HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » White House: No debt deal...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:20 PM

White House: No debt deal unless tax rates on top earners go up

Source: The Hill

White House: No debt deal unless tax rates on top earners go up
By Amie Parnes - 11/29/12 01:52 PM ET

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Thursday there will be no deficit deal unless Republicans agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest households.

“There can be no deal without rates on top earners going up,” said Carney, who reiterated that the president will not sign legislation that extends the Bush-era tax rates for the wealthy.


“This should not be news to anyone who was not in a coma during campaign season," Carney said of the president’s stance on taxes.

Carney’s ultimatum came on a day in which both sides dug in and appeared to move farther apart on a deal to prevent tax hikes on most households and crippling spending cuts to defense and non-defense budgets set to hit in January.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/270139-white-house-no-deal-unless-tax-rates-on-top-earners-go-up

33 replies, 5064 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 White House: No debt deal unless tax rates on top earners go up (Original post)
kpete Nov 2012 OP
patrice Nov 2012 #1
zentrum Nov 2012 #2
Smilo Nov 2012 #4
blackspade Nov 2012 #3
blue_heron Nov 2012 #5
blackspade Nov 2012 #6
julian09 Nov 2012 #9
John2 Nov 2012 #16
leftyohiolib Nov 2012 #17
freshwest Nov 2012 #19
jtuck004 Nov 2012 #10
blackspade Nov 2012 #13
jtuck004 Nov 2012 #18
Martin Eden Dec 2012 #29
csziggy Dec 2012 #31
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #32
csziggy Dec 2012 #33
BeyondGeography Nov 2012 #7
jtuck004 Nov 2012 #8
pepperbear Nov 2012 #12
SummerSnow Dec 2012 #30
midnight Nov 2012 #11
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #15
midnight Nov 2012 #20
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #21
midnight Nov 2012 #22
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #23
midnight Nov 2012 #28
riqster Nov 2012 #14
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #24
riqster Nov 2012 #25
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #27
arely staircase Nov 2012 #26

Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:27 PM

1. They can either PAY FOR what they've TAKEN or else! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:29 PM

2. But in addition....

...there should be no more pain for the Middle Class and the poor.

Raising the age of SS and medicare shifts the costs from the Federal Government to us and to doctors and ends up actually being more expensive! The richest, whose income has gone up over 280% since 1970, should start contributing at a level and in a way that is finally fair.

Adding to the costs of medical insurance and losing the mortgage rate deduction for the vast middle will slow the recovery yet again!

Obama's 10:1 or 3:1 ratio is not in the least fair to 98% of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:36 PM

4. Totally agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:33 PM

3. Exactly how are the defense cuts crippling?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:36 PM

5. the sequestration cuts are deep across the board

My understanding, they can't pick and choose what to cut. So it would damage programs that should not be cut

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue_heron (Reply #5)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:39 PM

6. I knew that :)

My point was more about the wording.
In know way are the defense cuts crippling.
Non defense I totally agree with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:02 PM

9. A lot of jobs in defense industry, bases in south.

 

Should end a lot of bases in Europe, Asia and weapons systems military doesn't even want. How many skirt chasing generals do we need?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #9)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:03 PM

16. This is why

 

I claim he has the Republicans in a rock and a hard place. Those cuts, hurts their constituents mostly. I know, that the military is a big part of the economy in North Carolina,Georgia,Alabama,Texas,Wyoming and kansas. If the Republicans accept cuts in those states, it will kill them. Those Republican Governors will be defenseless too. Their economies will tank. That is the Federal Government assistance they get. And they want to talk about States supporting themselves. Then go for it. You can add Oklahoma and Arizona to that list also. They are just as important to those states as GM or the auto Industry is to the Midwest. So will the Republicans throw them under the bus just for the wealthy? It is Boerhner's and McConnell's move. This is a high stake's game they are playing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #9)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:05 PM

17. skirt chasing generals that are treated like royalty

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #9)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 02:40 PM

19. Crippling their ability to bring home pork to buy votes and claim it's patriotism...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:03 PM

10. As a matter of policy we prefer to wage war on ill-equipped people in a mistaken belief that

human spirit can be overcome with our ability to kill, instead of educating ourselves and becoming the nation who builds great things. Cutting funding would prove a barrier to that.

I look at the old science fiction stuff and see pictures and descriptions of big cities, people flying around in their personal Jetson-mobile, everyone looking fit, (except for the boss), jetting between planets, you only break a sweat for fitness. I can count on few fingers the number of those who foresaw shortages of health care and food,

They assumed we would keep investing in ourselves like we were.

Instead we are moving toward islands of private jets surrounded by tar paper shacks, while 20% of the country insists that what we used to invest in our people and tools should revert to payments into their personal bank accounts, they then use those funds to buy politicians and others to do their bidding, and invest elsewhere in the world for greater profit.

And we help them just by living our lives as we do.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #10)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:47 PM

13. I know what you mean.

A lot of that science fiction wasn't 'old' stuff to me!

Then again there are all of the post apocalypse and dystopian future stories and movies.
Tragically they seem to be closer to the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #13)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 05:36 PM

18. I only sort of had parents and teachers. Books were closer and better companions,



for the most part. And my favorites were the sci fi's.

Seems like a majority of the stuff I got from American authors from the 50's through the early 70's envisioned a better future than the later stuff seems to. And I remember the little newspapers, the architecture experiments, labs, people trying things, because we were still investing in our neighbors and our country. It is interesting to note the change in the literature as we let people sell off our future...




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 07:26 AM

29. "people flying around in their personal Jetson-mobile"

I grew up in the 60's, and most of us believed that technological progress & increased productivity would substantially improve our standard of living. Average Americans wouldn't have to work as many hours and could spend more quality time with their family and doing all kinds of things that enhance quality of life.

Well, there have been amazing technological advancements & increases in productivity ... but the benefits and financial rewards have been skimmed off the top by an ownership class that is amassing huge wealth while the American Dream for most people is in decline.

The Republican Party is fighting tooth & nail to perpetuate & accelerate that decline. When is the other half of this country gonna wake the fuck up and see they've been slitting their own throats voting for those assholes??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 04:13 PM

31. Andre Norton SF was pretty close to the truth

In her books that featured the "Dipple" - an interstellar refugee camp turned slum. Lots of very poor people with a few very very rich. The poor survive by scrounging or stealing with many in effective slavery. Refugees from planets destroyed by war or pollution stuck in slums on planets with no space or use for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to csziggy (Reply #31)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 04:58 PM

32. Magazine covers and heads were filled with these fantastic images.



I kinda preferred more mechanical and electrical engineering sci fi than those that centered more around mind fantasy and characters. Comes from being a fixer of things, I think. (Though I really liked Stranger in a Strange Land, so not always, eh?).

Anyway, we were on our way to building those visions, maybe wouldn't have had to worry about food stamps and housing. Why did we choose this divergence? I forget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #32)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 08:48 PM

33. Yes, the Star Trek future was our goal

Though there were rough times between the 1960s and when Kirk was made Captain! We all just thought about the wonderful future with no thought of how we'd get there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:40 PM

7. “This should not be news to anyone who was not in a coma during campaign season."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #7)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:50 PM

8. Like virtually the entire Republican voting apparatus? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #7)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:16 PM

12. I KNOW, RIGHT??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #7)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 04:04 PM

30. agreed

:sleep:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:13 PM

11. What is the deficit deal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to midnight (Reply #11)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:58 PM

15. I think the deal is that the 1% make out like bandits and the 99% get screwed.

Remember, most of Congress are in the 1% or at least represent the 1%. They kindly allow us to vote but that doesnt mean they represent us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 03:26 PM

20. Hopefully the election will have some consequences for this type of imbalance in our countries

distribution of resources....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to midnight (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:35 PM

21. We still have way too many Republicans in the HOR. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #21)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:43 PM

22. Look at this D.U. post....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to midnight (Reply #22)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:50 PM

23. I have seen the post and "go getem Nancy". But call me back when we have results.

In the meantime, we have too many Republicans in the HOR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #23)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 11:59 PM

28. Results are the important thing....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:57 PM

14. Here's hoping they stick to it this time (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riqster (Reply #14)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:50 PM

24. Good luck Charlie Brown. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #24)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:53 PM

25. "All I got was a rock"

True on Halloween, and most likely now too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riqster (Reply #25)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 06:06 PM

27. Dont trust Lucy. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 05:53 PM

26. barack hussein obama

my president!

as proud (if not more) to have voted to re-elect him as i was to elect him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread