HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » What do you think would h...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:33 PM

What do you think would happen if the Repubs do not extend the tax cuts for those above $250K?

If the President continues to urge them to pass the taxcuts for those making less than $250K and they refuse, how do you think the voters would react to them in the election in 2014?

Do you think the Republicans are playing with fire on this issue?

Only the House can pass tax cuts, not the President or the Senate. If they refuse to pass the taxcut for 98% of Americans unless they can pass the taxcuts for billionaires, do you think that is a winning issue for the Repubs?

Do you think this might be the issue to change the Congress in 2014 if the Democrats play it right and doesn't give away the store in a negotiating game?

18 replies, 1459 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply What do you think would happen if the Repubs do not extend the tax cuts for those above $250K? (Original post)
kentuck Nov 2012 OP
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #1
Ohio Joe Nov 2012 #2
jberryhill Nov 2012 #3
subterranean Nov 2012 #4
kentuck Nov 2012 #7
unblock Nov 2012 #5
BlueStreak Nov 2012 #6
frazzled Nov 2012 #8
unblock Nov 2012 #9
julian09 Nov 2012 #10
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #13
hfojvt Nov 2012 #15
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #16
julian09 Nov 2012 #17
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2012 #18
davidn3600 Nov 2012 #11
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #12
hfojvt Nov 2012 #14

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:35 PM

1. the end of the world as we know it.

 

it's what the mayans were talking about when they designed their calendar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:36 PM

2. My hope would be...

That President Obama would let them all expire.

Edit - I read the OP completely wrong... Ignore me and move along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:38 PM

3. Yes, this is the beginning of a play for a 2014 majority


And they can scream "class warfare" all they want.

Those who have been winning that war for too long really get upset at it being pointed out to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:47 PM

4. It would also be a tax cut for billionaires.

Everyone would get the tax cut on all their earned income up to $250,000, even billionaires. That's how it should be framed. I would like to see the Republicans try to explain their opposition to that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to subterranean (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:50 PM

7. True.

It is a taxcut for everyone. Very good point. And that is probably the best way to frame it? IF the Repubs do nothing, they are stopping a taxcut for everyone. That is their decision. The only power that is in the President's hands is to let it expire. The President cannot pass tax cuts - only the Congress. If they try to pass the bill for billionaires, the President has promised to veto it. Of course, it would never make it to his desk because it would not get thru the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:47 PM

5. point of order --

i think you meant to refer to the constitutional restriction that only the house can originate bills that RAISE revenue.

the senate can originate bills that REDUCE revenue, though traditionally it doesn't even do that because virtually all revenue bills include SOME increases.


in truth, though, this provision amounts to a formality rather than a meaningful restriction. the senate can originate a bill that raises revenue, it just can't become law *in that form*. but the house can of course then originate a bill in a remarkably similar form and then the senate can pass THAT bill. which is little different from any other complex bill that gets passed by both houses in different forms and then goes to a reconciliation committee after which a fresh compromise bill is passed by both houses.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:50 PM

6. It is all just a game to both sides

They aren't talking about the real issue, and I predict they will not.

The top tax rate is a bogus issue because almost none of the 0.1-percenters pay any significant tax at that rate. The real issues are:

1) That the billionaires are able to shelter their income through offshore accounts and/or complex corporate structures; and

2) that they can use loopholes to launder their income at the special billionaire's rate of 15% (cap gains).

Is anybody talking about fixing either one of those abuses?

No and they will not. Because this is all just bullshit rhetoric to both sides. They will each milk the rhetoric for as much political benefit as they can get, then they'll sign some bullshit agreement that doesn't lay a finger on the rich.

Mark my words. I hope to be proven wrong. I don't think I will be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:52 PM

8. They should just rip the bandaid off quickly and move on

Our side will have to do the same thing on entitlements. Nobody is going to like it, from either side. But the quicker they do it, the quicker it will be over. And it won't be the end of the world. Anything that comes out badly can be refought at a later date.

My guess is that the Republicans will accede to a tax hike for high earners. But Schumer's statement the other day makes me think that there will be a compromise on both sides: they'll go up to 35% rather than 39%, but also cap deductions on these high earners to make up for the rest. I could live with that, as long as the needed revenues are generated from it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:56 PM

9. this will be a federal wonk issue from the distant past in state/local 2014 races.

i don't see it having a huge impact on 2014 in and of itself.

but that's partly because i don't forsee any huge changes. if they completely rewrite the tax code, yeah, sure, that would have a big impact on 2014.

but i see rates increasing, mostly due to the shrub cuts expiring; a few deductions ending; a minimum tax fix that might be somewhat more enduring that the usual annual "patch"; and maybe a few new deductions/credits to make it all go down easier. more than the usual tinkering, but nothing landmark.

nothing so huge that congressional races won't still be about local and state matters like did their candidate come out in favor of rape, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:59 PM

10. We had the chance a few days ago.

 

Our hope is a solid democrat vote with some reasonable republicans added to bring vote to 217; for tax cut for EVERYONE
including millionaires on the NET income of first $250,000 earned. Then anything above that would be taxed at a rate of 4.6% higher or 39.6% from the 35% now. All this for the sake of keeping a 4.6% tax hike from happening on rich, which would bring taxes back to Clinton era. Don't forget the millionaires get taxed at 35% on first $250,000, which they didn't have in Clinton era.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #10)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:29 PM

13. Let's keep the facts straight

They won't be taxed at 35% on the first $250,000. They'll be taxed at 10%, 15%, 25%, 28% & 33%, just like everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:48 PM

15. no, actually they are taxed much less

because, unlike the rest of us, much of their income is in the form of capital gains and dividends which thanks to Republican politicians, are taxed at much lower rates. See, for example, Rmoney http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1167192

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:11 PM

16. The post I was replying to had to do with the increased marginal rates for the wealthy

That has nothing whatsoever to do with capital gains.

So, as I said - on the first $250,000 they will pay the same rates as everyone else, not 35%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 09:11 PM

17. I'm talking the maximum rate, not the effective rate.

 

It would seem to me if you are above $250,0000 net, the first $250,000 would be 35%.
CHECK TAX TABLES.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:48 AM

18. I'm not talking about effective rates either and you're flat out wrong

President Obama hasn't said anything about changing any of the marginal rates except the top one, from 35% to 39.6%. All the rest will remain the same, at 10%, 15%, 25%, 28% and 33%.

Please take a few minutes to learn about how our tax system works before yelling "CHECK TAX TABLES" at people that do know. We can't be effective proponents for the President and make the case to others if we have no clue ourselves about how the marginal rate system works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:23 PM

11. 2014 will be difficult no matter what happens

Over the past century or so, the party in power on the federal level traditionally loses ground in the states during mid-terms. There has only been a couple exceptions.

It's going to be a very uphill battle to retake the House in 2014. History has proven time and time again the coattails of the president's election does not extend into mid-terms like you think they would.That's just simply the way our political cycles work in this country. The pendulum swings back and forth when you have a divided electorate.

I remember many Democrats after 2008 gloating about our majorities in Congress. And many said the "GOP is finished. They will never take over the Congress again." Well...what happened in 2010? History repeated itself and Democrats got caught in a hangover after 2008. Don't make the same mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidn3600 (Reply #11)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:25 PM

12. not if the repugs continue to be obstructionists..

 

people are waking up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:45 PM

14. unfortunately, youtube let me down

I was gonna say "the rich would intiate secondary protocol" and then put a clip of that scene from Armegeddon where the soldiers march off the elevator and the scientists at NASA are going "wtf?"

But as for the electoral consequences? Well what were the consequences this time?

Besides that, there's a 99.9% chance that Obama will cave and let them off the hook again.

He will again claim that he must cave for the good of the country.

And besides that, Obama's plan gives most of the benefits to the top 20% anyway.

So even an Obama victory is gonna be a huge loss for the working people of America and a win for the rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread