HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » McConnell says Obama want...

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 07:51 PM

McConnell says Obama wants more revenue than Bowles-Simpson. It’s not so.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/11/15/mcconnell-says-obama-wants-more-revenue-than-bowles-simpson-its-not-so/

Thursday afternoon, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) claimed that Obama’s opening bid of $1.6 trillion in tax increases over 10 years is a “joke” and more than any deficit commission recommends.

As Sarah Ayres and Michael Linden of the Center for American Progress explain, this, while a common misperception, is false. Simpson-Bowles is sometimes said to include $1.2 trillion in revenue increases over 10 years. That, however, is relative to a “current law” baseline where all the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire, and the Alternative Minimum Tax is not patched.

Relative to “current policy,” or the tax code currently in effect, Simpson-Bowles raises $2.7 trillion to Obama’s $1.6 trillion.

~~

McConnel’s remark is a reminder that, contrary to popular belief, Obama is staking out a position on taxes that, if anything, is more timid than that of the bipartisan debt commissions. They want revenue increases far in excess of anything the administration has proposed.



Sonafabitch! Obama is still operating the same fucking way. He starts off with a position that MAY be acceptable as a final agreement - which guarantees we end up with something LESS than that. What the fuck is he doing even mentioning a position that is less than what bipartisan commisssions have recommended?! SHIT!


11 replies, 1491 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 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply McConnell says Obama wants more revenue than Bowles-Simpson. It’s not so. (Original post)
Bill USA Nov 2012 OP
Qutzupalotl Nov 2012 #1
elleng Nov 2012 #3
Bill USA Nov 2012 #6
Qutzupalotl Nov 2012 #8
elleng Nov 2012 #2
Bill USA Nov 2012 #5
malexand Nov 2012 #10
Bill USA Nov 2012 #7
struggle4progress Nov 2012 #4
LineNew Reply I
John2 Nov 2012 #9
Turborama Nov 2012 #11

Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 07:57 PM

1. Bowles-Simpson is draconian.

I'm glad Obama didn't embrace it fully. There are parts he likes, parts he doesn't.

Obama is prepared to go off the cliff if Republicans don't raise rates on the wealthy. He holds all the cards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:04 PM

3. Thanks for the rational word, Qut.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:49 PM

6. were the parts on tax increases unwarranted, unjustified. Worth throwing out without using them?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 09:35 PM

8. My understanding is Obama is keeping the tax increases.

But Bowles-Simpson also included a lot of spending cuts, including cuts to Medicare and SS, which Obama opposes — and rightly so, since that doesn't affect the deficit. But that's how they achieved the higher number. And if you put SS cuts on the table, Republicans will jump on it and never let go. It's not worth it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:01 PM

2. WTF is wrong with you?

mcconnell comes in, before meeting with the President, says 'Obama’s opening bid of $1.6 trillion in tax increases over 10 years is a “joke” and more than any deficit commission recommends,'
and you say, here, 'Sonafabitch! Obama is still operating the same fucking way,' similarly ignorant and confrontational.

We could all do with a constructive dialogue, and we who voted for President Obama will support him and do our best to expose and remove the obstructionists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)


Response to Bill USA (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 16, 2012, 09:39 AM

10. Advice...

You may find the following three simple bits of common advice helpful in your day-to-day activities and which will also undoubtedly enhance your reputation and legacy:

1) Use and remember the 'Thumperian Principle' which most of us learned early in life:

"If you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all."

2) "It really doesn't cost anything to be nice, and the rewards can be unimaginable." - Paul 'Bear' Bryant

3) "You get more with honey than vinegar." - Anonymous

While we should pay attention and not ignore "the haters," perhaps we should spend more time thinking of how we can help and support President Obama and other Democratic leaders with all the problems facing the U.S. and the world (rather than spewing more hate).

But also leave a couple of moments to gloat in our wonderful victory on November 6th:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:54 PM

7. maybe you'd like to explain what sense there is to throwing away a position on revenues without even


using it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:18 PM

4. Mebbe Yertle can't do arithmetic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Fri Nov 16, 2012, 09:05 AM

9. I

 

don't start with Simpson\Bowles because of Simpson and Bowles. I don't trust either one period. They are both conservatives as far as I'm concern which you fail to realize. You base your logic on revenues with arguing about the amount of tax increases.

I base my position on the amount of spending cuts they are proposing because I find that side of the equation more important. Bowles and Simpson's argument are spending drives the deficit but I find the argument flawed. Over spending is bad on principle or spending at is a bad principle in the first place. Spending should be targeted as investments. Spending on Healthcare,Education and to bring down Poverty are good investments and not bad spending.

The trick is to cut wasteful spending while at the same time raising enough revenue in taxes which want hurt job growth which allow businesses to expand. President Obama is trying to walk that tightrope. I think he is going in the right direction by compromising. His problem is bringing the Left and Right to sensible solutions instead of holding steadfast in their positions. I don't accept a knee jerk reaction, that President Obama is trying to sell out his base. He needs his base to support him. He did also talk to the organizations that represent them before he made any move so I don't agree with your assertion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Fri Nov 16, 2012, 11:21 AM

11. I feel a duty to share the jury results on this OP

The only juror who said something was number 2, and that's not me. However, as the jury spent 35 minutes on this and juror #2 put a lot of thought into her response, I thought it appropriate to share it, as otherwise - due to the result - the people juror #2 wrote to would never get to see it. So, without any further ado....



At Fri Nov 16, 2012, 08:41 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

McConnell says Obama wants more revenue than Bowles-Simpson. It’s not so.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101648089

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This person is rude and abusive.


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 16, 2012, 09:16 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I am an old lady, but I have been married for forty years to an ex-merchant seaman, so I am used to bad words. I realize that many young people use them routinely. I noticed that one of the other posters, Ellen, used an obscenity to reply. However, obcenities are distracting and may serve as triggers to painful flashbacks for abuse victims. Ellen seems to know that, as she abbreviated hers. Bullies frequently scream obscenities as they beat people up (including children). Some of us have terrifying memories which feature loud bad words paired with physical pain. Also, obscenities increase the flow of rage hormones which hamper the thinking process of the person using them. Bill USA needs to learn to control himself verbally. His other posts, without obscenities, are much more persuasive. Bill seems to me to be operating from fear, seeking emotional support without knowing how to do that effectively. Be comforted, Bill, and settle down.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread