PROMISES, PROMISES: Obama tax pledge unrealistic

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,742
42
91
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...h/us_obama_tax_promise


Common sense would let one know they numbers don't add up, of course taxes will have to be raised




WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama promised to fix health care and trim the federal budget deficit, all without raising taxes on anyone but the wealthiest Americans. It's a promise he's already broken and will likely have to break again. Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have already increased tobacco taxes ? which disproportionately hit the poor ? to pay for extending health coverage to 4 million children in working low-income families.

Now, lawmakers are looking for more revenues to help pay for providing medical insurance to millions more who lack it at a projected cost of $1 trillion over the next decade.

The floated proposals include increasing taxes on alcohol, which could raise $62 billion over the next decade, and a new tax on sugary drinks such as soda, which could raise $52 billion.

Senate Democrats this week pretty much rejected a proposal by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., to tax health benefits, an idea that Obama repeatedly criticized during the presidential election campaign but has refused to take off the table.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said negotiators are still looking for revenue alternatives. Asked during an interview with The Associated Press if they included tax increases on families with incomes less than $250,000 a year, Schumer said, "There are lots of things on the table now."

The health care bill is a long way from Obama's desk, but tax experts say the debate illustrates a stark reality: It is simply implausible for the vast majority of Americans to get a free ride while the nation tackles such an incredibly difficult ? and expensive ? issue.

"We're all going to have to contribute," said Eugene Steuerle, a former treasury official in the Reagan administration and now vice president of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

Paying for Obama's agenda might be easier, Steuerle said, if the nation wasn't already facing massive federal budget deficits for the foreseeable future.

"The dilemma is trying to do the new while the old is still unpaid for," Steuerle said.

The federal budget deficit is projected to hit an unprecedented $1.8 trillion this year ? on top of a national debt that has already topped $11 trillion. Obama insists that any bill on health care or climate change not add to the debt.

Obama says much of the $1 trillion needed for his health care overhaul will come from cutting costs. So far, drug companies and hospitals have agreed to provide 10-year savings of $235 billion.

Health care experts say cost cutting alone won't produce enough money to insure the nearly 50 million Americans who lack coverage. Moreover, Congress is obligated to follow budget rules that might not recognize many of the promised savings.

"The administration has an extremely difficult educational problem on its hands," said Henry J. Aaron, a health care expert at the Brookings Institution. "They understand that at some point tax increase are going to be necessary across the board.

"Yes, for the middle class, too," he added.

Obama made a firm tax pledge during the presidential campaign, repeating it numerous times in the weeks and months leading up to Election Day: no tax increases for individuals making less than $200,000 a year or couples making less than $250,000.

"Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes," Obama told a crowd in Dover, N.H., last year.

But less than a month after taking office, Obama signed an expansion of child health care financed by 62-cent tax increase on each pack of cigarettes.

Obama also signed an anti-smoking bill in June that grants authority to the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco. To pay for the new program, a fee is being imposed on the industry ? and presumably passed on to consumers ? estimated to generate more than $5 billion over the next decade.

While not directly increasing taxes, a House-passed version of Obama's plan to reduce greenhouse gases blamed for causing global warming would similarly increase American families' home energy bills by $175 a year on average, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Obama hasn't offered a detailed plan to fix health care, though his aides are working with lawmakers as they craft proposals. Obama included only a down payment for health care reform in the budget proposal he unveiled this spring.

He proposed limiting itemized tax deductions for individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000. The plan, which faces stiff opposition in Congress, would limit deductions for mortgage insurance, state and local taxes and charitable contributions, raising about $270 billion over the next decade.

Obama also proposed a series of business tax increases and accounting changes that would raise an additional $30 billion.

Kenneth Baer, a spokesman for the OMB, said Obama's cost reductions and tax increases add up to "a plan which gets you really close to what you need."

"Congress has other ideas," Baer said. "We'll work with them."

The appeal of Baucus's proposed tax on health benefits was the amount of money it could raise. Currently, employer-provided health benefits are not taxed, regardless of how generous they are.

One version of it would tax health benefits that exceed the value of the basic insurance plan offered to federal workers, raising about $420 billion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. But limiting it to individuals making more than $100,000 a year and couples making more than $200,000 would raise only $162 billion.

The math illustrates how difficult it is to raise enough money to pay for expensive programs, when tax increases are limited to the wealthy.

"We're living in an era, over a period of 20 years or more, in which the idea that tax rates would actually be boosted is unutterable," said Aaron, the health care expert. "That has to stop."
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
well duh. you can't promise to spend as much as he wants without it.

 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
"Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes," Obama told a crowd in Dover, N.H., last year.

But less than a month after taking office, Obama signed an expansion of child health care financed by 62-cent tax increase on each pack of cigarettes.

This was the first clue who we elected:

One
Big
Ass
Mistake
America

Expect the bending over to contnue for another 3 1/2 years.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.
 

Andrew1990

Banned
Mar 8, 2008
2,153
0
0
Hmm, so the poor stay poor, while Obama taxes the only thing that brings them Happiness, Booze.

Damn Obama, taking away our booze.



Anyways, Obama's reign of tax and spend will continue for another 3.5years.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Not to mention that the tax cuts that were supposed to be stimulus either completely failed to prevent the current economic crisis, or helped create it.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: sandorski
In related News: Retrospect 20/20 News: Bush's Tax Cuts Unrealistic

I expect more from you than the standard deflection.

The faster the dems realize that thier messiah is just another politician, the better our country will be.


It seems more and more are starting to see it.
 

BarrySotero

Banned
Apr 30, 2009
509
0
0
""The dilemma is trying to do the new while the old is still unpaid for," Steuerle said."

Well then don't pursue the new. Trying to do so many stupid things at EXACTLY the wrong time is why smart investors/employers are sitting on sidelines and other countries are quaking about their US investments.

That article didn't even mention VAT tax that's being brought up more and more. It's sad to see a country being run by maniacs and pushed off a cliff when some patience, respect for law/free enterprise and some investment incentives would clear the way for recovery. But noooo - we have to declare war on capitalism and take some retarded Maoist "Great Leap Backwards". The shame is that this was all easy to see coming last fall.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

well, duh.


I remember during Clinton's administration, some news outlet showing a small Clintion town hall meeting. The topic was taxes. One woman suggested that the administration no longer referred to taxes as taxes, but rather investments. To me that spoke volumes on how Dems look at taxes differently than Repubs.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

well, duh.


I remember during Clinton's administration, some news outlet showing a small Clintion town hall meeting. The topic was taxes. One woman suggested that the administration no longer referred to taxes as taxes, but rather investments. To me that spoke volumes on how Dems look at taxes differently than Repubs.

Exactly.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.
No, especially if to see them it means that Obama broke his promise and you have been a steadfast supporter of him.
Taxes should have been raised in 2001 to pay for the wars. That is life.
I agree with that, they should have been.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.
No, especially if to see them it means that Obama broke his promise and you have been a steadfast supporter of him.
Taxes should have been raised in 2001 to pay for the wars. That is life.
I agree with that, they should have been.

Wait has he increased my Federal Income taxes?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

Perhaps you know, realistically, he won't actually do it. What handed Congress back to the GOP in '94? Tax increases. If the Dems have any memory, they won't repeat that mistake. No, we'll just get a continuation of GWB's reign - deficits as far as the eye can see! Dems like to spout on and on about caring for the poor, investing in America, healthcare for all, etc., but they're no more willing to pay for it than the GOP. I've yet to meet a Dem not making millions who willingly paid more than the legal requirement for his/her taxes. There's certainly no law against it, but it's so very rare.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

Perhaps you know, realistically, he won't actually do it. What handed Congress back to the GOP in '94? Tax increases. If the Dems have any memory, they won't repeat that mistake. No, we'll just get a continuation of GWB's reign - deficits as far as the eye can see! Dems like to spout on and on about caring for the poor, investing in America, healthcare for all, etc., but they're no more willing to pay for it than the GOP. I've yet to meet a Dem not making millions who willingly paid more than the legal requirement for his/her taxes. There's certainly no law against it, but it's so very rare.
I've never met Buffet or Gates either. Oh wait, they have enormous tax exemptions due to the Billions of dollars they give to charitable foundations.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

Perhaps you know, realistically, he won't actually do it. What handed Congress back to the GOP in '94? Tax increases. If the Dems have any memory, they won't repeat that mistake. No, we'll just get a continuation of GWB's reign - deficits as far as the eye can see! Dems like to spout on and on about caring for the poor, investing in America, healthcare for all, etc., but they're no more willing to pay for it than the GOP. I've yet to meet a Dem not making millions who willingly paid more than the legal requirement for his/her taxes. There's certainly no law against it, but it's so very rare.
I've never met Buffet or Gates either. Oh wait, they have enormous tax exemptions due to the Billions of dollars they give to charitable foundations.

You missed the "not making millions" part. It's easy to be charitable when you've got more money than you can spend in a lifetime, and you've giving from excess, in a way that won't hurt your lifestyle one bit. Gates still lives in a mansion valued at ~$140M - he's not exactly suffering from his generousity. I don't begrudge him the money he earned in his lifetime, but let's not pretend he's some saint. If you gave me $1B, I promise I'll give 90% of it away to charity - honest!

Edit: Just finished reading a profile of the Madoffs yesterday. Apparently, they were quite charitable too! Once you've got four homes (including one in France), a private plane, several yachts, etc., you begin to run out of things to buy.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Well they promised accountability and we got it. They are counting every dollar they can get out of people.
The problem is not that the USA doesn't have enough income, it is that the people in charge of where it is spent are corrupt and clueless.
 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.
How do you feel about bold-faced lies?
 

themusgrat

Golden Member
Nov 2, 2005
1,408
0
0
I wouldn't call cigarette taxes the same as just raising taxes, but it makes sense for him to break the ice with that, then raise taxes later, rather than just raise income taxes in the first place. It's not like we didn't see it coming, wars cost money, and universal health care SURE costs money.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: themusgrat
I wouldn't call cigarette taxes the same as just raising taxes, but it makes sense for him to break the ice with that, then raise taxes later, rather than just raise income taxes in the first place. It's not like we didn't see it coming, wars cost money, and universal health care SURE costs money.

Nor would any of the republican faithful if anyone other than a democrat had done it. Welcome to a party that can't seem to get past their transparency issues.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,126
9,261
136
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

I suppose cause you have money to contribute to fight the good fight.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Taxes should have been raised in 2001 to pay for the wars. That is life.

This is part of why I respected the first president Bush. Remember his promise? Read my lips - no new taxes? I do. What is necessary and practical should always take precedence over idealogy, even on the subject of taxation. Wars are always expensive and sometimes necessary. The second Bush took the other approach to the subject and plugged his ears going lalalalalaicanthearyoudeficitsdontmatter911lalala. Looks like we're paying the piper now.
 

themusgrat

Golden Member
Nov 2, 2005
1,408
0
0
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Originally posted by: themusgrat
I wouldn't call cigarette taxes the same as just raising taxes, but it makes sense for him to break the ice with that, then raise taxes later, rather than just raise income taxes in the first place. It's not like we didn't see it coming, wars cost money, and universal health care SURE costs money.

Nor would any of the republican faithful if anyone other than a democrat had done it. Welcome to a party that can't seem to get past their transparency issues.
Ya, I'm kindof conservative... that was the point.
 

Mani

Diamond Member
Aug 9, 2001
4,808
1
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: senseamp
I guess tax increases don't cause the same sort of visceral reaction from Democrats like myself as they do Republicans.

well, duh.


I remember during Clinton's administration, some news outlet showing a small Clintion town hall meeting. The topic was taxes. One woman suggested that the administration no longer referred to taxes as taxes, but rather investments. To me that spoke volumes on how Dems look at taxes differently than Repubs.

Exactly.

Awesome single data point analysis there. Guess the nuts at Palin rallies speak for all republicans as well.