Boehner Should Cave to Obama, Make More Tax Revenues Part of Debt Deal
Now, if President Obama should reject this offer to boost tax revenues, then either:
1) He’s ignorant of the historical impact of tax-rate reductions, or
2) He’s lying about what he really wants.
The former can be remedied by education, though only to a willing learner.
The latter can be cured only at the ballot box.
If what the president really wants is NOT increased revenue to pay down the debt, but punishment for those who have succeeded in our free-market system, then his goals stand at odds with the aspirations of the vast majority of the American people.
President Obama has recently indicated that a manufacturing and business revival is the recipe for emerging from the recession. Yet he then talks of penalizing businesses, as well as their customers, employees, and shareholders, by grabbing a greater percentage of their revenues and burdening them with further costly regulation.
President Obama appears committed to expansion through discouragement. Not only is he ignorant of basic economics, but his Vulcan aloofness has left him bereft of wisdom about human nature. His economic program echoes the break-room bulletin board parody poster: “The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves.”
As he advances plans to eviscerate the goose that laid the golden egg, he berates that hapless farm fowl for consuming the grain from which eggs are made. He cuts her feed rations, as his insults grow increasingly bellicose.
But, Mr. President, you can’t kick the eggs out of the goose.
Speaker Boehner will never get a more propitious moment to declare the truth and beauty of our exceptional American recipe for prosperity. At the same time, he can call President Obama’s bluff. If it’s greater tax revenues we need to reduce our debt, then, Mr. President, there’s a proven method to acquire what you say you desire.
By yielding to the president’s stated goal, Republicans can put their principles into practice to produce prosperity once again.
Aw, but feeding America’s starving children or letting corporate fat cats keep their jets was such a purifying choice. Kids . . . jets . . . kids . . . jets. It’s just not right when everyone wins. Prosperity, where is thy sting?
Let’s get rid of those jets starting with Air Force One.
And talk to your tax accountant about the rules for using corporate aircraft for personal use (unlike using AF1 as a party boat).
You are right. BHO can claim that taking private jets to Vegas avoids taxes and not one MSM reporter asks about the deductibility of such a trip.
And if the company’s shareholders don’t mind, then why should anyone else? If consumers are still willing to buy the company’s products – why should anyone care about their use of jets? And what about all those who make their living building, servicing and flying these jets? You just lost your job because BHO like to play politics of envy.
As if that were the actual choice.
We had eight-years of tax cuts under Bush Look what that got us. FAIL!
Obama may not need the GOP to ensure the full faith and credit of the United States. There is the 14th Amendment option being discussed right now and I hope the Democrats use it to literally cut the legs out from underneath teabagging saboteurs. “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law…shall not be questioned.” This, of course, includes debt that has already been incurred by previous congresses. Let’s see those who purport to uphold the Constitution argue against it. Then again, the Constitution is only meaningful to teabaggers when it furthers their own agenda. Otherwise, they may as well have it beside their toilet.
And don’t even think the SCOTUS would come to the rescue of the GOP. If Obama is forced to take this option, SCOTUS would have only two options, either allow his actions to proceed, or actually push the plunger, and watch the country’s and world’s economies explode on their order. This court is way too pro-business to flush that much money down the drain, especially when they can find some way to duck the issue, and wiggle out of decision that would set precedent and give Obama a straight up win. My guess is that in the end the teabaggers will get thrown under the bus again.
I look forward to a vigorous debate pitting those who protect tax breaks for corporate jet owners and big oil and those who are protecting the middle class.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY1l9OOxtqo&feature=player_embedded
“We had eight-years of tax cuts under Bush. Look what that got us. FAIL!”
Not so fast. How is that a fail? Revenues kept increasing. Bush’s biggest deficit was less than 1/3 of Obama’s smallest deficit. Bush had about 5.5% unemployment most of his presidency, and the day before Oblahblah took office, the national average gas price was $1.89/gal. Most Americans long for FAIL! like that after a few short years of Obama’s floundering.
It’s not a revenue problem, it’s a spending problem.
In spite of what you say Bush cannot disentangle himself from a home-lending industry run amok or a banking industry that mortgaged its future on toxic loans that he then had to bail out by amounts most of us can’t even comprehend.
The crisis began and definitely snowballed on their watch. They had eight years to fix it. There was a lot of time to deal with it and all they did was cut taxes. It failed. Now Obama has to clean up the Republican borrow and blow mess, as usual.
The crisis began under the Clinton administration, when the Democrats beefed up Jimmy Carter’s CRA. Unfortunately, the Republicans never had majorities large enough to stop the Democrats by reining in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and bringing some sanity back to the housing market. Perhaps they could have shouted louder and rebutted the Democrats’ cries that the Republicans were racists who hated the poor and didn’t want them to own homes. Perhaps the regulators who warned of the impending crash could have gone to the MSM and gotten their message out (yeah, right).
The Republicans were helpless in the face of a determined and noisy bunch of Democrats, most of whom were getting large donations from Fannie, Freddie and others, and all of whom were getting the votes of grateful new homeowners, who were able to purchase homes they couldn’t afford due to the helpful efforts of Barnie, Chris and the rest.
Check out the videos the Dems hope you’ll never see:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/194210.php
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/29/video-democrats-insist-nothing-wrong-at-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2004/
This probably won’t make a dent in your thinking, “Praetorian,” but Bush twice tried to rein in the mortgage market excesses and was twice rebuffed by congress. Both times, the Democrats politicized the exchange, claiming that Bush was just trying to deny mortgage funding to the poor and non-white. This is not to claim that Republicans are blameless – they are not – but the primary culprits on both sides of the aisle were in Congress, not the White House.
The funny thing is, it was “deregulation” of the type Democrats typically like: rule changes (e.g. payoffs) favoring key Democratic interests. Not only the poor, but also including banking types like Angelo Mozilo. Remember him? His “friends of Mozilo” program ended up costing Chris Dodd (D-Wall Street) his job and reached into Obama’s inner circle via James Johnson. All told, *most* of the “deregulation” leading to the melt-down was implemented at the hands of Democrats (starting with Clinton) with a few key Republicans right there with them. Of course, once the whole thing blew up, Democrats were quick to demogogue the issue as another example of Republicans pushing recklessly for “free markets” and irresponsible deregulation.
So, “Praetorian,” are you still willing to buy into the whole fraudulent idea that this was somehow all President Bush’s fault despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
So even after 2.5 years of Borat Hussein Osama, the leftists still say the bad economy is Bush’s fault.
Wow, they sure have a low opinion of Obama’s abilities. This is probably because he is blacks and Democrats think blacks are stupid. Racist democrats.
BOOOOOOOOSH!!!
Is that all you have? Seriously? After two and a half years of Obama’s genius?
You sure are clueless, barney/dodd and their forced bank loans for all the folks that could not qualify for a loan, don’t think that had anything to do with it? Of course f/d were aided by the rino’s or Bush would have got it turned around in 03, so, your leftist friends, who you seem most supportive of win in the end, country goes down the drain, compliments of the dims and their gop support group. Far more complex then this, but that is the starter.
Reason is to no avail with the true believers. It’s a religious matter with them. But the rest of us might read “Reckless Endangerment” by Gretchen Morgenson, et al. It will clarify your understanding of the housing meltdown
SongDog ..in the book you mentioned did they go into how acorn blackmailed lenders into giving out the mortgages and that they actually looked for homeless etc and did the paperwork to get them loans.
..and jessy jacksons campaign to shakedown (acorn was doing it too) banks.
Like a good lefty, you pretend to know something…but then you expose yourself by putting thoughts (?) in writing.
The PUBLIC DEBT is what the 14th amendment is about.
This is the Public Debt, as of 06/30/2011 : 9,742,223,364,846.58
The amount of 4,600,864,275,161.82 is Intragovernmental Holdings, which are not covered by the 14th amendment. Since you do not know what “Intragovernmental Holdings” are, I will tell you (You can thank me later)– That would be Social Security and Medicare. That’s right…that 4.6 trillion is not coered by the 14th amendment. Oops.
Now what, (pretend)smart guy ?
And by the way, your first argument was none too bright, either… Your silly claim that eight years of tax cuts by Bush was a failure. Well, here is the bad news for you: The years of tax cuts were a spectacular success, but the problem was that Bush, the Republicans, and the Dems (who have controlled Congress since 2007) could not stop spending the money. Tax cuts did what they always do-bring in more money to the US Treasury. Then Dems and Progressives spend all of it and more.
Go get a clue.
Good response Ned V
Community Reinvestment Act – Carter D Reinforced with additional laws by Clinton D; House Banking Committee and Senate Finance Committee Frank D Dodd D
These idiots raise taxes and you can bet $ will never be repatrioted back home.
For the life of me the Ds go after Exxon who has paid an average of 40.5% in total taxes (in and outside US)But they dont have a care with GE paying less than 12% over the same time period. The company that makes the bulbs we dont want; produces bias brodcasting and is cashing in by Buying the Chevy JOKE and the $7500 tax credit – Guess it pays to be an Obama FATCAT if you back his socialist agenda
take about things that fail. you connected all the dots that aren’t supposed to be connected.
your misdirection and manipulation of fact is astounding. you might get the next press secretary job for obama. extreme fail..
someday the democrats will pay for their idiotic policies.
You are a self blinded idiot. If Bush would have ATTEMPTED 1/4 of the things Obama has done, he would have been impeached. If Obama attempts to raise the debt limit by decree and continue this spending, he will be impeached.
http://mises.org/daily/3788
You know, Arhooley, I always love when liberals “tote” their moral uprightness about rich fat cats. The problem is that when taxes are taken out (automatically), someone is going to make those decisions on how to spend it. Most people who complain about the fatcats are the ones who want to get into office to decide how to spend other people’s money, OPM, because they feel they have a moral superiority to everyone else.
The problem lies here: they become arrogant, and the same attitudes that they don shameful, they acquire, only it’s not with their own money, it is with the public’s money. Then they not only think that it’s their right to keep spending it, but they start using law to defend them and keep other’s out.
Case in point: a group in our school district used $12.000 – $12,000! to service a meaningless workshop for 43 people,including the speakers that attended! This is at a time when our district is $26 mil in the hole! Why? “Because we will lose this money if we don’t spend it!” $12,000 for a day workshop, when I have a friend who only gets $100 stinking dollars for curriculum for his class for the year?!?!?! Please don’t tote moral superiority about private “fat cats” when we have idiots like this in the public sector who flagrantly misspend $ like this.
And please stop whining about Bush. Call a dwahmubulance, for Pete’s sake.
Yes, Scott, that is absolutely true. Great article in the op/ed at the Wall Street Journal today on this very subject. There are two correlations, however: a) economy booming/busting; and, b) tax rate on individuals and corporations. There are some interesting statistics and graphs here: http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=1950_2010&view=1&expand=&units=p&log=linear&fy=fy12&chart=F0-fed&bar=0&
There you go again, trying to speak good sense to a man demonstrably uninterested in what actually works. Of course Obama is lying about what he really wants. He wants income and corporate tax rates to go up! He especially wants to make the individual income tax more “progressive,” and damn the effects on revenues, job creation, and overall productivity. The Democrats’ class-warfare electoral strategy demands that there be classes, perceptible to everyone and distinct enough to leverage envy, and if there are no such at the present time, then by gumption, they’ll create ‘em!
Remember Obama saying that even if revenues should decline from it, he would seek an increase in the capital-gains tax rate “for reasons of fairness” — ? That’s the guy America put into the Oval Office.
Obama is a bad man with an evil agenda. He was raised to power by the machinations of equally bad men: men who put the acquisition and retention of power over others ahead of all other “goods.” In any discussion of federal politics and the divisions between the parties, that’s all anyone really needs to know.
Exactamundo!!
“Obama is a bad man with an evil agenda.”
Thank you for saying that, Francis W. Porretto. Too many people don’t want to face facts about who we now have in the Oval Office. Its not just that we have a president who has a few character flaws, or is a little misguided. The heart of the problem is that we are in a serious war of ideas about what the nature of our country should be, and we have a president whose agenda is hostile to our Constitution. Obama is in the process of doing just what he said, to “fundamentally transform” the nation.
I think the nation is a “House Divided” again, and Obama is doing all he can to promote the Progressive side of that division. He is more akin to the ideas of Marx, Gramsci and Jeremiah Wright than he is to Jefferson, Adams or Lincoln.
Gramsci is much more important than Marx, because Gramsci dispenses with the economic distractions and states the Leftist goal directly — destruction of existing human society. Leftists are the enemies of normal human beings. Their goal is to imprison normal human beings in an inhuman, abnormal, unnatural gulag. Because normal humans cannot tolerate such conditions, Leftist regimes always end up killing large numbers of people. I would presume by now that this is the ultimate goal of Leftism.
No need to presume anything. In his 1982 documentary about the Weather Underground, Larry Grathwohl recalls meetings in which Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and other leaders of the terrorist group discussed how they would probably have to execute 25 million Americans (those who refused to embrace communism) after they overthrew the government.
Few people call call The Big-earred Snake what he actually is? But… but… I *do* call him “Stinkey”, a Gollum-esce character if ever there has been one in real life.
Seriously, *and* you know about Gramsci,too!
Wow! Am I glad I found this place! *Finally!* a place where people *think*!
I find myself, however, that after 3 strokes, (all since August 2009) I dare not take Amber-stain’s Antics seriously, though they *do* sadden me. I keep thinking of the nation my grandchildren will inherent… or as seems increasingly likely, enslaved to.
Hav a Great Independence Day, everyone!
Obama is a communist and he wants to be our dictator. If he is not re-elected, he may have to be forcibly removed from the Oval Office. This nutcase thinks he is on a mission for allah.He always lies. He always does the wrong thing. Look, please at who he has given hundreds of billions to and then gues who he really works for. Thats your money this dingbat has flushed down the toilet. Your sweat, your tears, all the nice things you could have given your family, if only he hadn’t stolen your bucks and shared them with his nogood pals.
Ah, well!
Nice try, but’s it’s still a pissing contest. We don’t even have agreement about what the problem is and until we do, how can we begin to fix it?
You don’t get out much, do you?
Nice try, but’s it’s still a pissing contest. We don’t even have agreement about what the problem is and until we do, how can we begin to fix it? At least the Europeans found consensus, acted on it and now they’re well ahead on the path to recovery. Yeah, yeah, I know, there’s Greece, but even here they agree on the way forward and things are happening while our glorious leaders are defending entrenched positions.
In your view, what’s the actual problem?
What is the problem? That’s an interesting question with an infuriating answer.
I think that carrstone is dead wrong about Europeans finding consensus or an answer to their economic problems. They have neither consensus nor solutions, and they are pointedly not addressing the root cause of their difficulties: Private central banking with a monopoly on issuing money and credit.
This is also our problem.
Every cent in circulation is a measure of debt on which we pay usury. We can’t grow our economy without increasing the debt, and we cant pay off the debt without removing all our current money from circulation. The solution to this problem is simple: The United States Treasury must take up its responsibility to issue currency, and be the sole agency allowed to do so. To that end, it must either dissolve or nationalize the central bank.
Of the very few things that should be left in the public trust, issuing currency is one. While I would prefer something like silver demand notes, I think that even Colonial Scrip or greenbacks would be preferable to Federal Reserve Notes.
Gold Standard and Silver Standard end of game.
Colonial Scrip or greenbacks. Equally good end of game. Cowry shells. End of game.
I like intrinsic money, too. It’s hard to beat the feeling of precious metal coins clinking in your hand. The problem isn’t that it’s fiat money. It’s that the monopoly on money and credit isn’t held in public trust. We don’t fix that, and we won’t ever fix anything.
Consider that service on the public debt is $400B and we can’t ever repay the principal under the current regime unless we want to be without currency – no instrument through which we can conduct trade. We’re not just paying for programs we don’t want. We’re paying for having an economy. That’s just plain wrong.
“Every cent in circulation is a measure of debt on which we pay usury.”
No, we don’t.
“We can’t grow our economy without increasing the debt,”
Sure we can, in fact the problem is we have too much debt, paying for too much malinvestment–all of it done for political purposes.
“and we cant pay off the debt without removing all our current money from circulation.”
All but all–100%–of the QE is already not in circulation; witness the hyperinflation not happening.
“The solution to this problem is simple: The United States Treasury must take up its responsibility to issue currency, and be the sole agency allowed to do so.”
That won’t fix a thing. What needs to be stopped is having a income tax code where the paperwork won’t fit on a postcard. It should be moved towards an “permanent” base rate of 5% that everyone pays on all income, plus a variable rate paid on an amount after a per person exemption is taken.
“To that end, it must either dissolve or nationalize the central bank.”
And then the Treasury does the same thing? No improvement there. In fact, you are then putting the Executive in charge of the money supply–it will be even easier for economic decisions to be made for political reasons then. You “fix” is worse than the current situation.
“Of the very few things that should be left in the public trust, issuing currency is one.”
Absolutely, abjectly, no, never ever. The history of “public” money in the US is far worse than the history of even nominally private money–with the sole exception of state chartered “private” banks prior to 1890 or so.
Although even those had their brights spots, they were usually small enough they couldn’t threaten the whole economy when they imploded.
Carrstone, if you are dealing with terrorists or totalitarians, there can be NO consensus. Good people cannot consent to evil to keep the peace. There will still be evil and there will not be peace. Europe is far ahead of us on the path to destruction. Blame political correctness, affirmative action, social justice, multiculturalism, environmentalism, and of course, tolerance.
As far as I can tell, only Iceland fits the description of “the Europeans found consensus, acted on it and now they’re well ahead on the path to recovery.” Anyone still bound to the European Central Bank is still flailing.
There is no contest, only right and wrong. It is wrong to raise taxes at this time. It is right to reduce federal spending by at least 30 percent.
There are European countries that are not recovering, Greeks are rioting; the problem there is identified as the same problem in Washington: spending way too much borrowed money on runaway social programs.
Then there’s this. “Yet he then talks of penalizing businesses, as well as their customers, employees, and shareholders, by grabbing a greater percentage of their revenues and burdening them with further costly regulation.”
I work at a formerly healthy small business (with about 25 people) that now concedingly operates on the boundary of fiscal soundness. The owners file tax returns as individuals, just as millions of other small business owners do. Now Obama says he needs his tax money, and he has decided that my “rich” bosses can afford it. Obama also says our health care plans don’t fit his model of federal perfection, so he will extract more of his money from our pockets as penalty. Then, he will go after our retirement plans and squeeze out some more cash.
The “transform America” thief is going to kill this shop along with many others. Who the hell does this president think he is, King George? I’ve had it. Where do I sign up?
I work for a small biz as well. 21 yo with 6 employees. The state has just pulled an Obama, and is taxing everything including yoga.
Add up the burden Obama has put us, then the state burden, and we will be lucky to exist in 2012.
You do realize that this is what they want.
anti-small business…it’s easier to crony up with big businesses. Notice those that are supporters of this admin.
The debt is the main thing. Even if we increase revenues, all Obama will do is want to spend it. Both Republicans AND Democrats do the same thing, only the Democrats do a lot more of it. Under the Bush administration spending still went way up on social-welfare programs, although not nearly as much as it did under the Democrats. So even if the money does come pouring in, all the people in Washington will do is spend it.
Nope, the only way to get a handle on this is to REDUCE spending to 2008 levels. Cap all government spending and force the government to prioritize its spending with what’s left. Then if you can reduce taxes to stimulate growth, you should see the deficit go down by a lot. Plus it will make it easier for us to sell our T-Bills because the rest of the world will see that we are serious about paying down our massive debt. Unless we force the Democrats into a deal that reduces spending levels, all the revenues int he world will not help us simply because we’ll just spend whatever comes in.
If the government is forced to prioritize, you can be sure Obama’s priorities will be: anything that Americans really, really value, cut it — and blame all pain Americans feel on the Republicans.
But do not touch the bureaucrats at the EPA!! Or at the NLRB!! Or anywhere else that Obama values.
Intelligent tax policy is only one element of a healthy economy and perhas not the main one.
Stosh2 (#8),
What are the other elements, and how would you propose to address them?
Live the Freedom,
Scott Ott
You have an excellent point, but I doubt it would work. Conservatives and liberals have a very basic, opposite view of the purpose of taxes. For us conservatives, the purpose is to raise revenue. For liberals, it is to distribute wealth and reward behavior they deem appropriate. They will never understand that lowering rates increases revenues – even when math and history prove the point.
Anyone doubting Obama’s agenda needs to read this:
I can only imagine the caterwauling that will come from the progressives when a new president is sworn in Jan 2013 and he/she begins the arduous process of rolling back the bureaucratic fiats these commie assholes have inflicted upon the American people. I don’t often call anyone names but these are special people – bent on destroying the America I grew up in and love so dearly. I won’t apologize for that.
When I ask my more liberal friends and family if they know what the latest rule by these bone-heads a glaze comes over their eyes – and I swear they have muscles in their ears that pull the hearing canal closed! They no longer try to defend the indefensible and are simply waiting for me to finish this latest in a long string of bad news. They no longer wish to hear it but do not offer counterpoints any more.
I wonder if they hear me saying “I TOLD YOU SO”?
New President? You mean Obama’s second term! Many people like myself will be out-hustling you old codgers to make that a reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praetorian_Guard
so it seems praetorians worked for Roman emperors. I am not empressed by Roman emperors and their enforcers.
Here’s a short video on Obama’s failed economic policy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvnAE8olUxU&feature=pyv
How much more evidence do we need to demonstrate what a disaster this bum is?
Here’s the Problem, the Government is sucking up the entire available job creating investment capital. Since, 2008 when the Democrats began looting the treasury, the Federal government has borrowed $5 Trillion. Greenspan said just yesterday, that the $2 Trillion+ in Fed printing over the last 2 years vanished into the economy without any effect. We now have domestic Deflation as we can see from falling wages, home prices, and interest rates (I wonder what interest rates would be if the government wasn’t sucking up $2 trillion a year at the Federal, State, and Local levels?), with foreign Inflation as we can see from foreign traded items like gas, food, and Chinese junk at Walmart.
Thanks Obama!
Welcome to the Great Depression 2.0, doing the same stupid things we did last time, because the Democrats are once again in charge.
The best political move, notwithstanding the base, is for the GOP to go to Obama and just tell him he’s got a blank slate and they’ll pass anything he wants. Of course this would be complete disaster for the economy but Obama and Dems may never survive as the Party of The Second Depression.
Don’t bet on that! Obama & the Dems are masters at blaming everything on the Republicans. BM will confirm everything they say, without examination or comment. Fox News will not be enough to counter BM, since Fox News is now Faux News, evil and not to be believed.
Anyone know what this is? Class? Anyone? Anyone? Anyone seen this before? The Laffer Curve. Anyone know what this says? It says that at this point on the revenue curve, you will get exactly the same amount of revenue as at this point. This is very controversial. Does anyone know what Vice President Bush called this in 1980? Anyone? Something-d-o-o economics. “Voodoo” economics.
So your point is that the guy who lost to “it’s the economy, stupid” is our sage for economic advice?
Just the opposite, Mark. Bill is citing Bush Sr. who laughed at the Laffer Curve, and then lost. We need to do the opposite of Bush Sr..
Jacking up the tax rate beyond the reasonable has the same effect as a batter in a slump trying harder to hit that home run -result -a prolonged slump.
Sometimes a little works fine (like yeast in a bread) and more will just make the entire thing collapse! But they know that!
Don’t kid your self, they don’t do what they do to solve our nations’ problems. They want to tax the rich into poverty to satisfy their marxist egalitarian souls -period.
Your basic premise is incorrect. Expecting Washington politicians do anything in a rational manner is unrealistic and dangerous to the citizens well being. Increasing taxes for any reason is like giving money to a junkie when the junkie promises to only spend the money on food for the children. Increased taxes will only make our economic problems worse.
Agreed. Our first step is to get honorable people in Washington. Then we can talk business. Until then we’re only feeding the junkie.
“Our first step is to get honorable people in Washington.”
Considering what our current political system tends to attract to public office, that is just about impossible. For the ones who do make it on the Hill in “honorable” condition, they don’t stay that way for very long (or they don’t succeed).
You’re absolutely right about there being few honorable people left in Washington. The only solution is term limits across the board, for Congress and federal bureaucrats alike. Nobody should spend more than 10 or 12 years feeding from the public trough.
If we were really serious about this, we’d also institute a prerequisite of x-number of years of experience in the productive class before being allowed to work for the government in any capacity.
I like your idea of requiring some years holding a job in the economy’s productive sector as a prerequisite to ever joining the parasitical political sector, Kev.
As for term limits, think again. California has had ‘em for about two decades. Have you noticed any improvement in the Golden State? I haven’t. We’ve now got four more years of Gov. Moonbeam 2.0. Maybe there should be term limits on the voters…
Certainly reforming and cutting the tax rates would be a major and beneficial action by the federal government. But, the extra monies from such a cut should not go to the government! All such money should remain with the private sector.
The basic structure of a robust economy remains investment by the private sector. Any government that disables such is harming the economy. Furthermore, ‘taxing the rich’ (definition?) is a key error for it removes investment capital from the private sector.
It should be noted, as others have done, that the Obama description of ‘the rich’ as any individual with over 200,000 a year is ridiculous. And, that a majority of small businesses file as individuals. The Obama plan is destroying the small business sector of the American economy.
Government programs should be limited; government should, for example, have welfare and health care services operating only as limited ‘safety nets’. The prime agents of care should be the private sector and charity sectors which are funded by individual donations.
The key reason for this removal of a central government from industry and social services is because private provision of these is more efficient, more flexible and adaptive to changing markets, cheaper and less wasteful. Public provision rapidly moves the money from serving the needy and the consumer to serving the unionized bureaucracy.
The result is a society starved of investment money…because all its income is going to current consumption of its expanding bureaucracy and expanding Dependency Class. We have seen this occurring all around the world – and certainly, Obama’s actions are a prime example of an increasing bureaucracy (whose wealth is outside of taxation within benefits and pensions)..and a massive increase in the ratio of dependent-consumers to wealth producers. These two classes, the bureaucracy and the dependents – form Obama’s electoral base.
Therefore, I agree with ‘slashing the tax rates’ but also ‘slashing the intrusive programs of government’..and leaving more investment money in the hands of private citizens. A society that focuses only on consumption of its wealth production and ignores both the production of wealth and the investment of that wealth production..is in serious trouble. This leaves the American economy without investment capacity! It has no money to continue into the future!
Dear ETAB, You’ll get no argument from me. However, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave…
Dear ETAB,
You’ll get no argument from me. However, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue…
Live the Freedom,
Scott Ott
That’s because the Obama agenda is simple and singular: Power.
He’s pathological and needs to feel that He is The Power and the rest of the population are without power. That includes Congress – and he’s shown his contempt for Congress by insisting that they pass His bills without reading them, and – as well – ignoring the laws duly passed by Congress.
Congress rejects cap-and-trade? No problem; Obama sets up the EPA and orders them to carry out cap-and-trade anyway. Congress doesn’t pass the Dream act? No problem; Obama orders ICE to carry out his indifference to aliens anyway.
Requirement for Congress to declare war? No problem; Obama simply redefines ‘war’ as ‘ground troops engaged in hostilities’…ignoring that bombs dropped from planes are a ‘hostile act’.
Obama requires a LOT of revenue to set up the population as passive dependents on government subsidies, welfare, universal programs, special interest funding..and the unionized bureaucracy. These are his electoral base. They are also the non-productive members of a society; they consume wealth; they do not produce it.
Obama’s focus on His own power, which he attains by reducing the population’s capacity for independent lives, thoughts and actions – means that he is reducing the nation’s capacity-to-produce-wealth. He is destroying the small business class; he is disabling industries from creating wealth and using that wealth for investment. His focus is to take all this wealth production, which ought to be used for INVESTMENT – and instead, use it for CONSUMPTION..to support his burgeoning Dependent Class, his followers.
Disaster. But – he’s doing it to get elected. He’ll leave the nation destroyed..but, he’s indifferent to that.
Look – it’s basic economics. Heck, it’s even basic biology. If you consume all your produce now, and don’t save any seeds, any animals, any goods, to invest in the future – there’ll be no next-year’s crop, no new young animals, no factories producing goods. You’ll have, like they did to the trees on Easter Island, consumed them all.
Mindboggling dumb. How can there be any arguement it?
It’s even more than you say. Economics is just part of it.
His every action causes more people to become dependent on government. He attacks families, churches, charitable organizations, small businesses, Boy Scouts, the Chamber of Commerce, the military, and ultimately, the country…any organization that isn’t committed to statism or that helps people be self-sufficient without the obtrusive hand of government.
This doesn’t happen all at once. That would be too obvious. But it’s been going on for 60 years and the Narcissist in Chief forwards that agenda through policy (as you say, often illegally), and through misusing his office to propagandize against organizations that are the backbone of the United States.
The end-game, of course, is to have everybody be totally dependent on Big Brother.
…the end game?
maybe not particularly obama’s end game but the progressives is to reduce the world population. and it seems they are going to succeed. with the obama support of the arab spring there will be massive hunger and possibly starvation. I would say starting in eygpt where they were seriously struggling even before the uprising.
none of the wars currently being waged none has any real effect other then reducing numbers of people …it is slow right ( the attrition of people) now but in wars there is little attention paid to agriculture which will end up providing most of the work. none of these wars have any program to win. Libya the rebels are systematically killing the loyalist forces and most black men that they catch. Sudan killings grind on. Yemen and Somalia continue to get worse. (hardly imaginable that they can get worse) India the population increases by close to 10,000 muslims a day …and we know what they bring to the development of human kind.
anyone looking for solutions from the USA is sadly disappointed.
when the conservatives do have political victories then the democrats go ALINSKY and try to shutdown the process ..think Wisconsin. it is the same tactic that EVO lack of Morales did in Bolivia. he mobilized the people in class warfare (think obama) and paralyzed two democratically elected governments until they abandoned the government to evo and his minions. history is repeating itself over and over.
the progressives and parasites of this world have the upper hand and will suck all the blood out of the free market system and then turn on themselves.
we all lose
p.s. I am optimistic despite what I write (but not for democracy).
Yes, it’s been going on since FDR but I think there’s a vital, an important difference.
In the post WWII days, I think the socialist ideology of Big Government looking after ‘those who cannot look after themselves’..emerged along with the emotional ideology of the US Winning the War. That is, both the European and Pacific wars were won with US military and industrial strength..and this established a kind of self-imagery of the US as the nation that ‘looks after everyone’.
The UN was set up and rapidly demoted itself to an incestuous hapless bed of impotent corruption. Any and all troubles in the world were met with: ‘When are the Americans coming’ (to help us get out of this mess). This sense of America as overseeing and supporting everyone moved into the internal governing mode as well.
More and more programs were set up to ‘service those who cannot help themselves’. More and more of the population decided that these programs were enticing ‘honey-pots’..and the programs moved into serving, not those in need, but those who WILL NOT help themselves.
This growth of a massive Dependent Population was aided, not only by this post WWII new identity of the US, but, by other ideologies within the US.
Affirmative action, instead of empowering black people, enslaved them in a more insidious manner than open slavery. It set them up as dependents, as people who require, always, special treatment. It fostered single parent families, broke up the family economic unit, flung millions of single parents on to the state to support – moving this mode of life into a generational mode. Who needs a family as the economic unit? The state will support you..and, the key to obtaining state support is: have children. Rather than getting a job, these programs encouraged single parenthood as the means of getting a living.
The growth of statism meant a growth in the public service bureaucracy. The gradual loss of unions in the private sector..led to the unions moving into the public sector. This area was ‘ripe pickings’ for the unions. Unions are massive corporations; they do not, however, produce any wealth; they are parasitic on the wages of the workers. Moving into the public sector set the public sector up as a monopoly…able to bully and threaten the state into more and more and more. Result: an elite set of workers – with wages far above that of the private sector, and benefits and pensions all unknown in the private sector.
BUT – paid for by a private sector held hostage by them. The civil service has ‘morphed’ into a gigantic parasite on the economy.
As a bureaucracy, the costs are enormous; the waste and inefficiency are equally enormous. As centralized, they are inflexible, non-adaptive, unaccountable to anyone..and exist only to serve themselves. Not the public.
As for the private sector unions, their burgeoning demands led to the flight of many industries overseas…all those jobs lost to the American economy.
This was the basis of the post WWII socialist statist America.
What is happening now, however, isn’t simply a continuation of the statist socialist ideology. The hard reality is that the US, because of the massive increase in its non-productive sector of the population, the increase in those who rely on various forms of state funding to live…; and the increase in the size and costs of the civil service;..and the loss of private industry to overseas locations..has lost its capacity-to-produce wealth.
The focus switched. From producing wealth..to consuming wealth. And with the socialist agenda, the deliberate increase in a non-wealth producing dependent CONSUMER population…the loss of private industry…the US’ GDP is no longer exceeding its CONSUMPTION of wealth. Simply put, its capacity to produce wealth is less than the systems it has set up to consume wealth.
This means – the US has no capacity to invest in the future. It’s consuming everything. It has disabled and enslaved its productive members of the society.
Now – Obama’s reasons for further destroying any capacity of the US to produce wealth (one eg, taxing anyone with over 200,000 per year..which means that that money isn’t INVESTED..but given to someone else to CONSUME)..is for his own pathological need to destroy anyone with any power.
Obama is anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-individual power…Add someone with such a pathology to a slippery slope egoistic ideology based on the powerful euphoria of WWII success…and it’s a disaster.
Well said, ETAB; I couldn’t agree more. It’s time to dismantle the unproductive class in this country; turn ‘em all out. But who’s going to rise up and put this idea into motion?
The Republican defense against broad immigration reform ( which is what the democrats call their plan to dilute the voter roles with new captive democrats) is that we must first secure the border. Using this same strategy, the republicans should resist calls from the president to close the “fat Cat” loopholes ( a PR masterpiece when the real objective is to raise taxes on all producers) by insisting that spending cuts have to be in place before any increases in taxes are considered. Put the president on the defensive by saying we would be glad to address all the special interest tax deductions AFTER we have cut 5 trillion in spending.
Scott you are missing the secret ingredient. …the obama and co. are dishonest ..ABOUT EVERYTHING. the less they actually discuss with these dispicable people the better.
to deal with malcontents like progressives and marxist you only need to look at Wisconsin to see how they react to reason.
the congress has the power of the purse …if they had the backbone to even look for their ball yet alone find them.
they need to put forward their case and then leave it up to the other side to accept or not. no discussions no compromise. the debt limit is the test. if they raise it the public will not re-elect them.
sadly the obama cabal will not abide by any congressional requirements anyhow. there should be dozens of impeachment hearings etc yet there is no a single one.
that is your answer to the republicans in congress …not one impeachment hearing …none. most are career politicians and not worth sh!t.
The article sounds like semi-good sarcasm, but it also sounds like big-government Republicanism, which shares the blame for our current mess. We also need to reduce spending.
Charles Martel: I believe the phrase ‘massive spending cuts’ was in my first sentence.
John Work: Thank you. If those who know will DO, then those who don’t might see. The alternative is nihilism. Let’s pretend we can solve this, and act as if we will.
proreason: Very clever.
Live the Freedom,
Scott
Scott,
Bravo! Clear and concise. An excellent plan for a start to getting the economy moving in a positive direction. Won’t hold my breath that the RINO’s will take your advice. The general level of ignorance and misinformation in our citizenry will also make it unlikely that this plan will have an adequate level of popular support with the voters. Our Republic has become a Democracy, the Constitution has been rendered meaningless, and there is no sign that anything can overcome the ignorance and misinformation in time to avoid a disaster.
hmmmm
I thought the author was going to suggest the following:
1. Agree to increase tax revenues by:
a. Cutting tax rates (particularly the capital gains), but if tax revenues don’t incrase within 18 months? 2 years?, then
b. Lift marginal rates
in return for
2. Large spending cuts (that would have to cut well more than the massive Obama spending increases since 2008).
That gives the communist pretend president what he claims to want, which is guaranteed additional tax revenues.
Basically, it forces both parties to put their money where their mouths are.
Doesn’t that put the communist in a box? Obviously, he won’t do it, but wouldn’t the offer be invaluable for conservatives in the 2012 election? Wouldn’t it expose him as a class warfare demagogue when he refuses a deal that guarantees a more balanced budget?
If Spike does the impossible, and accepts the offer, I would suggest that the value of the spending cuts would outweigh the damage of tax increases in the remote case that option 1a doesn’t work. The 90% liklihood, of course, is that the tax cuts will increase tax revenues and spur the economy.
The obvious downside is that Spike would take credit for the success, in the unlikely case of him agreeing to the deal. But claiming credit and receiving credit are two different things.
I doubt they’ll do it unless you join the strategy team
Bear;
Where you been hidin’? The media has already published the fact that he doesn’t listen to his own committees, weeks ago.
Yea; Let’s just give these drunks one more drink to calm them down.
Tax rate declines are not enough, on their own, to promote prosperity. The regulations the Administration is propogating will kill the economy by themselves. Likewise, the financial destruction can also kill the economy. If Obama wants to ruin the economy, he can give in on one of these three and still win.
As to corporate income tax, I agree it is far too high. However, some lower level is appropriate since government grants a group of real people a chance to create a virtual person and so gives the corporation advantages that real people don’t enjoy, namely perpetuity and a firewall on liabilities. Investors can pay a little extra for the granting of these advantages over real people.
One off-the-cuff remark that Obama made during a rare moment of candor in the 2008 campaign was extremely revealing, but never got the attention it deserved, unlike his remark to Joe the Plumber about redistributing wealth being good for everyone. Obama was asked that if he knew ahead of time that an increase in tax rates would actually result in a decrease in tax revenue, would he still go ahead with a tax rate increase. Incredibly, he answered in the affirmative, that he would still increase tax rates because it was a matter of “fairness”. I could never understand why this remark was ignored because it reveals quite clearly that besides their function as sources of revenue, the left views taxes as a means to punish their political enemies, such as the ones who have been demogogued by Obama in his last press conference as fat cats who fly around in corporate jets while poor children are suffering.
I believe that was ignored by Fox News too – all but Hannity IIRC. If anyone else mentioned it I’m not aware of it.
I’m not surprised.
Why would that surprise you? The MSM/LSM ignored all of his I’m-gonna-cost-you-money remarks but plastered his opponents tongue tied gaffes all over the evening news. It would seem even Fox News is leaning left these days. Few remarks are heard about countries like Saudi Arabia – hey it pays to invest in Fox News!
Why else would they let Glenn Beck go? I know what he says about leaving but I doubt he’d have left if Fox wanted him to stay. I think I seen reluctance on his part to leave his show. I credit Beck with being maybe the only media person without an agenda (other than personal – $s – but so what?).
Its all about power – and they all want it.
All I want is to be left alone. Powerful people can’t understand that – or leave me alone.
“I know what he says about leaving but I doubt he’d have left if Fox wanted him to stay. I think I seen reluctance on his part to leave his show.”
Did you happen to catch his after-show on gbtv after Thursday’s show? He spoke specifically of his reluctance to leave. It was when he met Bono at the Spider-man Broadway show. He said he was looking at the city that night and he knew if he didn’t leave NYC, he wouldn’t get out with his soul.
I’m not so sure Fox wanted him to go. They may have been squishy, but he was still pulling FAR more viewers than all the others. That’s gotta mean something, right?
Before we are pressed to pay more taxes someone needs to explain why Obama’s buddies (GM, GE, Boing, etc) not only pay ZERO taxes but receive money in the billions! I plan to campaign for those that will NOT compromise. Out with them all! The primaries is where the action is, get involved and lets get these bums kicked out.
Obama would never go for this. You have to remember that Obama wants more investments in the mostly failed green energy production. Green jobs are his concern even if they do not exist. In the mean time he has regulated just about everything else. That by itself has raised the cost of living for all of us. Whether it be the tax rates or the increase cost of living for all Americans we are still going to see much higher prices, which could be considered an addition tax rate.
This article and all the commenters fail to acknowledge that we HAVE already cut taxes with the GWB cuts, which have now been extended. Neither the cuts nor the Obama stimulus have had the desired results. Some righty, Ben Stein maybe, was explaining to an unbelieving Laura Ingraham the other night why we needed to RAISE taxes. He claimed that figures showed that the highest growth rates have come with tax rates considerably higher than the ones we have today.
The common sense, fair, and politically balanced thing to do is to raise taxes on the million plus folks and cut spending, plus tax some pensions at higher rates. 4-4-4 or 2-2-2.
dwight – ben stein is not a conservative but, economically, a statist socialist; he advocates taxing ‘the rich’ (definition?).
As for the Bush tax cuts – which Obama now claims as his own, to support his claim that he, Obama, cut taxes – Obama wanted to and wants to raise taxes on anyone over 200,000…which includes most small businesses. And Obama was only stopped from raising taxes because the GOP won the House.
With regard to Obama’s stimulus, the only people who claimed that it had an agenda to infuse jobs into the economy…was Obama and his sycophants. Since most of the money went to support already-existent public service bureaucratic jobs…then, the ‘stimulus’ wasn’t about developing jobs. It was only about maintaining Obama’s electoral base: the unions and the civil service.
No, the common sense thing to do is REDUCE government programs and move the economy back into the hands of the private sector. This includes pensions, health care…and research/devt and industrial devt. This involves also reducing govt regulations, reducing corporate and capital gains taxes and reducing the bureaucracy. And, reforming the entitlement programs.
The agenda should be to focus, not on enabling consumption – which is what taxation is geared to, but on enabling the production of wealth which is then, not consumed. But invested. By private agents. That’s the only common sense agenda that will work.
It’s really a shame that the Repulicans have spent so much energy discussing tax cuts.
The real problem is government spending, which, as you say, sucks so much capital, energy and resources out of the private sector, that we are close to, if not beyond the point where new wealth can be created.
Without the unnecessary, wasteful government spending, taxes could be slashed.
I wish the leading conservatives would always make the point first and foremost that it isn’t really about taxes at all, it’s about government spending. Taxes are a function of spending and will take care of themselves when spending is reduced to a level that allows the private sector to resume growing.
Exactly. It’s government spending – and the government doesn’t distribute money that develops the production of wealth; it distributes money for consumer purposes.
Add that agenda to the fact that the consumer population dependent on the govt for these funds has exponentially increased since WWII – and it’s a disaster.
The bureaucracies have exploded in size, and because the unions moved in, this segment of the population absorbs more and more of the tax dollar. But it doesn’t produce wealth; it consumes wealth.
Then, the dependent population has equally exploded in size, created by and developed as camp-followers of the Democratic Party. The black population, immigrant groups, affirmative action, single parent families – all have been moulded into a dependent population. As noted, they do not produce wealth; they consume it.
Then, the unions drove manufacturing out of America – think of it; Obama is trying to prevent Boeing from opening a plant in a state that rejections unionization..because he’s trying to please the unions. Obama wants union money (which comes from the taxpayer in the public service unions) and wants union votes. That’s all he cares about.
And taxation is destroying the small business economy.
Government should drastically and I mean that word, reduce its size and its costs and allow the people..to keep their money. And you know what? I suggest that the ratio of non-productive to productive people will be reduced; wealth production will blossom; and, local charities and foundations will emerge to help the genuinely in need.
Get rid of the massive intrusion of government; give wealth production back to the people.
you are correct the republicans are engaging the democrats as if they want to solve some of these economic problems (most of which they created).
it is a waste of time and exactly like trying to reason with a troll. POINTLESS in the extreme.
the conservatives should speak to the public not the progressives.
d-wrong is not a conservative. it is (well it thinks)a clever troll
Well, you have the name-calling down pat. All that you are missing is substance.
..de nada
you raise an important point dwight
simple tax cuts alone will not unleash our current economy
the only thing the tax cuts/rates are accomplishing is the “treading water” effect-(we aren’t sinking but we aren’t getting to safety either and, eventually, we will become too fatigued and will sink)
this is a familiar ploy by the left to say “gotcha” to republicans: lowering taxes doesnt grow the economy; thus, capitalism fails- long live central planners VIVA!
to truly unburden our economic potential will require a significant move in the capitalistic sense– it is vital to lower the corporate tax (one of the highest in the world,) deregulate industry, and address out of control SPENDING
apply these principles first and then see if the political climate is ripe for even further capitalization: especially addressing “cronyism/corporatism” and public union monopoly
We already know he’s a liar. He’s trying to bring this country to its knees because he has a basic dislike of the U.S. All his actions bear this out.
President Obama should lead. As a “rich” person with income over $250,000 per year, he should pledge to take only the standard deduction on his income taxes and forgo the option of itemizing. That would increase the income tax revenues to the government from the “rich” without the need for the Congress to do anything at all! Just show rich Americans how they can put the needs of their country ahead of their own selfish needs.
You can’t be a beacon if your light don’t shine! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36apVN4p7QQ
Bruce: Exactly. Let’s throw the issue back in the faces of the progs. How about for every dollar in tax increases on those earning $250k and above, we tax the 51% not paying any taxes by the same amount? How about since the “bill of attainder” has been obviated we institute a wealth tax on those earning, say, $25million and who do not own a company? How about an entertainment tax of, oh 50% on professional athletes, Hollyweird, and anyone in the MSM? And finally how about discontinuing the 501c3 status of 527s, and other political groups-i.e. MM, CAP, and anything Soros funds. Also tax charities like Ford, McArthur and the such since they are political. Tell them their money will go directly to the poor, starving children, schools and illegals. How can they fight that?
Nice try Scott but Obama is smarter and more devious than you give him credit for. His base has long ago been convinced, by rote, that taxes are a zero sum game; Increased tax rates result in increased revenue and vice versa and no amount of enlightened discussion about the fallacy of class warfare, the dynamics of the tax code and it’s seemingly contradictory and counter intuitive economic effects will have a chance of changing this inculcated perception before November, 2012 unless the Republicans vigorously dispute it.
This is the root of the tree of poisoned fruit the Democrats hope to feed their base and all those voters who choose to accept the simplistic arguments long ago declared sacrosanct by the politicians on the Left. Obama is far more committed to solidifying his socialist, big, global government agenda than in any piddling concerns such as stimulating the economy and creating jobs. Remember his snickering over his much touted “shovel ready” jobs which never materialized; never, because it was and is, not a real policy but agitprop designed to mollify and impress his base; talking points which he can deliver in mellifluous, resonant tones, read from a teleprompter to a mesmerized following. He and his media flakes can always convince the gullible uninformed that the misery sure to ensue if he is successful can always be laid at the feet of the Republicans and their “evil, fat cat, corporate buddies” who are “not paying their fair share.” Let’s see; where and how often have we heard that before?
Boehner and company need to concentrate on educating the masses by confronting the Democrats on every issue and vigorously and in the simplest of terms, convincingly demonstrate the fallacy of the Democrats decades old paradigms. No one needs to write a book; history is rife with real examples that Keynesian, Socialist, Communist, Marxist government orchestrated, centrally planned approaches to economic justice and growth are pitifully inadequate when compared to the unique, Capitalist, free market, free enterprise, profit driven system operating in an environment of personal freedom unhindered by intrusive government intervention and participation, that resulted in the shining phenomena we lovingly call America. Republicans need to hammer incessantly at the fact that America was not built by people who came here as victims, looking for government handouts but people “yearning to be free.”
America still survives even in the midst of this political maelstrom but it is not indestructible. We are at an existential crossroads. On the Left, Obama in 2012 may signal the end of America as the world knew it perhaps never to re-emerge as Ronald Reagan’s “shining city upon a hill.” On the Right, an uphill, torturous, winding road extremely difficult to navigate and convince the masses it’s safe to travel and that the long difficult journey will be worth the sacrifices that must necessarily be made, sacrifices a growing number of government dependents are increasingly unwilling to make.
Our Tax policy has almost nothing to do with revenue;It has everything to do with power. What we suffer from in this country is not a bad policy about who pays what and under what circumstances, what we suffer from is the corruption that comes from power.
Tax policy is about the power to control and coerce. Battles over “taxing the rich” ensure that rich political donors pick up the phone, it ensures that people with money pay their protection money the same way a green grocer pays his monthly fee to the neighborhood association, lest “things get broken”.
What we suffer from in this country, the real true deep crisis we face, is the creeping political corruption of daily life that is becoming accepted as normal and within the bounds of acceptable behavior.
We have learned to accept this sort extortion from our Political class as normal. That is the true crisis and it has nothing to do with tax rates.
Is this person even remotely conscious? Any tax cuts to increase tax revenues would fail anyways. Even though it does in fact work, it is under the requirement that all other things remain equal, but we all know that Obama does not like successful companies, and as such, he would just spend the period putting the big foot of regulation on the necks of any productive activities undertaken in this period, and he gets a two for one. A total refutation of the lower taxes can increase revenue, and the ensuing catastrophe laid at the feet of the Republicans.
Yeah, not even half awake this author is.
I love the fact that the ponzi scheme of Social Security and Medicare are finally bring in less than they pay out. I hope this will force those funds to be set aside to pay for their benefits which will remove the piggy bank the Dems have had for years to buy votes. Now since they are void of any good ideas how can they ever get elected
I think this is a good strategy, but I would present it a little differently:
Republicans in the House would agree to raise the debt limit a TOTAL of 750 billion dollars IF the following conditions are met:
* The President signs (in public) a deal to submit to Congress a budget that reduces the size of government 5% during the next fiscal year, beginning in August/September;
* Taxes would NOT be raised on individuals or corporations for the next three fiscal years;
* Taxes WOULD be raised on INDIVIDUALS, NOT CORPORATIONS making more than $750,000 a year – 17.5% for singles, and 12% for people with families/dependents. This special tax rate would sunset, BY LAW, on January 20th, 2014, and can ONLY be extended if the following conditions take place: the unemployment rate is 7.5% or higher in the country, Congress has failed to pass ANY budgets during this period, or government cutbacks of 5% or more have not occurred during that period. And the cutbacks MUST be aggregate for the ENTIRE government; there will be NO 5% cuts in some podunk out-of-the-way department in order to get around the agreement.
* The new taxes MUST ONLY be applied towards lowering the national debt – the revenues CANNOT BE SPENT FOR ANY OTHER REASON, and the Secretary of the Treasury must certify this to Congress by Feburary 1st during every year of the agreement.
* This entire agreement AUTOMATICALLY sunsets on January 1st, 2015, UNLESS the President and BOTH houses of Congress agree, by a three-quarters margin in the House and 50% in the Senate, to renew it.
This agreement would give the Democrats and Obama what they want – taxes raised on the rich, and the debt ceiling increased.
It also raises revenues for reducing the national debt, and gives Republicans cutbacks in the size of government.
The politicians look good, the national debt is reduced, and taxes are raised on people who can afford it the most.
Yes, these are the kinds of deals which should be considered.
..are you saying you trust obama or the democrats to follow through on a promise?? REALLY !! REALLY !!
the debt limit should not be raised. it is the spending that is the problem.
how much did obama spends since coming to office. and what was accomplished with that money …redistribution of wealth. those who work were relieve of their future earnings with debt to give money to those who do not / wont / will not work. raising the limit will make the republicans accomplices in that redistribution of future earnings.
I have no doubt …NONE that the obama administration will not abide by a debt limit. why the congress hasn’t started a dozen impeachment hearings against obama, holder and a multitude of czars is a disgrace to the integrity of the people congress serves. congress is supposed to protect the people from abuses by the executive branch.
I’m going to rain on the parade of many of your imagined solutions and postulate its too late. Its too late to turn this debt crisis (government at all levels and personal debt) around. Its too late to take baby steps such as reducing spending by $200 billion/year over 10 years. Its too late to reform entitlements because the majority of voters will reject any politico who attempts to do this in any meaningful way. Its too late to grow our way out of this f*@~ed up fiasco. DC (and the states) can tax everyone making anything beyond $50K at 100% and its still too late. Within a few years we become Greece on steroids. If you still have one, hold onto your hat.
Parker: I do agree with you to a degree. I think we can turn this around with some austerity measures, and as I postulated above, by taxing everyone including the 51% who pay nothing; make them pay 15%. Most of the wealthy are progs so lets start a wealth tax at 30%; (but reduce corp. tax to below 20% which will help industry return to the US)lets just start taxing the progs where it hurts-themselves. Kick out the illegals and we save about $100 billion/year from their remittances to Mexico, entitlements, and crime… Cut out many whole departments…saving untold billions. Pull our troops from around the world-saving billions. End subsidies and port which will save another $100 billion/year. Of course kill Ocare, end Medicare as we know it and devolve Medicaid to the states. I bet there is at least $400 billion right here in my simple cuts.
But it takes pols who are Americans first to do this. Can you name one??
Rain away, Parker, but the necessary changes CAN be made, IF we have the right leaders in place to do it … and IF the American people are willing to tighten their belts more, in order to get through the present circumstances. We need about a few hundred more Chris Christies, in other words.
He says over and over – “I tell it to you straight, and no one ever has any doubts about what I am saying, or what I mean.”
THAT’S what the American people need right now – if citizens in New Jersey can take Chris Christie at his word (even his opponents, as many as he has), then a national leader as strong and principled as he is can do the same at the national level.
The question is, who?
Of the people out there right now, I think there are three that match Christie in temperament and strength of will: Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, and Michele Bachmann.
Nobody else fits, or has the skill set, or the right temperament.
Which one will be left standing when the dust settles? I have no idea, though personally I hope it’s one of those three.
And I pray it isn’t Romney, because I just think he’s a snake in the grass … and don’t trust him as far as I can throw John Kerry.
Obviously, this can’t be repeated often enough because there seems to be some short term memory loss around here:
Under the oppressive and “job killing” tax rates of the Clinton administration, we had the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years, added 22.5 million new jobs (92% of which were private sector – an all time record for an administration), and balanced the budget.
While under the “job creating” tax cuts of George Bush, we doubled the national debt, suffered a near fatal economic collapse, and endured a 9.1% unemployment rate.
If you judge them by whether or not they worked as advertised, the Bush tax cuts worked about as well as Soviet communism and had about the same result. It’s time to be practical, raise the revenue, and dig ourselves out of that failed tax cut experiment.
Error! Error! The 9.1% unemployment rate never happened until Obama took the reins and began “stimulating” the economy with incredible overspending, most of which went to the states so that they wouldn’t lay off their union teachers and other Workers.
Unfortunately, public spending is NOT the engine that makes the economy grow, but try to tell Obama & his carefully-chosen appointees that! (Okay, I believe they know that, and I believe they have no intention of letting the economy grow in its normal, dynamic way–under any other administration, the recession would be over by now.)
The point is not whether 9.1% happened under the Presidency of Bush or Obama. The fact of the matter is that it happened under the “stimulative” policy of the Bush tax cuts. Those tax cuts have been in place and working since long before Obama took office and have continued uninterrupted since his election. And while I do see a big hole in the budget, a big hole that was there before Obama took office and has only grown larger as tax receipts have fallen after the economic collapse, I don’t see the jobs these tax cuts were promised to create. Can you point them out? Because by your own admission, the stimulus at least kept teachers, firefighters, and police on the job. Who did the tax cuts save?
Also could you enlighten me as to how the stimulus cost the US private sector jobs? I can perhaps understand the argument that it didn’t add enough jobs given the cost, but I would love to hear your explanation for how it actually increased unemployment and led to the 9.1% unemployment figure.
raise the revenue for what?
raising the revenue or taking out of private hands and putting it in government’s hands, will do what exactly
nevermind that clinton (like ghw before him) was able to ride the inertia of reagan’s modest implementations of capitalist principles or the illusions of “government surplus” or the “real” unemployment rate under obama (15% at least)
the comparisons to soviet communism will only rise if we fail to address the out of control government spending
There is no other sure way to stop borrowing except to hold to the huge debt limit we already have. Pushing for lower tax rates is great in concept but since the Democrats can’t buy enough votes from it, it is a non-starter for them.
By stopping borrowing, we have to live within our means from now on. It will be bitter medicine for all those who did not live through the Great Depression, or who do not remember what it is like to be self-sufficient. Any one proposing anything else is just trying to prolong taking the medicine and beginning to get well.
Thanks to all the intellects and their reasoning. But if Obama is such an evil influence on the USA, what good is it to continue to belabor the fact over and over again? We are all aware now that he cannot function properly as a leader.
WE all know his intent is to ruin the country from the inside. So, knowing what we know, I would like to hear one suggestion for ending his presidency. Not in 2012, but now, before he does more damage. Anyone …question mark.
Improving the economy is not dependent on taxes, and there is only so much we can cut the Government’s budget deficit. Obviously using taxes and borrowing to stimulate the economy is not working.
The only way the U.S. can improve and possibly regain our former prosperity is through energy independence and reduced regulations. Remember, in 1973 (not really in ancient times) up to the formation of OPEC and the nationalization of Oil companies by middle east regimes, THE U.S. WAS THE LARGEST CREDITOR NATION, and furthermore our balance of payments were positive, both from goods and services.
So drill baby drill, with adequate environmental protections of course. Canada does it –so can the U.S.
“Boehner Should Cave to Obama, Make More Tax Revenues Part of Debt Deal: By yielding to the president’s stated goal, Republicans can put their principles into practice to produce prosperity once again.”
Since taking control of Congress in 2007, the Democrats have increased the size of the budget by trillions. And your answer is to continue to feed the beast?
Easy, close every federal program except defense. Shut it all down and fire all of the Federal Employees. This include Congree and Senators. New one can be chosen from willing violunteers. Any left over issues will be handled by the States.
See how easy that was…
Where does such pointless “easy” imagining get any of us? Can we try living in the real world here? If you don’t propose something possible, there really is no point.