• 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.

President to propose tax increases <shocker!>

P

PokerGuy

Lifer
Looks like Obummer wants to raise more taxes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42566545/ns/politics-more_politics/

I haven't seen specifics yet, but I'd be willing to bet that somehow the pledge that taxes would not go up for those making less than $250k per year will be shredded. Anyone who understands basic math knows that you can't even begin to tackle the problem in a meaningful way by just raising taxes on "the rich".

Thank goodness for folks like Boehner:

"If the president begins the discussion by saying we must increase taxes on the American people — as his budget does — my response will be clear: Tax increases are unacceptable and are a nonstarter," Boehner declared Tuesday.
Click to expand...

Fix spending first.

"We don't have deficits because Americans are taxed too little, we have deficits because Washington spends too much."
Click to expand...

Truer words have never been spoken. :thumbsup:
 
Good, everyone from top to bottom need to pay for the services from the government that they demand.

Maybe once once people start helping to pay for it themselves, they will not demand as many services.
 
What should be a nonstarter right away is the same tired 'let's raise taxes on the 250-thousandaires' while doing nothing to repeal the carried interest provision that let's anyone paid in stock (like senior execs) pay only 15% effective tax.

I've said many times before that the truly wealthy need to start paying more. We need 5-6 additional marginal rates at the high end (i.e. 750k/yr+) and a phase out of the 15% capital gains treatment for investments that ramps if your total income from all sources exceeds some number ($5 million/yr+ ??). This will exempt most of the upper middle class and '$250k/yr middle class' in high tax states like NY, NJ, CT, and CA from the tax increase while making sure the truly wealthy and the idle investor class actually pay a reasonable effective rate of tax.

The fact that Obama and the Dems who had full control didn't even try to repeal the 15% carried interest provision is disgusting in my view and makes them no better than the Repubs who are openly cheering for grifter class.
 
brencat said:
What should be a nonstarter right away is the same tired 'let's raise taxes on the 250-thousandaires' while doing nothing to repeal the carried interest provision that let's anyone paid in stock (like senior execs) pay only 15% effective tax.

I've said many times before that the truly wealthy need to start paying more. We need 5-6 additional marginal rates at the high end (i.e. 750k/yr+) and a phase out of the 15% capital gains treatment for investments that ramps if your total income from all sources exceeds some number ($5 million/yr+ ??). This will exempt most of the upper middle class and '$250k/yr middle class' in high tax states like NY, NJ, CT, and CA from the tax increase while making sure the truly wealthy and the idle investor class actually pay a reasonable effective rate of tax.

The fact that Obama and the Dems who had full control didn't even try to repeal the 15% carried interest provision is disgusting in my view and makes them no better than the Repubs who are openly cheering for grifter class.
Click to expand...
Can you make a business case for your plan? It sounds purely punative.
 
brencat said:
What should be a nonstarter right away is the same tired 'let's raise taxes on the 250-thousandaires' while doing nothing to repeal the carried interest provision that let's anyone paid in stock (like senior execs) pay only 15&#37; effective tax.

I've said many times before that the truly wealthy need to start paying more. We need 5-6 additional marginal rates at the high end (i.e. 750k/yr+) and a phase out of the 15% capital gains treatment for investments that ramps if your total income from all sources exceeds some number ($5 million/yr+ ??). This will exempt most of the upper middle class and '$250k/yr middle class' in high tax states like NY, NJ, CT, and CA from the tax increase while making sure the truly wealthy and the idle investor class actually pay a reasonable effective rate of tax.

The fact that Obama and the Dems who had full control didn't even try to repeal the 15% carried interest provision is disgusting in my view and makes them no better than the Repubs who are openly cheering for grifter class.
Click to expand...

I don't think we need more brackets, maybe just move the existing brackets around. If you raised the capital gains and dividend taxes to appropriate levels you could probably raise the income threshold for the top one or two brackets and still end up bringing in more revenue.
 
He can't cut Medicare or Social Security, and he can't cut defence. What else can happen? Talking about cutting spending with those three items out of play is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

taxpayerreceipt.jpg
 
PokerGuy said:
Looks like Obummer wants to raise more taxes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42566545/ns/politics-more_politics/

I haven't seen specifics yet, but I'd be willing to bet that somehow the pledge that taxes would not go up for those making less than $250k per year will be shredded. Anyone who understands basic math knows that you can't even begin to tackle the problem in a meaningful way by just raising taxes on "the rich".

Thank goodness for folks like Boehner:



Fix spending first.



Truer words have never been spoken. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Good! not only they need to reduce spending 'everywhere possible' but they also need to end the current tax breaks they have in place. Tax reform is due too.
 
What ever happened with "Ask not what you can do...."


Shared sacrifice is shared..

The fix spending first mantra is disingenuous since any way you slice it the deficit needs to be attacked from both sides of the issue..
 
Good. Most people who are genuinely interested in reducing the deficit realize that it has to be done through spending cuts combined with tax increases. Of course never extending the Bush tax cuts to begin with would have been an easy way to do this since they were always unaffordable, but such is life.
 
There should be no increases in taxes or spending for now. The focus is completely wrong. Take my favorite pet peeve medicaid. Reform what we are already spending money on first.
 
eskimospy said:
Good. Most people who are genuinely interested in reducing the deficit realize that it has to be done through spending cuts combined with tax increases. Of course never extending the Bush tax cuts to begin with would have been an easy way to do this since they were always unaffordable, but such is life.
Click to expand...

I am fine with some tax increases. When I did the NY times budget game a few months back I balanced the budget with about 70% spending cuts and 30% tax increases. The problem is that I simply don't trust that the spending cuts will materialize. They will raise taxes then raise spending even more because they'll think they have more headroom. For me to support tax increases I want to see spending cuts in the same bill.
 
the DRIZZLE said:
I am fine with some tax increases. When I did the NY times budget game a few months back I balanced the budget with about 70% spending cuts and 30% tax increases. The problem is that I simply don't trust that the spending cuts will materialize. They will raise taxes then raise spending even more because they'll think they have more headroom. For me to support tax increases I want to see spending cuts in the same bill.
Click to expand...

That's perfectly reasonable, and I imagine that's what you will see with a Republican House and a Democratic WH/Senate. (assuming neither party goes nuts and decides to blow everything up)
 
He already raised taxes for those under $250k...and under $50k... By passing Health Reform.... Mandatory Insurance or tax penalties...

He also capped Flex Spending accounts at $2500... Exposing $2600 of my income to taxation... Income that was being used to pay the high out of pocket medical costs generated by my wife.... Thanks Obama. Fuck you too.
 
Good.

If the budget is to be balanced, then some tax increases are needed along with the spending decreases.
 
yllus said:
He can't cut Medicare or Social Security, and he can't cut defence. What else can happen? Talking about cutting spending with those three items out of play is intellectual dishonesty at its finest.

taxpayerreceipt.jpg
Click to expand...
Couple things about that "tax receipt".

- All the numbers add up to only $3,258.51, not anywhere close to the $5,400+FICA taxes.
- Based on the original blog post, it doesn't sound like the numbers presented are based on actual numbers. I mean, it has a footnote 4, but has no explanation. Also, where's the line for non-combat defense expenditure?
 
I have no problem increasing taxes on a one for one real rate.

Every new tax $ that everyone pays MUST be matched by an offset of $ in spending decrease. No smoke or mirors in terms of cuts like Obama succeeded with this last round.

We have (in round numbers) 300Millioin people in the country.
A forced tax of $10/head would raise $3B - a token, but an example
At the same time actually cutback $3B from the government spending.

At this point we are ahead $6B with little pain in the year.

Now take that $10/head and impose it every month.
Do the same with the spending and we have gone to $60B - again a small drop, but the amount of tax is less than most people waste in a week.

Once everyone is starting to realize that handouts do not come free; the loopholes and graduated taxes can be addressed.
 
WackyDan said:
Nope.

You can tax them at 100% and still not cover the deficit.
Click to expand...


Thats old tired argument is just stupid, of course you can't cover the entire deficit by just increasing the taxes on one segment of the economy, but that certainly doesn't mean they shouldn't pay more.

Thats like saying you can't solve the deficit by just cutting Medicaid so we shouldn't cut medicaid at all. 😕
 
"We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem."
- Republican talking point

We do have a revenue problem thanks to the recession.
090803-tax-revenue-bcol-3p.grid-6x2.jpg
 
manimal said:
What ever happened with "Ask not what you can do...."


Shared sacrifice is shared..
Click to expand...

Explain to me how someone who files their taxes and claims an Earned Income Credit is sharing the sacrifice? So their EIC welfare payout is reduced slightly because now they have to pay more every year.... but it is not money that person earned to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top