Tue Nov 13, 2012, 06:37 PM
trailmonkee (2,610 posts)
Obama Promises Liberal Groups He'll End Bush-Era Tax Cuts For The Wealthy
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama promised liberal groups on Tuesday that the Bush tax cuts will end for the nation's wealthiest, according to a statement from the progressive group MoveOn.
"MoveOn’s 7 million members will be pleased to know that President Obama today strongly reiterated his steadfast commitment to ensuring that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent finally end December 31—and to protecting the middle class in the process," said the group's political action executive director Justin Ruben after meeting with Obama at the White House.
In his daily briefing, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney rejected the GOP's approach to raise revenues by cutting loopholes and deductions from the tax code, saying raising taxes on the rich was non-negotiable for Obama.
But Carney did not say whether Obama would stand by his "wealthy" cutoff line at $200,000 for individuals or $250,000 for families — a response to disagreement among Democrats over where to raise taxes and where to keep the rates the same or lower. Sen. Chuck Schumer has proposed raising the threshold to $500,000 or even $1 million.
Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/obama-promises-end-to-bush-era-tax-cuts-for-the-we
18 replies, 3378 views
Obama Promises Liberal Groups He'll End Bush-Era Tax Cuts For The Wealthy (Original post)
|Mz Pip||Nov 2012||#3|
|mother earth||Nov 2012||#10|
|mother earth||Nov 2012||#18|
Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #15)
Wed Nov 14, 2012, 06:22 AM
Cha (182,360 posts)
17. Yeah, so many don't appreciate what he has done
I have no doubt that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will NOT be cut. But, then I
pay attention to what has been said by Harry Reid, the White House Blog, and it was reported on here that Schumer was on tv saying "Social Security is off the table"
Harry Reid's response: "We are not going to mess with Social Security"
'Top Democrats in the U.S. Senate are saying this week that they won't push changes to Social Security as part of a deal to reduce the federal budget deficit.
"We are not going to mess with Social Security," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters as he left a news conference Wednesday, according to Reuters.
During the conference, Reid invited Republicans to "dance" rather than fight over the so-called "fiscal cliff" -- the nickname given a looming expiration of tax cuts and spending cuts that will take effect at the end of the year."
Response to Mz Pip (Reply #3)
Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:43 AM
Blasphemer (2,695 posts)
16. No kidding
Way to help the party's negotiating position! I can imagine a scenario where a compromise involves a 500,000 threshold but Schumer should have never brought it up when the game was just beginning.
Response to trailmonkee (Original post)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 07:38 PM
DLnyc (2,442 posts)
Obama consistently said, throughout the campaign, that "folks like me should pay a little more". He should keep that promise and he has every right to insist on it, since voters chose his platform knowing exactly what it was.
Switching to some complicated game over deductions reads like a shell game and would be a very bad idea, IMHO.
Raising the cutoff to 500,000, say, I think is actually good for Democrats -- there are a lot of voters between 250,000 and 500,000 and, more important, a lot of people believe (mostly incorrectly) that they will reach 250,000 one of these days. The Republicans will probably chicken out if the raised threshold is offered, since it just weakens their flimsy argument that any significant numbers of voters would be affected.
Also, it is important to point out that taxes would go up on the EXCESS over the cutoff, not the whole amount. Good luck getting attention-challenged America to hear you on that one though.
For the record, my income currently is around 10% of either cutoff, so I don't gain or lose directly from a different cutoff. But I think we all would actually gain, both economically and politically, from a higher cutoff.
I hope I don't get flamed for this one; it's actually a considered opinion, not a nefarious plot.
Response to shawn703 (Reply #9)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 08:38 PM
mother earth (6,002 posts)
10. Exactly...not up to bargain away SS & Medicare, no age adjustments either...hands off! What good
would it serve to start giving away the few safeguards left?
I would like a statement to that effect from the president, too. Is that too much to ask?
I think it's time to reassure Americans that the "elected" who enjoy the finest benefits at our tax paying expense won't fuck with our one safeguard, esp. since these economic times may be with us indefinitely & many have already lost savings and investments they had planned for retirement.
It's not enough to promise any age tinkering would only affect younger people, that's WRONG too.
Response to mother earth (Reply #10)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 09:36 PM
John2 (2,730 posts)
heard Social Security was off the table from someone that was in the meeting. The people who was in the meeting is pleased with what they heard apparently, so I think they have their supporters best interests in mind.
They also said if the Republicans don't deal, then they are going to keep the campaign going. We won a major battle in the election but the war isn't over. The Republicans think they are in a position to dictate terms to the President but if they do,then they don't understand the political environment they are in. Think of it as the counter to the Tea Party movement.
We'll go off the cliff and the Bush tax cuts will end. They have been offered a Deal to extend tax cuts for 98 percent of the people, but if they refuse, the next campaign will hang it around their necks. We will take it into 2014. THey need to understand the country did not elect President Obama to just implement Mitt Romney's or their Policies. President Obama was elected on his Policies. They must think we are Dumb. They are not in a position to dictate anything.
Extending those tax cuts will not grow any jobs but just line the pockets of the rich more. Getting rid of loopholes also touch the middle class and small businesses but want hurt the wealthy much. They couldn't add the math with Romney, why do the GOP Congress think they can do it when their own Presidential candidate couldn't do it? The Republicans are just doing a tap dance and being dishonest.