President Barack Obama will enter high-stakes budget negotiations firmly committed to seeing the tax rates for high-income earners rise to pre-George W. Bush levels, he assured a gathering of progressive and labor leaders on Tuesday.
"I am not going to budge," he told the group, according to an attendee who relayed material from the meeting on condition of anonymity. "I said in 2010 that I'm going to do this once, and I meant it."
The White House did not immediately return a request for comment, but two other sources who attended the meeting confirmed the quote. The administration seems to have staked out a firmer position than during the first stand-off over the Bush-era tax cuts, in November and December of 2010, leaving the impression that it won't sign off on a compromise that doesn't increase the tax burden on the wealthy as a means of paying down the deficit.
This is EXACTLY what the American people voted for in this election. We want our President to draw a line in the sand, and flat refuse to budge until the Republicans cry "uncle" and give up on their "no tax increase under any circumstances" bullshit.
I also hope that the voters are paying very close attention to which Republicans are willing to work with the President in solving our difficult financial situation, and which ones are still working as obstructionists, so that in the 2014 election they can kick some of THEM out of office like they did sa number of their teabagging comrades in the last election.
While I like the idea of increasing their tax load (which I think should be the SAME as ours, even for so-called unearned income), he is going to have a tremendous fight on this.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing he is going to have to do is shatter their belief that the rich create jobs through investing. You know and I know that it isn't so, but THEY don't and they squash any attempt to disprove their little theory. And the investing is way down right now since so many of the 1% are putting so much more into savings accounts. (One estimate runs as high as 35%!)
Maybe he could make an end run by eliminating the different TYPES of income and simplify the code by having only one type of income!
Unfortunately, he will have a huge fight, as I said. These idiots don't understand the extent to which we of lesser income despise their breaks - and a lower rate on unearned income IS a break!
They WILL let the country go to hell - just to prove HE doesn't care, or understand or whatever!
Even the "saintly" Ronald Reagan had to give up on trickle-down economics which George H. W. Bush had called "voodoo" economics. And they were GOP titans! Boy that GOP elephant sure has a short memory!
DeleteThe problem now is that the GOP answers only to Grover Norquist who is a seditionist who wants to drown government in a bathtub. Not quite sure how he plans to do that but never mind, the GOP would not want to quibble over details.
The American voters have just rejected trickle down economics and it is time that the GOP accept that it lost and that the people won.
Beaglemom
The first thing he is going to have to do is shatter their belief that the rich create jobs through investing. You know and I know that it isn't so, but THEY don't and they squash any attempt to disprove their little theory.
DeleteIn particular, they made the Congressional Research Service (Congress's own bi-/non-partisan think tank) remove from the CRS website a report on their study of this matter. However, the report has resurfaced on the DPCC (Democratic Policy & Communications Center) site.
http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/?p=blog&id=193 presents a brief introduction and links to the report's PDF file.
From the introduction: In a rebuke to long-held Republican economic theory, a nonpartisan report has found that there is no evidence that tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires leads to improved economic growth.The report also found that tax cuts for the wealthy increase income disparities.
The analysis, conducted by the Congressional Research Service, compared tax policy with GDP patterns over the last 65 years. The report's findings undermine a central tenet of Republican party orthodoxy on taxes.
I really wish that public figures would make more of the existence—and results—of this study.
Ooops. I inadvertently omitted the "http://" in the link to the PDF file. The link on the DPCC's page is good, or you can try this one: http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/documents/CRSTaxesandtheEconomy%20Top%20Rates.pdf
Deleteif they invest the money in proven job creating type businesses - then they pay taxes on it through a variety of filters.
ReplyDeleteif they don't invest, but let it languish in accounts - tax the crap out of it.
THAT would create jobs.
I doubt you could get them to agree about what was a "proven job creating business". They think that ANY investment creates jobs - even the kind of "investing" Romney did in his leveraged buy out scheming. You know, the kind that provably DESTROYED jobs?
DeleteI want to badly to hear President Barack Obama say: "I've got some political capital, and I'm going to spend it." (For those of you that don't get the quote, George W. Bush said that in 2004 after he barely won re-election)
ReplyDeleteFOX News would explode if Obama said that!
I wish he could do it by executive order. THAT would fix 'em.
ReplyDeleteYessssssssssssss! Go Pres Obama!
ReplyDeleteThat's right: fuck Grover Norquist and his no-taxes pledge. And fuck every tea-bagging Republican that took the pledge -- they're supposed to pledge to uphold the constitution - NOT some guy that's never been elected to anything, ever.
ReplyDeleteI'm so pleased our wonderful President is standing his ground w/the asshole Republicans in Congress. He was reelected and ran on this - got the support of increasing their taxes - and will do it. If we go 'off the cliff' I'm not worried about it as I think the issue is being overly hyped.
ReplyDeletePay attention to the Republicans going against the issue and vote them out of office next go around - especially McConnell and Boehner!
Yes! No more Mister Nice Guy! Give 'em Hell!
ReplyDeleteApparently, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iran and Afghanistan (heckuva a job, Bushie) account for more than half the national debt we're acquiring. And let's not forget that Clinton left a surplus.
ReplyDeleteDump the tax cut and get out troops out and you'll go far in making your sane citizens happy.
We'll see. We heard this before.
ReplyDeleteWhat concerns me is what else is going to be negotiated. To me nothing needs to be.
Bush tax cuts expire and Defense budget is reduced.
I'm all for revising the tax code to eliminate some of the loopholes that benefit the über wealthy. But I fear that instead the middle class will be further hit by having their mortgage interest rate deduction eliminated. That would devastate those of us who have managed to hold on to our homes. For some that small benefit might mean the difference between holding on and foreclosure. And it will keep others from realizing the American Dream of buying and owning a home. Thus further slowing the economy.
I'd rather see everything to do with capital gains revised. A separation between the capital gains of the little guy and the huge INCOME of millions based solely on something that is currently defined as capital gains.
I think it is all going to come down to revising the filibuster and trying to get 7 Republicans to cross the aisle and vote with the Dems. (Providing the Blue Dogs don't desert to the other side. I'd sure like to see the Dems hold the Blue Dogs in line the way the Republicans keep their people in a solid block.)
I don't see any point in wasting political capital by trying to up the taxes on the uber-rich. (The .1%) No matter what the tax law is, the Ubers will avoid it somehow, by expatriating their money if they haven't already, or by simply lying on their tax forms.
ReplyDeleteI do think Obama's saying he'll set the cutoff at $250,000 a year is nothing more on his part but a negotiating ploy. I'm betting he'll settle for that cutoff point being $2,000,000. He's a good negotiator--so long as the other side is rational.
All he really has to do is drive the Republicans into being more hardline than they are now, because many of them come up for reelection in 2014. If Obama can have the Dems campaign on the Republican obstructionism for the mid-term elections, he may wind up having his last 2 years without the obstruction. And that would be wonderful.
I'm willing to loose my bush era tax cuts and pay more myself. And I'm far, far away from that income bracket.
ReplyDeleteIt's time to tackle our debt.
I think Obama might have quite a backbone in his second term. I like it.
ReplyDeleteElections have consequences! Keep it up, Mr. President!
ReplyDelete