HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Obama Sets Steep Tax Targ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:17 PM

Obama Sets Steep Tax Target

Source: Wall Street Journal

President to Seek $1.6 Trillion More in Revenue, Double Level From 2011 Talks

BY JANET HOOK AND CAROL E. LEE
President Barack Obama will begin budget negotiations with congressional leaders Friday by calling for $1.6 trillion in additional tax revenue over the next decade, far more than Republicans are likely to accept and double the $800 billion discussed in talks with GOP leaders during the summer of 2011.

Mr. Obama, in a meeting Tuesday with union leaders and other liberal activists, also pledged to hang tough in seeking tax increases on wealthy Americans. In one sign of conciliation, he made no specific commitment to leave unscathed domestic programs such as Medicare, leaving the door open to spending cuts many fellow ...


Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323551004578117152861144968.html?mod=djemalertNEWS



Yep, retrogrades of all stripes its going to cost you double to keep everything happy and keep the stock market going in the right direction. You could have settled for less but your greed is now going to cost you.

You remember that war in Iraq that you loved so much, and the bombs dropping in Baghdad that thrilled you so mucy?

Its time to pay for them.

33 replies, 6253 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 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama Sets Steep Tax Target (Original post)
grantcart Nov 2012 OP
Gregorian Nov 2012 #1
Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2012 #10
sofa king Nov 2012 #32
ancianita Nov 2012 #2
ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #3
grantcart Nov 2012 #4
mimi85 Nov 2012 #6
SunSeeker Nov 2012 #5
Jasonrc42 Nov 2012 #7
yorgatron Nov 2012 #8
OnlinePoker Nov 2012 #11
Jasonrc42 Nov 2012 #25
Fearless Nov 2012 #9
Mr.Turnip Nov 2012 #14
awoke_in_2003 Nov 2012 #20
Fearless Nov 2012 #27
KILL THE WISE ONE Nov 2012 #12
Journeyman Nov 2012 #13
Marmitist Nov 2012 #15
Journeyman Nov 2012 #19
nolabels Nov 2012 #31
JoeyT Nov 2012 #16
bamacrat Nov 2012 #17
WRH2 Nov 2012 #18
Sophiegirl Nov 2012 #21
high density Nov 2012 #22
democrattotheend Nov 2012 #24
democrattotheend Nov 2012 #23
daleo Nov 2012 #26
Sundome Nov 2012 #28
cstanleytech Nov 2012 #29
rickyhall Nov 2012 #30
Jasonrc42 Nov 2012 #33

Response to grantcart (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:21 PM

1. Roads and bridges are a bitch.

Wars and tax cuts- a "luxury".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gregorian (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 01:21 AM

10. Yeah? But we were BUILDING bridges in Iraq....

True, we were blowing them up again and rebuilding them again....

If I were an Iraqi I would want them built all over,...knowing the way things went every bridge has a built in bomb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #10)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 03:01 PM

32. I don't think we actually built any.

KBR and Bechtel just charged for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:24 PM

2. Mo' betta butta, bitchez.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:35 PM

3. Now THAT'S

how you start a negotiation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProgressiveNow (Reply #3)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:37 PM

4. Nice place to end it too!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:25 AM

6. Yes, it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Tue Nov 13, 2012, 11:43 PM

5. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:42 AM

7. But it's not enough

Based on the start to this fiscal year that new tax of $1.6 trillion, collected over ten years, will just barely cover the budget deficit for just a single year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jasonrc42 (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:45 AM

8. Welcome to DU Jasonrc42

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jasonrc42 (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 01:36 AM

11. I'm sure you meant a single month.

Budget deficit rises to $120 billion in October

The budget deficit rose in October, the first month of fiscal year 2013, as looming negotiations over expiring tax cuts and imminent spending reductions dominated the post-election political landscape.

The Treasury said on Tuesday the October deficit was $120 billion, larger than economist forecasts for a $114 billion gap and up from $98 billion in October of 2011.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/13/us-usa-economy-budget-idUSBRE8AC10320121113

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnlinePoker (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 09:50 PM

25. Based on $120B in October, we need $1.4 trillion each year

Don't know if October will be a continuing trend, but if you annualized that amount the deficit for the year would be $1.44 trillion. Even with strong market growth, it would take a long time for that to come down without cuts in the investments Obama would like to make.

So maybe he needs to be aiming even higher...someone else suggested $3.2 trillion. Maybe it should be doubled again. $6.4 trillion?

It would be tough to get though. I looked at IRS data from 2009 (couldn't find the detail for 2010 or 2011). If the tax rate were 100% on all income above $100,000, it would have brought in an additional $925 billion in tax revenue that year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:50 AM

9. Not enough. Try harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fearless (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 04:07 AM

14. Honestly if we are truly serious about the deficit I don't think we can keep any of Bushes tax cuts.

Maybe a temporary extension of the middle class cuts as the economy is still weak but I do not think a permanent extension is a good idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fearless (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 07:15 PM

20. If anything...

start at 3.2 at least, because the pukes are going to bargain it down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #20)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 12:32 AM

27. Exactly. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 02:29 AM

12. Mr. Obama ???? That's President Obama to you WSJ

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KILL THE WISE ONE (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 03:19 AM

13. AP Stylebook. In effect since 1953. "President (Full Name)" on 1st mention, "Mr. (Last Name)" after…

and this but codified standards that had been in effect for decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Journeyman (Reply #13)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 07:07 AM

15. So is that why you NEVER saw a media outlet say "Mr. Bush"?

 

And why I wanted to reach through the radio and throttle the disembodied voice on NPR who NEVER said "President Obama", rather, always "Mr. Obama"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marmitist (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 12:05 PM

19. I saw that all the time. Did you not read the news while he was President?. . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Journeyman (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 10:46 AM

31. Pretty sure they are still trying to count the votes in AZ

And probably will take them at least four more years so i will be holding my breath till then

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 08:41 AM

16. K&R n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 09:27 AM

17. That's how you negotiate!

Go high to what you want in a dream world, then settle for what you need. Glad he is starting this term like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 11:02 AM

18. A tax on the purchase of each stock and bond, Like EU is implementing.

Currently these are classified as tax free trades. But they have the benefit of US laws and court system.
they need to get off the dole, we can't afford to carry the markets.How much did they cost the country in the last 10 years? They didn't build the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 07:24 PM

21. An associate of mine once told me...

...shoot for the stars with reaching the moon as the true goal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sophiegirl (Reply #21)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 07:57 PM

22. Yeah it seems like after four years they're finally learning how to deal with the GOP?

Don't start in the middle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sophiegirl (Reply #21)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 08:26 PM

24. Exactly

Which is why I hope people here don't start screaming "sellout" when he inevitably gets less than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 08:26 PM

23. Just to be clear, he is setting the bar high on purpose

So that he has more room to negotiate. So please, don't be screaming "sellout" here if he gets less than the full amount.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 11:33 PM

26. Elections have consequences. N/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 01:35 AM

28. I'm worried about him saying he's willing to raise retirement aget to 67.

I do like that he wants to tax the millionaires fairly. It's about time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sundome (Reply #28)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 01:38 AM

29. Meh, I could live with the age raise though as long as the wealthy end up actually paying taxes

for a change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 10:38 AM

30. Missing the Obvious

Besides raising taxes on the rich....

Seems to me we're missing the obvious:
1)Stop subsidizing big oil
2)Stop subsidizing corporate farms
3)Stop drug war & let the states handle it
4)Legalize & tax marijuana
5)Stop waste

And why are we still guarding Europe from the Soviet Union?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #30)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:59 AM

33. Still not enough

1) Subsidizing big oil = $10-52B (source: priceofoil.org)
2) Subsidizing corporate farms = $10-30B total for all farms (source Cato Institute)
3) Drug war = $15B (source: drugsense.org)
4) Legalize & tax = that's a tough one. state of CO suggested it would get $60M per year. WA says $400M. Average those two, take it times 50 states, and it's $11.5B
5) don't know how to estimate that one

Total taking the high end of each estimate: $108.5B. Against a $1.3-1.4 trillion annual deficit. Even $3.2 trillion in new taxes over ten years does not come close to filling the gap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread