Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: The Obama Plan?

  1. #1

    The Obama Plan?

    [QUOTE]Debt ceiling: What Obama wants in taxes

    By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney July 12, 2011: 2:27 PM ET

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Taxes. They've become the most controversial issue in the debt ceiling talks.

    Republicans say President Obama wants to enact "job killing" tax hikes "now." Obama says that's not so: He says his tax increases would be targeted so as not to hurt the economy and would not take effect until 2013.

    "Nobody has talked about increasing taxes now, nobody has talked about ... increasing taxes next year," Obama said Monday at a press conference.

    So what exactly has Obama said he wants?

    First, he wants to get rid of some corporate tax breaks enjoyed by oil and gas companies as well as buyers of corporate jets. Together, those changes might generate close to $50 billion in revenue over 10 years. He also wants to restore some Bush-era tax rates for high-income households -- a move that could raise roughly $700 billion over a decade. The Bush tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012.

    In other words, roughly $750 billion in revenue raisers out of what the president hopes will be a $4 trillion package or "grand bargain" even though it's looking more likely that a final package will be much smaller.

    "Is the package that we're talking about exactly what I would want? No. I might want more revenues and fewer cuts to programs that benefit middle-class families ... My point is, is that I'm willing to move in their direction in order to get something done," Obama said.

    The Republican counter to the suggestion that tax increases be included even as a minority portion of a debt-reduction package has been that it would be a "job killer."

    "Tax hikes destroy jobs. And the last thing we should be doing right now, at a time of 9.2 percent unemployment, is enacting more government policies that will destroy jobs," House Speaker John Boehner said Monday.

    While very high taxes can dissuade businesses from hiring or investing at least in the near term, it's not at all clear how much, if any, job killing would occur if the proposals Obama has acknowledged publicly were implemented.

    For one thing, it's not known how many jobs business owners in the top two tax brackets actually create. The IRS collects information on businesses income but not on jobs. And some types of business income -- such as income from rental properties or investment partnerships -- may generate few if any jobs.

    Finally, Obama said that he offered to work with Republicans on tax reform that lowered income tax rates in exchange for eliminating most tax breaks.

    But he added one caveat: He would only get behind such reform "as long as that package was sufficiently progressive so that we weren't balancing the budget on the backs of middle-class families and working-class families and we weren't letting hedge fund managers and authors of best-selling books off the hook." [/QUOTE]

    .

  2. #2
    ending tax cuts and tax breaks is different than raising taxes. it's a semantic difference maybe but the Bush tax cuts were always written to have an expiration date.

    the grand bargain also included 4 trillion dollars in spending cuts over 10 years. it has cuts to medicare and ss.

    they also don't REALLY want to make a deal that helps Obama. They want to run the 2012 election on how much entitlement spending hurts the country, if they make a deal to actually cut spending it takes away that issue.

    the Republicans want all spending no revenue, it's not feasible. they are acting like children. deep down they know the debt ceiling has to be raised. Hence the mitch mcconnell "back door" plan. they want Washington and the USA to be broken so they can rescue everyone in the next election. they don't actually want to govern like adults. Obama has made overtures that he's ready to deal the GOP walked away.
    Last edited by bitonti; 07-13-2011 at 12:27 PM.

  3. #3
    So we have an Annual Deficit of ~$1.5 Trillion

    And the plan, as the article and you lay it out, amounts to:

    3.25 Trillion in Spending Cuts (per the Article, the Revenue Gained is part of, not seperate from, the 4 Trillion/10 Year Total) over Ten Years, or 325 Billion in Spending Cuts Per Year (21% of the Deficit).

    And 750 Billion over Ten Years in increased Revenue, or 75 Billion in Revenue Per Year (5% of the Deficit).

    So lets do the math on the "Grand Bargain":

    1.5 Trillion Per Year x 10 Years = $15 Trillion

    Less: 750 Billion in Increased Revenue
    Less: 3.25 Trillion in Cut/Reduced Spending

    So instead of a 15 Trilion Deficit, we will have an 11 Trillion Deficit, and thats if all revenue figures reamain accurate, and all cuts remain cut, and all existing programs/entitlements/wars/obamacare/etc. work as intended over the next ten years (I wouldn;t take that bet btw).

    So, 11 Trillion in Debt vs. 15 Trillion in Debt.

    Seems like teh Grand Bargain is alot of hot air, from both sides, if this is the best they can do.

  4. #4
    Not just hot air. Spending cuts without structural reforms are basically worthless. Congress is supposed to pass a new budget every year. Obama put forward a plan with 1 trillion in new taxes over 10 years and paper cuts that can easily be restored is congress does what it always does and increases spending.

    It should be noted that the new trillion in taxes is in addition to massive tax increases that kick in over the next few years in Obamacare.

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4061204]
    So instead of a 15 Trilion Deficit, we will have an 11 Trillion Deficit, and thats if all revenue figures reamain accurate, and all cuts remain cut, and all existing programs/entitlements/wars/obamacare/etc. work as intended over the next ten years (I wouldn;t take that bet btw).

    So, 11 Trillion in Debt vs. 15 Trillion in Debt.

    Seems like teh Grand Bargain is alot of hot air, from both sides, if this is the best they can do.[/QUOTE]

    it's realistic and positive change to get 15 to 11. these things take time. spin it any way you want it would be a giant step forward and anything that doesn't grow the deficit is very good. we could sustain a 15 trillion dollar deficit indefinitely, believe it or not.

    it's unrealistic to expect 15 to go to 0 right away. what did you expect? it's a huge hole that has been around for decades.

    bottom line Obama and the democrats are ready to deal, acting like adults, the GOP can't control their tea party wing and would rather create an economic disaster than govern like adults. this is just like Mccain's suspending of his campaign, these people cannot be trusted in a tight spot.

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4061254]spin it any way you want[/QUOTE]

    The good thing about this topic Bit, is there is no need for spin. The numbers speak for themselves.

    For the record, going from 1.5 Trillion in debt, to 11 Trillion in debt is not

    [QUOTE]anything that doesn't grow the deficit is very good[/QUOTE]

    Also, thanks for your opinion, but:

    [QUOTE]we could sustain a 15 trillion dollar deficit indefinitely, believe it or not.[/QUOTE]

    Even if true, it's not 15 Trillion indefinitely. It's 15 Trillion + 1.5 Trillion Per Year, indefintiely (at current, and as well all know, Govt. spending has never stayed "at current" levels, it always rises).

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,531
    Is there anyone here that believes that trashing the oil/gas tax breaks [B]*won't*[/B] cause a price increase?

    Obviously, we don't need that right now.

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=quantum;4061270]Is there anyone here that believes that trashing the oil/gas tax breaks [B]*won't*[/B] cause a price increase?

    Obviously, we don't need that right now.[/QUOTE]

    i believe that. the price of gasoline on the global open market is impacted by huge things like war in Libya. it's not impacted by the tax breaks for XOM.

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,966
    [QUOTE=quantum;4061270]Is there anyone here that believes that trashing the oil/gas tax breaks [B]*won't*[/B] cause a price increase?

    Obviously, we don't need that right now.[/QUOTE]

    Who knows?

    I know one thing...if congress passed a bill that eliminated ALL taxes for oil companies, the price of gas would remain EXACTLY right where it is right now, people would b*tch, they'd drop it 5 cents a gallon, then people would forget.

    :D

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4061261]
    For the record, going from 1.5 Trillion in debt, to 11 Trillion in debt is not
    [/QUOTE]

    the 1.5 t is old news. why not talk about the debt at 40 billion 70 years ago? it's not relevant. all we can focus on is where we are 15 and where we are going, hopefully 11. but I say again the GOP doesn't want to shrink the deficit before the 2012 election. they want everything to be as bad as possible so they can pretend to rescue washington.

    [QUOTE=Warfish;4061261]
    Even if true, it's not 15 Trillion indefinitely. It's 15 Trillion + 1.5 Trillion Per Year, indefintiely (at current, and as well all know, Govt. spending has never stayed "at current" levels, it always rises).[/QUOTE]

    Obama put alot of spending cuts on the table. You can say there's no link or whatever but he's trying. the Gop isn't really trying. that's the bottom line.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4061316]the 1.5 t is old news. why not talk about the debt at 40 billion 70 years ago? it's not relevant. all we can focus on is where we are 15 and where we are going, hopefully 11. but I say again the GOP doesn't want to shrink the deficit before the 2012 election. they want everything to be as bad as possible so they can pretend to rescue washington.



    Obama put alot of spending cuts on the table. You can say there's no link or whatever but he's trying. the Gop isn't really trying. that's the bottom line.[/QUOTE]

    You are very funny Bit. Truly.

    You sound like a toddler who wants his binky, and just screams the same thing over and over till he gets his way. "GOP not trying, GOP not trying, GOP no trying, OBAMA offered cuts, OBAMA offered cuts, OBAMA offered cuts, etc, etc, etc.

    Did you say something before about Spin? You may be the sites biggest talking point regurgitator these days. I point out that a debt of 1.5 trillion becoming 11 trillion is not a deficit reduction, and you go right back to "GOP NOT TRYYYYYYYYYING, OBAMA IS SOOOOO MATURE AND DREAMY!!!!!!".

    So what do you think of the Republican Plan (McConnell) to give the PResident the Power to raise the debt limit all by his lonesome, up to 3 times a year, with congress getting only a Veto (supermajority vote) option?

    Is that trying, as you see it?;)

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=quantum;4061270]Is there anyone here that believes that trashing the oil/gas tax breaks [B]*won't*[/B] cause a price increase?

    Obviously, we don't need that right now.[/QUOTE]

    Not if prices are predicated on a market economy. And if they were lower based on government subsidy how can any free market Conservative support the government creating barriers to alternate energy?

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4061312]i believe that. the price of gasoline on the global open market is impacted by huge things like war in Libya. it's not impacted by the tax breaks for XOM.[/QUOTE]
    If XOM is made to pay more taxes in order to produce gasoline that cost will get passed to the American driver.

    There is no scenario where that will not be true.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=sackdance;4061361]If XOM is made to pay more taxes in order to produce gasoline that cost will get passed to the American driver.

    There is no scenario where that will not be true.[/QUOTE]

    If you admit that we have a monopoly in oil which your premise clearly indicates why should the government support a subsidy to the monopoly instead of directly to the consumer?

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,943
    [QUOTE]Finally, Obama said that he offered to work with Republicans on tax reform that lowered income tax rates in exchange for eliminating most tax breaks.[/QUOTE]

    Sounds reasonable.

    It's quite hilarious to see conservatives speak about $4 trillion dollars in spending cuts as if it is an insignificant feat or amount. If this was being proposed by a Republican, he or she would be lauded as the greatest American hero since Reagan.

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=parafly;4061372]Sounds reasonable.

    It's quite hilarious to see conservatives speak about $4 trillion dollars in spending cuts as if it is an insignificant feat or amount. If this was being proposed by a Republican, he or she would be lauded as the greatest American hero since Reagan.[/QUOTE]

    Whats hilarious is that you really believe Obama himself "proposed" any of the possible spending cuts at all. As if cutting spending was his idea.

    If you believe that, I have a wonderful old bridge to sell you.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4061384]Whats hilarious is that you really believe Obama himself "proposed" any of the possible spending cuts at all. As if cutting spending was his idea.

    If you believe that, I have a wonderful old bridge to sell you.[/QUOTE]

    The Republicans have done a marvelous job at making the case for reducing spending and cutting the deficit for our long term economic survival. Now that they have gotten 90% of what they wanted they are going to squander it for purely political reasons. Doesn't seem like smart governance to me. Sounds like pure politics at the expense of the country. They won, Obama has conceded the point now what?

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4061387]Now that they have gotten 90% of what they wanted[/quote]

    Please point to the news report saying we are 90% of the way to a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

    Or are you forgetting that is a core point the (R) are seeking?

    [QUOTE]Doesn't seem like smart governance to me.[/QUOTE]

    And having a 11+ Trillion debt in 10 years does?

    [QUOTE]Sounds like pure politics at the expense of the country.[/QUOTE]

    The Country that even after this will be 11 Trillion in debt, with a barnkrupt Social Security, and worse? Yep, sounds like a big win for the Country to me.

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,943
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4061384]Whats hilarious is that you really believe Obama himself "proposed" any of the possible spending cuts at all. As if cutting spending was his idea.

    If you believe that, I have a wonderful old bridge to sell you.[/QUOTE]

    Where are the Republican proposals? I don't see anything meaningful besides for leaving the table and saying "job killing" when anything having to do with taxes is brought up.

    I don't see how you can objectively look at the situation and the information being leaked and come to the conclusion that the Democrats are not being more reasonable than the Republicans.

    "Four trillion dollars in cuts," "Entitlement cuts", "Reduced income tax rates while eliminating most tax breaks." All meaningless and some sort of vast conspiracy. :rolleyes:

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=parafly;4061401]Where are the Republican proposals? I don't see anything meaningful besides for leaving the table and saying "job killing" when anything having to do with taxes is brought up.

    I don't see how you can objectively look at the situation and the information being leaked and come to the conclusion that the Democrats are not being more reasonable than the Republicans.

    "Four trillion dollars in cuts," "Entitlement cuts", "Reduced income tax rates while eliminating most tax breaks." All meaningless and some sort of vast conspiracy. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    I thought Warfish pointed out rather eloquently that Republicans want a balanced budget amendment. That amendment would call for expenditures in no more than 19-20% of GDP and revenues to match. Structural change that could permanently fix our addiction to debt and waste.

    I also saw a radical proposal from the GOP to simply return to the spending levels of 2008 and cap increases for 5 years. RADICAL!!!! Or simple common sense.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us