.
Click to expand...

Wrong. The fact is you don't understand a temporary rate change. It's an increase in taxes over last year, but it's not a 'tax increase' like when you pass a rate change.
 
ElFenix said:
trough, yes. depression, maybe. recession, no. recession is the downhill part. we're not headed further downhill at the moment. expansion is an uphill part. you can still be in a trough during an expansion.
Click to expand...

There's too much concern about words like recession, a very technical condition. What matters is the actual situation and a variety of statistics.

We're better with general words like 'problems' and discussions of the specific situation than the words like 'recession'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top