Clueless Obama? With a budget deficit he's gonna extend the Bush tax cuts?

[Hedgehog]

So explain this to me anyone if you would.

The US budget is in a deficit.

And the GOP wants to trim down the deficit.

And Obama is against the Bush tax-cut.

So are they gonna remove the tax cut?

No - instead they want to EXTEND it to the high income households as well?

How is this not just gonna add to the budget deficit?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/30/obama.congressional.leaders/index.html?hpt=T1

[Soul Crusher]

The same rates have been in effect for 10 years now.  Its not going to increase anything deficit wise.  Our problem was that we overspent during the "good years" based on a phoney baloney economy and have not cutailed spending accordingly. 

We have a spending problem, not a tax rate problem.   

[ATHEIST]

so Obama wants to continue the tax breaks for the wealthy while the GOP wants it extended to everyone? i would think that it would be the other way around?

[whork25]

The same rates have been in effect for 10 years now.  Its not going to increase anything deficit wise.  Our problem was that we overspent during the "good years" based on a phoney baloney economy and have not cutailed spending accordingly. 

We have a spending problem, not a tax rate problem.   

"Its not going to increase anything deficit wise."

If the government get X money in, the deficit will be X smaller right?

[tu_holmes]

"Its not going to increase anything deficit wise."

If the government get X money in, the deficit will be X smaller right?

If the spending goes down, yes...

In all reality, the Bush tax cuts should NOT be extended and the spending SHOULD be reduced.

[kcballer]

It doesn't make sense at all.  Other than to appease the important members of the GOP base which is traditionally the larger income earners.  I find it sad that many people viewed the Bush tax cuts as a permanent right of some kind.  

[Soul Crusher]

It doesn't make sense at all.  Other than to appease the important members of the GOP base which is traditionally the larger income earners.  I find it sad that many people viewed the Bush tax cuts as a permanent right of some kind.  

So how high should taxes go? 

[GigantorX]

"Its not going to increase anything deficit wise."

If the government get X money in, the deficit will be X smaller right?

70 billion per year over 10 years. Not 700 billion dollars a year like some in the media/admin have stated. If we rolled back spending to around 2007-08 levels we would be close to a balanced budget. But so much of the spending and expansion of govt. is pretty permanent so anything moving forward will be very tough to cut. Which was probably one of the administrations aims.

All a tax increase would do is make the ledger look a fraction better than it does now. If 70 billion a year (estimated) is a big deal than why is raising the rates and netting an extra 70 billion a year a big deal going the other way? Again, this will really do nothing either way, in my opinion as we have a gigantic, nation ending, currency ending spending/printing problem. Not a tax revenue problem. Until the 54% of the population start to pay something in the way of net taxes into the treasury not much will be able to be done via tinkering with the current tax rates.

They want the books to look a bit better so the govt/admin. can continue to spend and spend more. Period.

[Soul Crusher]

This is another lie from the far left.

We are running a 1.3 TRILLION deficit every damn year.  700 Billion over Ten years is nothing compared to this and the negative economic impact of raising taxes on everyone will likely yield even worse results as growth will be stifled and more jobs and capital sent overseas.     

[kcballer]

So how high should taxes go? 

That's a loaded question and you know it.  

Fundamentally you understand the need for a tax raise in that bracket but can't agree publicly because you're afraid it'll hurt your lower taxes mantra.  

[Soul Crusher]

That's a loaded question and you know it.  

Fundamentally you understand the need for a tax raise in that bracket but can't agree publicly because you're afraid it'll hurt your lower taxes mantra.  

Nonsense - please tell me where you think taxes need to be. 

[kcballer]

Nonsense - please tell me where you think taxes need to be. 

I know where they don't need to be and that's at the present level for the top 2%.

[Soul Crusher]

I know where they don't need to be and that's at the present level for the top 2%.

Here is my issue.   i agree with you that people like gates and buffett are laughing at us. 

But to me - how does sacking a guy who makes between 250 -500k  a year make me any better off? 

[tu_holmes]

Here is my issue.   i agree with you that people like gates and buffett are laughing at us. 

But to me - how does sacking a guy who makes between 250 -500k  a year make me any better off? 

It is unfortunate that a guy in that tax bracket is officially in the top 1% of earners in this country.

[MB]

At this point, it doesn't matter to me what is cut, just cut federal spending.  Social security, medicare, welfare, education, federal wages; let's start somewhere and keep going until we have a yearly surplus.

[Fury]

Should be a flat tax rate for all. Don't like it, go back to school and get a better job.

[tu_holmes]

Should be a flat tax rate for all. Don't like it, go back to school and get a better job.

This.

At this point, it doesn't matter to me what is cut, just cut federal spending.  Social security, medicare, welfare, education, federal wages; let's start somewhere and keep going until we have a yearly surplus.

Don't forget defense...

Can't not cut 40% of the federal budget.

I'd cut EVERY department by 20% to start and see what that does.

[GigantorX]

I know where they don't need to be and that's at the present level for the top 2%.

What of small business owners who file as a single earner? And even if you do raise taxes on the "rich" there is no guarantee that, by and large, they will pay it. There are so many holes, deductions, off-shore, write offs etc that the "rich" use it gets a bit ridiculous. Even with that the "rich" still carry a large tax burden and the top 1-2% pay 30% or so of the total taxes in this nation. The US has one of the top corporate tax rates at 39%....but large companies and mega corps like Wal Mart pay 23% and Google pays around 5%. You think it isn't "fair" that someone in the top 1% only pays 35%? Well how about the 54% of the population that, at the end of the day, pay nothing in taxes? Is that fair?I'm not accusing kcballer or whoever of blindly wanting "justice" and "fairness", it's just that I think some people get caught up and only focus on the big numbers with % next to them. There is far more to it than that.

I look at taxes as a mechanism of theft and graft for a Govt. that no longer abides by the Constitution. I also look at taxes as capital that is sucked up and burned up.

Drop the rates, kill the deductions, everyone pays and there you go.

[MB]

Should be a flat tax rate for all. Don't like it, go back to school and get a better job.

Flat tax or collect federal taxes through a national sales tax.

[Soul Crusher]

Flat tax or collect federal taxes through a national sales tax.

The income tax has NOTHING to do with revenue generation, but control over behavior. 

[tonymctones]

So explain this to me anyone if you would.

The US budget is in a deficit.

And the GOP wants to trim down the deficit.

And Obama is against the Bush tax-cut.

So are they gonna remove the tax cut?

No - instead they want to EXTEND it to the high income households as well?

How is this not just gonna add to the budget deficit?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/30/obama.congressional.leaders/index.html?hpt=T1

actually it makes perfect sense...

first and foremost you must understand that tax cuts do not add to the deficit, its the spending that adds to the deficit if the spending went up and down in proportion to the income from taxes there wouldnt be this issue...

Second you must understand that this administration and congress needs to do everything it can to stimuluate the fragile economy. This administration has done NOTHING but hinder the economic recovery with its legislation something that no liberal on this board will address. The money that isnt given to the govt goes somewhere bro, more than likely it will be put back into the economy so while you can say it will give us this much less in income tax its very hard to tell how much of that we will get back through it being spent.

Third raising taxes isnt the only way to cut the deficit, we can also cut spending. NOW LET ME ASK YOU THIS...what do you think will help lower the deficit while helping the economy?

Raising taxes or cutting spending? HMMMM well if you use obamas logic its raising taxes but in reality its cutting spending and keeping taxes at the rates they are now.

this is 2 problems in one and the first and more important problem that needs to be addressed is the economy.

again obama has done nothing I MEAN NOTHING but hinder its recovery and raising taxes would effectively continue in that idiotic agenda. I agree taxes need to be raised I said so during the general election BUT NOW IS NOT THE TIME...

so it makes perfect sense to not raise taxes right now...

[Emmortal]

actually it makes perfect sense...

first and foremost you must understand that tax cuts do not add to the deficit, its the spending that adds to the deficit if the spending went up and down in proportion to the income from taxes there wouldnt be this issue...

Second you must understand that this administration and congress needs to do everything it can to stimuluate the fragile economy. This administration has done NOTHING but hinder the economic recovery with its legislation something that no liberal on this board will address. The money that isnt given to the govt goes somewhere bro, more than likely it will be put back into the economy so while you can say it will give us this much less in income tax its very hard to tell how much of that we will get back through it being spent.

Third raising taxes isnt the only way to cut the deficit, we can also cut spending. NOW LET ME ASK YOU THIS...what do you think will help lower the deficit while helping the economy?

Raising taxes or cutting spending? HMMMM well if you use obamas logic its raising taxes but in reality its cutting spending and keeping taxes at the rates they are now.

this is 2 problems in one and the first and more important problem that needs to be addressed is the economy.

again obama has done nothing I MEAN NOTHING but hinder its recovery and raising taxes would effectively continue in that idiotic agenda. I agree taxes need to be raised I said so during the general election BUT NOW IS NOT THE TIME...

so it makes perfect sense to not raise taxes right now...

I was about to post pretty much exactly this.  We don't have a tax problem, we have out of control spending that needs to be cut.  This won't happen as tommy pointed out because they want more government, not less.

[MM2K]

It doesn't make sense at all.  Other than to appease the important members of the GOP base which is traditionally the larger income earners.  I find it sad that many people viewed the Bush tax cuts as a permanent right of some kind.  

It makes perfect sense. Obama and the Democrats say they want to keep taxes for everyone else  except the top 2%. As Gigantor has said, that is only an "increase" of $70 billion per year, which is a drop in the bucket compared to the deficits that we are running these days. But it will go a long way in hurting economic development, because those are the people who create jobs. Therefore, if you raise thier tax rates, you probably will not gain even as much as $70 billion in revenue per year. As has been said, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Government spending is at 24% of GDP if Im not mistaken. There is no way you are going to get revenues at 24% of GDP.

[Emmortal]

It makes perfect sense. Obama and the Democrats say they want to keep taxes for everyone else  except the top 2%. As Gigantor has said, that is only an "increase" of $70 billion per year, which is a drop in the bucket compared to the deficits that we are running these days. But it will go a long way in hurting economic development, because those are the people who create jobs. Therefore, if you raise thier tax rates, you probably will not gain even as much as $70 billion in revenue per year. As has been said, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Government spending is at 24% of GDP if Im not mistaken. There is no way you are going to get revenues at 24% of GDP.

Not to mention the fact that it's been proven that even if you were to extend the tax cuts for the rich only they will tend to save that extra money instead of spending.

[Arnold jr]

Like so many topics, the solution to this one is so simple yet construed in a way to make it seem beyond simple comprehension. There are two things we need, lower taxes across the board, which in turn brings more money into a floundering economy and lower spending, which prevents the deficit from rising even more. This is the first step and it's so simple.

Important note, for every dollar the government spends they borrow thirty to thirty-five cents, so spend less and the need to borrow that money is fixed.