E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Updated 1:36 p.m. ET - Capitol Hill leaders emerged from their meeting Friday with President Barack Obama sounding optimistic about their ability to reach consensus on vexing tax and spending issues and avoid the impending "fiscal cliff."
Just weeks before an end of year deadline -- when a series of income tax cuts are set to expire just as billions in automatic spending cuts stipulated in the 2011 debt ceiling deal will take effect -- House and Senate leaders suggested they had made progress during their first meeting with President Barack Obama since he won re-election last week.
President Barack Obama meets with congressional leaders for first round of talks aimed at avoiding tax hikes and spending cuts. NBC's Danielle Leigh reports.
"I think we're all aware that we have some urgent business to do," Obama said at the top of the meeting, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to his right and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to his left.
That urgency, apparently, was not lost on Republican and Democratic leaders who appeared jointly after the hourlong meeting to express their optimism that a deal was within reach. The word of the day was "constructive," a term which each leader used to describe their talks on Friday.
"I feel very good about what we were able to talk about in there," said Reid. "We have the cornerstones of being able to work something out."
Boehner, the GOP speaker who faces a tough task in convincing conservatives to sign off on any final deal, referenced a framework he's offered tying tax reform to changes in entitlement programs as keeping with Obama's own goals.
House Speaker John Boehner, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Harry Reid and Sen. Mitch McConnell speak outside the White House Friday following their fiscal meeting with President Barack Obama.
"I believe that the framework that I've outlined is consistent with the president's call for a fair and balanced approach," he said following the meeting.
Both Obama and Republican leaders in Congress have sketched broad outlines for the type of deal on which they could agree. The president has insisted that wealthier Americans share a higher tax burden as part of any deal's outcome, an idea on which he campaigned against GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
"Our challenge is to make sure that we are able to cooperate together, work together, find some common ground, make some tough compromises, build some consensus to do the people's business," the president said at the top of the meeting, adding later: "My hope is this is going to be the beginning of a fruitful process where we're able to come to an agreement that will reduce our deficit in a balanced way and deal with some of the long-term impediments to growth."
Boehner's office suggested after the meeting that the leaders' focus would turn to setting long-term targets on levels of taxing, spending and entitlement reform that could be presented to lawmakers after Thanksgiving.
Pool / Getty Images
President Barack Obama shakes hands with Speaker of the House John Boehner during a meeting with bipartisan group of congressional leaders in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on November 16, 2012 in Washington, DC.
Republicans have said they are open to new revenue, as long as it is the byproduct of tax reforms that lower rates and close loopholes and limit deductions. Boehner has also said tax reforms should be linked with steps toward shoring up the solvency of entitlement programs.
"I can say on the part of my members that we fully understand that you can't save the country until you have entitlement programs that fit the demographics of a changing America in the coming years," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., following the meeting. "We're prepared to put revenue on the table provided we fix the real problem, even though most of my members -- I think, without exception -- believe we're in the dilemma we're in not because we tax too little, but because we spend too much."
Nonetheless, the leaders' tone following the meeting was a marked departure from much of the toxic rhetoric that had enveloped Washington for much of 2011, when a standoff between Republicans in Congress and Obama brought the government to the brink of shutdown several times and almost produced a default on the national debt.
"The president and the leadership had a constructive meeting and agreed to do everything possible to find a solution that averts the so-called 'fiscal cliff.' and to work together to find a balanced approach to reduce our deficit that includes both revenues and cuts in spending and encourages our long-term economic and job growth," White House press secretary Jay Carney said of the meeting. "Both sides agreed that while there may be differences in our preferred approaches, we will continue a constructive process to find a solution and come to a conclusion as soon as possible."
President Obama says he and congressional leaders are aware of the "urgent business" at hand and are prepared to "work together" and "make tough compromises" to come to an agreement that will reduce deficit, encourage economic growth and protect middle class families. He also whishes House Speaker John Boehner a very happy 'bipartisan' birthday.
That August 2011 debt deal produced the series of automatic spending cuts, known as the "sequester," as part of the deal to extract an agreement to raise the debt limit. The sequester would inflict heavy and immediate cuts, especially to the defense budget, and was designed purposefully as such to offer lawmakers a political incentive to reach some sort of fiscal alternative.
Complicating matters are the 2001 Bush income tax cuts, which were extended for two years by Obama in 2010, which are set to automatically expire (along with a payroll tax break) at the end of this year.
But talks over how to best address the looming sequester stalled for much of 2012, putting lawmakers now against a heard deadline to reach a deal. Economists have worried that the combined effect of tax hikes and spending cuts would have a perilous effect on the economy.
Adding to the encouraging signs, both Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., suggested that they could reach a deal before the end of the year. In Pelosi's case, she urged her colleagues to adopt a deadline before Christmas.
Lawmakers are away from Washington on recess for the Thanksgiving holiday next week, during which, Reid said, talks would continue on how to best address the fiscal cliff. He said the leaders hoped to meet with Obama again shortly after the break.
Leave a Comment:
Half the potential danger to our economy by the fiscal cliff/curb, can be removed by extending the middle class to tax cut to 98% of Americans, and 97% of small businesses.
This Bill has already been passed by democrats and republicans in the Senate. Now it falls to House GOP to do the right thing for the American people. House GOP must vote YES and turn it into law, as soon as possible.
Lower tax rates for whom?
Obviously, there are going to have to be major cuts in spending. Let's start with the military budget.
Then we'll look at entitlements.
How about all that money we give to other countries to make them our "allies". That's a pretty big entitlement..............
Speaking of lowering taxes...
Any word on when Willard & Queen Annie filed their amended 2011 return?
Now that they've been shellacked... NO WAY "Mr. Charitable" pays a dime more than necessary by law (or his church)! lol
Greed and profits are the only things the republicans are concerned with!
It was urgent business 4 years ago, 3 years ago, 2 years ago, 1 year ago, 9 months ago, 6 months ago, 3 months ago, 2 months ago, 1 month ago, etc.
If this goes down it will be all on the Republicans. President Obama has them where he wants them.
Don't count on it. Republican's could care less about the 97%.
Just taxing the rich more isn't a real plan. We need to get spending under control, and all of us (including the middle class) are going to have to pay more.
We have lived far beyond our means to too long - it's time to start being fiscally responsible. I'm ok with a phased approach on the spending cuts so we don't cause another recession, but the cuts need to be real and not easily avoided by politicians in the future.
I say let's jump off the fiscal cliff!!!
Spend, Spend, Spend...... until there is no money "left".
Free contraceptives, Free amnesty to illegal aliens, Free lifetime unemployment bennies, Free health care, Free beer (hopefully)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tax the "rich" at 100% to pay for it.
WOW!!! it's fun to be a lefty liberal!!!!
What's really sad to me is the number of people that believe this. I have lots of Republican and Democrat friends (and politicians in both parties), and they all care about others.
Republicans don't want to enslave the population to the corporations, and Democrats don't want to make the population addicted to government subsidies. Those are just BS talking points put forth to get votes.
I'm so proud of you Joe! You're going to be a great communist some day! Just kidding.
Please get over it, and accept the facts as they are.:)
The pressure is on.
Just look at Boehner's face!
He looks like he just swallowed a bitter pill.
Obama on the other hand looks clear eyed and serious.
Somebody smart explain to me...is the reason Republicans want to "close loopholes" to generate revenue is in order to spread the pain to the upper middle class, instead of inflicting it on just the wealthiest? I mean, if you raise rates on the wealthiest, you are assured they pay more in taxes, bu t if you just "close loopholes" than the ones with the sharp accountants can get out of paying more, while the less well-connected pay more, am I right?
The election is over..the people have spoken..the GOP better learn something - but sometimes elephants and pigs are too slow in learning..if they are capable of learning at all...
.
I understand that if the GOP corporates, things get better...the DEM gets the credit..in 2 years...the GOP majority in the House evaporates; but if the GOP doesn't corporate, things may get worse..the GOP loses its majority in the House; the 3rd senario - if the GOP doesn't corporate, things actually become better...the GOP loses majority in the House and becomes damaged goods forever... talking about a no win situation for the GOP!!
.
I called Citizen Bain this morning, and got the ansering machine..that says...wrong number!!! and in addition - the 'severe' conservative has been in severe shock..and it takes time to recover...
No, He's just burped up some leftover booze from the night before.
I am so glad that we hired Barrack Obama to do the job, he will get it done despite those in congress that would take America back to the dark days of George W. Bush.
Amy,
As a CPA, it's my opinion that raising rates is not always the best way to get people to pay more in taxes. As an example, to avoid paying taxes people can invest in tax-free bonds - if they do this then it doesn't matter if you raise the rate to 100% - they still won't pay any taxes.
Also, the current tax system is very convoluted and it costs our economy hundreds of billions a year on government, corporate and private tax planning/monitoring. Removing most loopholes would significantly reduce this overhead cost, and also reduce the ability of a "sharp accountant" to reduce someone's tax burden.
Ron, I appreciate your being thoughtful about these issues. If we all work together to figure out what needs cutting and where more revenue can really come from, the problems will get solved.
Such bills don't originate in the Senate. Let the Senate act on a budget that has been sent to them from the House of Representatives.
There is NO FISCAL CLIFF!!!
All allowing the Bush ERA tax cuts to expire and reducing spending does is to eliminate the damage done by Bush and reduce spending to realistic levels.
Joe in Albany - Free contraceptives, Free amnesty to illegal aliens, Free lifetime unemployment bennies, Free health care, Free beer (hopefully)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Am all in for free booze. At least, we'll socialize on that. But the rich got to pay their fair share. You don't stick the tab to the middle class because you call yourselves the job creators.
Infact, I'll prefer everyone to go back to President Clinton's tax rate and reform our tax codes. The current tax code is a complete JOKE.
Headline should read - "Obama meets with lawmakers and tells them It's My Way or Deal With Me".
In other news today, Grover Norquist stuck his head out from under his rock and saw his shadow.
What does this mean? Two more years of republicans blocking any budget or bill the President wants passed!
It took me a little while to figure out the trick Republicans had in mind when they said they would "compromise" by taking away loopholes by limiting the amount of itemized deductions allowed to $50,000, but I've finally figured it out:
When tax reform was done in 1986 by Reagan and amended during the next few years, (in addition to taking away the personal interest deduction that benefited mainly the middle-class and the ability to deduct sales taxes paid), it phased out the itemized deductions for high income earners. The itemized deduction reduction originally called for reducing your deductions by 3% of the amount that your AGI exceeded the threshold amount (about $235,000 for joint filers).
But this provision expired in 2010. Those used to having their itemized deductions limited are now benefiting from this expiring provision when they filed their 2011 income tax returns (as late as last month).
So, what better way to offer a deal than to bring back the provision now, something that those high income taxpayers were used to anyway. The Republicans get to say they caved in, but the effects are minimal.
Pay careful attention to what Republicans give up when tax reform is done again. Just like their anointed one- Ronnie Reagan, they will surely try to pull something else to screw the middle class.
I've also included the other major provisions Ronnie came up with in 1986 just to let you see. Notice how most of the changes limited the middle-class from becoming "one-of-them". Let's not let them do it again (these guys aren't dumb):
President Ronald Reagan's "TRA 86" was the largest revision of the Tax Code since 1954, and has been referred to as "the most sweeping revision in the history of tax law". There were so many drastic changes to the Code that it became known in the industry as the "Accountants Full Employment Act of 1986".
Don't worry the republicans will cave just like always and BOOM everything will be fine!!
They have no choice but to OBEY the will of the people!!
I want more... gimme gimme gimme
Supporting Tax breaks now lol... the ones the Demos said got us into this mess. The ones the Repubs put into place and the ones the Demos extended... Those Tax breaks
There's going to Taxes... Lots of them. Demos and Repubs can't help themselves. Let's start with Obamacare. Lots of businesses starting to decide whether or not stay in business or pay this new heffty tax.
Let all of the Obama tax cuts expire... at least it would be fair and having more people putting their skin in the game as Super Joe Biden says.
Let's hope that interest doesn't go up.. because that's going to create all new round of taxes to pay for all that debt, new and old. Thanks for printing all that money, sure feels good to have devalued our dollar so much.
As for out sourcing jobs... Thank companies like Apple, one of the biggest out sourcer on the planet. Maybe Apple deserves another Tax credit for all their work in this area. Lots of people support them... Look the iPhone 36 just came out.
Now Twinkies is on the brink of calling it quites. What will all of those people do for a job?... I know go on unemployment, snap, etc. We all know we need more people on gevernment assistance. Who knows... maybe they will receive a bailout too so we can get the corporate welfare side like the car industry got.
Lets have another round of cash for clunkers.. that was an effective way of spending tax dollars.
Taxes are coming, you can count on it.
Confussed...you are correct as far as your comment goes, they don't care about the 47% or even the 98%. What you are missing is the fact that they DO care about themselves and their political careers and they know they have painted themselves into a CORNER.
The GOP have only themselves to blame. They were so sure they would be dealing with President-Elect Romney that they tossed all caution to the wind, they went all in, they burned their bridges and now they've got to live with the consequences.
The President and We The People....have them over a barrel and they know it. Just look at Boehner's face. He looks like it's a painful and distasteful experience to shake the President's hand. He looks like he's about to cry. I hope he does, he should, because he blew it.
The GOP is still in shock. They thought with their fat little evil genius, Karl Rove, pulling the strings and all the hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars in pac money AS WELL AS the 24/7/365 propaganda cycle of FOX NEWS/LIMBAUGH/BECK/COULTER/HANNITY/O'REILLY, etc they could not lose.
SUUUUPRISE!
Napoleon once said that God favors the big battalions. Boehner and McConnel just had the truth of that axiom demonstrated to them in a most painful fashion.
GEE, it turns out Millionaires/Billionaires DO only get one vote each and there are WAAAAAAAAAAAAY more of us than them. So clever Karl's little plan to game the system back-fired and Boehner and McConnel have got to eat humble pie in order to save their own worthless hides. How does it taste boys?
Life is good isn't it?
Sometimes, good triumphs over evil and sometimes the good guys win.
But let's try not to become that which we despise. We need to remember to be magnanimous in victory, just as Lincoln would have been had he lived. We cannot follow the harsh, scorched earth policies of the reconstruction. We've got to come together and work together for a better tomorrow.
We The People....have spoken.
This probably means nothing to all of you,.......With the looming so called -fical cliff and the re-election of Obama, it has forced me a a small business owner to take the following actions,
1. Each year I give an anuula review and bonus to all 15 of my employees, This year their bonus percentage will be 5-9 % less than what I had planned, knowing that my corporate tax rates and as well as my personall tax rates will be increasing.
2. My retirement plan for all of my employees is such that each year I determine what % the company will contribute on each employees behalf, I am forced in cutting that down as well.
3. I will be putting off hiring 3 new employees next year and asking all 15 of my employees to cover the work that the 3 new employees would be assuming. "More work for the same pay"
I am not taking these actions out of anger or despair, but as an act of fiscal protection for my company as we begin the next four years in which our Federal Government sets up to take more from companies like like mine in an attempt to fund their poor business practices in which they spend more than they take in. They are forcing me to not add jobs, and at the same time not increase the pay of current employees. When you tax only the higher tax brackets, you end up penalizing everyone in the workforce. That is not my opinion, that is reality in small and large businesses across the nation and the sooner everyone realizes that, the quicker a true real solution to this Nations Fiscal problems can be found.
The only problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money!
Then what will the liberals do?
I'll check back in 4 years to see the total damage this amateur has inflicted on this once great nation.
The founding fathers had it right. Unless you have skin in the game, you don't get to vote.
EVERYONE needs to pay something. Otherwise, what they get has no value.
That's rich CoRavensFan...
Kind of like the unions telling Hostess to go eff themselves. Now Hostess closes it's doors and 18,500 people will be out of a job.
Pass the current legislation on the table. After that, put out legislation that will end the loopholes that allow the majority of the wealthiest people to delay paying taxes. Many delay until such time as they are then able to settle with the government at a rate of about 10% what they actually owed.
I recently saw an article by ABC news that showed the top 500 delinquent taxpayers in CA owing about 1/2 a billion dollars. That is just the top 500. Most are people from the Hollywood elite. If people actually paid their taxes on time and in full we wouldn't half the problems we currently have.
CPA Ron, your post is thoughtful, but could you elaborate a bit on the differences in tax treatment of earned income and passive income? Most wealthy people have no idea what a W-2 Form looks like because their income is not 'earned' income. Credits, exemptions and deductions apply much more significantly to those who do know what a W-2 Form is. Eliminating these 'loopholes' will have a greater impact on the lower and middle classes than on the wealthy. Care to comment?
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Hey so you are saying what he is a bad American because he pays what he owes and not more than he owes. You are incredibly blind and a flipping bonehead. How much did you pay over your taxes due? None I bet, so that makes you the same as Romney or you paid extra and then I do not know what that makes you. I am pretty sure your accountant made sure you did not pay extra though.
Ron -
As a fellow CPA, I agree - partially. If you remove some exemptions and loopholes then a sharp accountant will find ways to use other (although perhaps less lucrative) loopholes.
Tax-free bonds at least contribute something to infrastructure, unlike the enormous amounts spent on complex financial instruments or tax shelters that allow capital to be invested where it benefits only the investor and his broker.
I am interested in the idea of a "cap" on itemized deductions, the creation of some additional tax brackets, and perhaps the elimination of even some middle-class deductions if combined with a rate decrease.
I would propose an 'all of the above' approach of a small increase in top marginal rates, elimination of some deductions, a cap on itemized deductions, and the repeal of the 'carried interest' exemption that in my opinion mistakenly categorizes earned income as investment income.
Why is Obama damaging this economy JUST for the opportunity and desire to punish those who have succeeded? Simply extend the current tax rates for another year and THEN let Congress do its job. Trying to FORCE punishment to those who succeed and punishing the lower and middle class JUST to make sure the successful get punished is naive, irresponsible, and incompetent.
EVERY Economics textbook in the country tells you NOT to raise taxes during an economic decline. So why would our incompetent Community Organizer in Chief want that? I guess that was an oxymoron. Since our president is incompetent of COURSE he will want to do things that are incompetent.
But more than a year ago when Hostess stopping paying into the contracted pensions of their workers they kept giving their CEO and the staff their big bonuses and pensions? Greed!
I've come to realize you're just not a very nice person.....
Well Doug, you won't be affected at all from Obamacare since you have less than 50 employees.
As for your other expenses, assuming you net more than $250K, and that's what's going to make you pay (3%?) more...
First, you still benefit up to the $250K everyone else gets.
Second, perhaps now is the time to have more payroll...bonuses and extra hires...to get your taxable income down closer to $250K.
Just a thought, because we all know you're not telling us this because you have the affliction of sour grapes.
Ron ...
If Congress would get ballsy enough to tackle the core of the problem which is exactly what you've stated above, we could definitely start making some headway.
Thanks Doug... Most of the people in the US have no idea about meeting payroll, creating a better life in their employees because they are my biggest investment I make. Next year I have to look at adding anywhere from 1000 - 8000 per employee to cover payroll, health care, cost of living, etc. Times that against 50 employees... wow well over 200,000 grand and rising.
Then comments like we have no clue about W2's... You're right we have no clue about them even though we are the ones who generate them. I too am not raising pay as much, adding bonuses, etc. because our government is clueless about knowing what makes my business work.
closing lop holes is a great idea. except the gop has yet to name one loop hole they would close.
to get on the path to a balanced budget you have to do some major cuts to spending, close loop holes especially on corporate taxes and raise rate as well as address medicare and medicade spending. it's gonna take all of the above to even get on path to a balanced budget
revenue has to go up, spending has to go down including the pentagon and medicare and medicade. social security has nothing to do with budget shortfalls so it should not be included although it needs a fix as soon as we get the budget fixed but it is pretty easy. the best plan i've seen for fixing SS is lower the rate to 10.4% and remove the cap. problem solved and most employers and tax payers actually pay less
Here's the proof in the pudding.
Will the Republicans sign the bill that saves 98 % of the population taxes from going up or do they only care about the wealthy 2%?
Are the 98% just leverage to be used in order to use for the top 2%? And if the 2% can't keep their tax rates then to he ll with the people who don't matter. Those pesky 98% don't have super pacs for us.
I find it funny. The repubs have already passed a bill (in fact more than one) that will keep the tax rates from rising for the 98% that the libs claim they support. But, the libs voted against it every time. Why? Because they'd rather screw everyone over. If they succeed in punishing the wealthy then they will still be screwing over the rest because it will just take that much longer for the economy to recover.
Moments ago, when he arrived at Capitol Hill, President Obama referenced "our strong economy" in an interview
With the huge increase in unemployment claims, to include many long terms, Poverty reaching an all-time high, the Dow falling below 13,000 and continuing to drop
Companies closing and letting people go - by the thousands
What was he talking about or is he really that clueless and incompetent?
Doug and Bob -
Your arguments don't really add up.
Yes, personal tax rates may increase by 3% on your MARGINAL income over the $250k threshold, but that is much less than an overall 3% increase. If you make slightly over $250k per year then you will barely notice the increase, if you are making dramatically over $250k then I think you can afford it!
Corporate rates are not increasing, as a matter of fact President Obama has proposed lowering corporate rates and eliminating loopholes that only large corporations enjoy.
If you only have 15 employees then Obamacare does not impact your business. If you do offer heathcare insurance to your employees then your rates should either remain flat or decrease.
Heathcare rates have increased exponentially over the last decade, with the rate only slowing down over the last couple of years. Why are you saying now, in this era of lower or no rate increases, that it has become too much to bear?
I am the controller for a $100 million manufacturing concern with other 100 employees so I know what I am talking about. Your arguments defie logic and common sense. If they do in fact represent your true situation then I would suggest you get a better accountant. I can refer you to one.
Witchrunner the bill going through right now includes no pork in addition to the 98% keeping their rates. It's simple and straight forward.
What straight forward bill have the republicans given that doesn't have extra interests included on them? I await your answer.
Just watched our political hill leaders on CNN.
A VERY historic day in american political history. A "big deal" in the works finally.
I love this country heart and soul. What has gone on, is going on, and what we will continue to witness in our political process, is appalling. McConnell, the consumate politician, did a good job of saving the party's "face". Lol. Was clear to me that he had had the riot act read to him, loudly.
Luckily the bill has already passed the senate otherwise McCain and Graham would not have time to make the vote.
Hey Dems - don't whine if congress blocks everything again. You voted Obama in but forgot to vote Republicans out. You get what you voted for!
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL:"Speaking of lowering taxes...
Any word on when Willard & Queen Annie filed their amended 2011 return?
Now that they've been shellacked... NO WAY "Mr. Charitable" pays a dime more than necessary by law (or his church)! lol"
Most people do not like sore losers, but no one likes a sore winner. Really, must you keep it up? Are you that shallow?
It seems that they care after the votes are counted, eh? ;)
The problem with your idea is that America achieved the prominence it did on the economic world stage due to its socialist institutions. The country's economic backbone is small businesses and small businesses aren't started by particularly rich people. They are started by gifted individuals who have an idea and run with it.
These people aren't necessarily rich to start out with. Mr Romney's suggestion "just borrow a million from your dad" doesn't work for most of them. While they are working, they are subject to all the economic hardships of other poor people. Give them a strong social safety net and they will feel better about taking a risk. Because for a while, they will be living on "other peoples money."
With a shredded social safety net - think about it - I have a 2 year old child, little savings and a brilliant idea. Am I going to follow my dream and put my baby at risk without healthcare, or am I going to keep working for the large company with a guaranteed paycheck and guaranteed healthcare?
Your assumption is that if you help out an American, he or she will follow you around, demanding more money. Your assumption is that 47% of Americans are feckless, lazy and stupid. Lots of countries have bet against the American people. How well do you think that's going to work out for you?
It is no coincidence that America is starting to lose its economic dominance just around the same we have stopped helping out our own.
The simple fact is that liberal policies are all about enlightened self-interest.
Do you realize how out of touch with reality you sound?
Probably not.
Reality check. No Democrat controlled Congress has balanced the budget for over 40 years. The Republicans were in control of Congress when Clinton balanced the budget for part of his term. No Republican president has signed a balanced budget in over 50 years. So the reality is that neither party has any claim to fiscal restraint, and neither party is offering any real solutions. By real solutions I am talking about something that happens today, and not a decade later when they are all gone from Washington. Washington is about appearances not solutions. Such as Obama claiming he has a plan to cut 4 trillion out of the deficit over the next 10 years, which still means we would be adding 8 trillion to the nation debt. We send clowns to Washington, and they play us like fools.
Entitlement Joe-
How I wish free contraceptives were available when your parents were young!
OK, so I just went through annual enrollment and my premiums are up 6% - 7%. Has anybody seen a decrease in the Health Insurance premium this year? I am in a large group policy.
Thank God that President Obama is in charge as our President, and not Willard Romney, who will never be President.
You tried taxing the poor, how did that work out for you?
I don't think you understand how it works. It is natural to read your own motivations into others, but liberals are nowhere near as irresponsible as you are.
Pigotry
You are so right. Some pigs just can't comprehend anything!
An hour!! thats all you could take from your day was a freaking hour and you accomplished so much in an hour that someone had to write a story about it....probably took more thought to write this story than our leaders could possibly spend solving the issues....what a freak show!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so done! We cannot count on our government to do a damn thing about anything....wow a flippin hour!!!!!!!!!!!! What shame I feel for this country
Controller.. Fact .. Obamacare did raise my premiums for each employee. You can blame the insurance companies too but it was from insurance companies forced to insure the uninsured. Pentally tax if choose not to insurance them, which can be less expensive. The fact that the company you work for hasn't had rate increases ... I can't speak to that. The only thing I can speak too is what I have to actually pay out of my own pocket... not some company I work for. My health care cost have gone up considerable whether it be Obamacare or not. I have to make the choices to pass that on to them or eat it myself.
I do care about the employee's I employ and personally I like to give them better pay for the contributions they make.
I made no statement about how much I pay in taxes, corporate or personally. You have a big ASSumption about what do pay. Each dollar that I spend or give whether it be a payroll tax, increases in pay, bonuses, etc. does increase anywhere from 1000 - 8000 per employee per year.
The business climate sucks and there is uncertainty from this administration and the lack of working with congress, both demos and repubs. As for taxing us more because we have better year than some.. well you don't write the check from your pocket.
Why is it my responsibility for paying for the bad management at our government level?
hey pig lady, you know, you are a hateful horrible person, with no good in you...or your bogus opinions of how you belong to a superior group. You my dear, are the worst type of personality this world has seen....
to be truly honest, i dont think many even blink when he says this....clearly, or we would have fixed it years ago....I really dont think, dem or gop that they even consider him as influential other than for a photo opp......Obama is ok I suppose, but he has not been able to lead at all....either party except for a sucessful camp-out of America for votes....but really, I see no politician following him like a leader...they just kinda wait for him to spout, and then they go back to what ever it is they are doing.....
I think this is the reason for such violent reactions from the citizens of the two parties....they both are trying to convince us we have direction, when in fact, they wont even give Obama respect...maybe in front of cameras....but their mouths when not in his presence tells a story of disrespect...
as with raising dogs, kids, etc....if there are no boundries, there is no rule....that, I think, is what Obama really messed up on....his politicians are a bunch of kids at school, with no parents and no teachers to be found.....they have gone WILD.....
im total GOP this time around, but I do think they are playing games with this tax thing...they refuse to give at all....they just want a magic trick....
I am going to tell you now, we need to replace the GOP insiders with new people....GOP does deserve to exist, but we need it to involve the American people and not just the puppet master.
dems have angered me so much by calling names, telling anyone not dem to "get out of our country" and tea bag crap, just to belittle someone that disagrees
but the GOP, have moved off this planet and with words uttered just this week show how they only care about the buddy sitting next to them...telling them how to run the country.....they do not listen to the American people and I do ask that the USA remove most of the GOP for various crimes committed against the American people via, unwillingness to do the job they were hired to do.
I will stay left of middle on this issue....and if the GOP keep protecting their master, at the cost of our entire country, then those members need to be taken in by our military and exiled. Period. I am GOP, but I do not have allegence to those who put me down....and keep their foot on my head while their boss/master kicks me so hard I dont even know who i am....
I see this two ways:
1. I have never been so hungry in my life since this admin/Obama
2. I have never been so hungry in my life since the GOP think its funny to win their master some more American $$$$$$$$
You both are starving me to death...88lbs and dropping, down 12lbs since Oct.
tyty
Don't redistribute my wealth, redistribute my work ethic.
Obama is holding all the cards. If the Republicans decide to finally go with the will of the people and raise taxes on the rich while keeping tax cuts for the middle class and small business, then Obama wins. If the House blocks any progress and the fiscal cliff happens at the end of the year then the rich still get taxes raised on them and then Obama can go back and lower them for the middle class and small business. Obama wins again. Even if the fiscal cliff happens, that makes the house look bad and come 2014, Republicans will not have the majority and then we can pass anything we want. I see no downside on this for President Obama.
$250,000 or more in net income for a small business doesnt mean the owner is rich. My own father will be sunk in his small business if his tax rates go up even a little.
He is by no means rich and supplemented his income by serving his country and State for 40 years in the national guard. Unfortunately, $250,00 is such an arbitrary number especially in todays high consumer cost era that most small businesses like my father will be out of business. Unfortunately, all of these recent "policy" platforms of Mr. Obama will have dire consequences that politicians are not trained to spot.
dksouthern
Entitlement Joe-
How I wish free contraceptives were available when your parents were young!
____________________________________________
Right back at you asswipe: How I wish abortions were legal six months before your mother spawned you!!
Ron,
You don't know the greedy republicans in my family and the neighborhood I live in. Gloating over paying 9% in taxes while I pay a heck of a lot more. I've told them of their greed and they laugh!
Democratic leadership: No deal for the middle class is better than a bad deal for the middle class.
Republican leadership: No on is entitled to affluence. (from ewent)
Why would any rational thinking American trust a single one of the republican teabag taliban at this point. The only thing that the the gop can do right is habitually lie. In the Supercommittee negotiations John Boehnor publically admitted he got 98% of what he wanted and he still backed out because the republicans don't work work for America they work for grover norquist. That's the gop's idea of compromise?? And besides, if that alcoholic Boehnor doesn't get his 98% of what he wants this time we're all afraid he will start to cry......AGAIN!
I have never been big on spending time on posting sites like this, i just never saw the point or value, So I guess I was caught in a weak moment earlier when I did and the only reason I did was to show how the current state of our Federal Governement and the direction that we are heading really affects a business in todays enviornment. The replies to my post have made it all the more clear that a good portion of this country really has no idea what it is like to own a business and make it go each and every day. And that is just not 8-5 M-F that is 7 days a week and 24 hours a day when we are trying to make sure we are PROFITABLE and sucessfull each and every day. You see My 15 employees represent 15 families, 15 spouses and many children. Right now the success of my business greatly impacts their lives, there future and when we have great years, I share the companies sucess with all of them.
Look at the Stock Market since the election, you should quickly get a feel for how the US business world feels about the economy and where we are heading. I myself have explained how I feel as a business owner and what cutbacks and changes I will be making knowing that I have for more years of governement who is not working in the favor of small business.
And for the "stopthecanibals" You are telling me that I should hire people at a time when there is so much uncertainty??? That statement in itself proves that you really have no idea what you are talking about or have the right to tell me how to run a business, you must work for the government because only they would increase expenses with no way to pay for it. Please if you are going to respond, please do so with some intelligence and common sense.
And for those of you who are so quick to point out that Obamacare does not affect my businesss since I have less than 50 employees, Please stop as you are only embarassing yourself. My Heath Care rates are up again for 2013, and yes that is because of the sweeping changes to the Healthcare industry caused by Obamacare. Then on top of that my tax dollars, just like all of yours will be spent paying for the cost of Obamacare.
It is very easy to sit behind your computer and explain to everyone how you have all answers, Mr or Mrs Controller of 100 million dollar company, It is obvious that you are in charge of paying the bills with someone else's money and that at 5 o'clock, your day is over and you job is of no importance to you until Monday Morning. Thats Okay- that is how most of the workforce is in this country, but you need to understand that it is your companys ownership that allows you to be that way.
Look, I am just one voice, one small business, but this is simply a warning that if the mindset of most of you do not change, you will all be very adversely affected when it comes to your financial well being. we will all pay for tax increases even if it is only on the so called wealthy.
@ Backhouse,
I continue to fail to see how increasing income taxes reduces the tax burden in small business as you suggest by 97%. How do you justify that stat with an S. Corp?
TO: Ron-1861300 who wrote:
Why do Republicans keep coming after "the middle class"???
WE are NOT the ones who have been making "record profits" and WE are not the ones who've enjoyed 14% income tax rate -- all those goodies have gone to the top 2% for at least the past 10 years while I have paid my taxes at a much higher tax rate than the 1%ers and I am paying nearly 50% of my annual income in freaking taxes already, and you want me to pay even more?!!!
Not to mention the FACT that "the middle class" has had to pay higher prices on everything from gasoline, to food, to electricity, you name it!
I am so glad we have President Obama in there who understands "who" has been paying "what" for the past decade!!!
Cry me a river. You're going to cry about paying 3% more on everything netted OVER $250,000?
You're the one crying about not paying the same bonus you did last year because you'll also pay 3 more cents on every dollar over $250,000 NET. All I said was if you're so worried about netting more than $250K, then hiring more people (albeit the extra sales & revenue you'll need to hire them for), all that's going to do (hiring someone or paying a larger bonus ) is lower the net income down so you won't be so hurt paying 3 more cents on every extra dollar they bring in.
For example, if I netted $250k in my business, and I had the opportunity to hire someone else, pay them $100k and get another $200K in business, I would now net $350K ($250K +$200K -$100K). If I was so worried about making the $350K (because I would pay 3% additional on the $100K over the $250K), well then, why not pay an extra bonus of $100k. That will then get my net down to $250. But for me, I'd rather make the extra $100K and pay an additional $3,000 for the opportunity (but what do I know).
And you all are our business leaders? I'll listen to William Buffett when he says, anyone who complains about making a extra dollar because they'll pay 39.6 cents rather than 36 cents, shouldn't be in business. Tax rates have always been progressive. If paying a larger tax rate were such a dis-incentive, then no one in business would net more than their lowest rate bracket ($17,000 for a joint filer).
@ stopthecanibals
Our S corp net profit is significant. If the tax increase is allowed to hit, we will be reducing our CAPEX by $700K, reduce the increase in our inventories and postpone some of the hiring that our executive committee penciled in September for 2013. All because the left wants to tax the rich.
One basic question. Why not tax the take home pay only of the rich, and not increase taxes on business owners that leave money in the company to fund the above? The only reason I can come up with is that the economists have reveiwed the question and determined it will not raise significant revenue. If that is true, then this tax will only reduce investment by small business. If not, then why punish small business (the job creators) for shoring up the health of their companies and fostering the so called desired growth that the Dems. and Reps. are asking for?
Instead of addressing that question, Obama has brought in Unions and CEO's of large corporations to answer the taxation question. Great. Let the CEO of GE vote in favor of increasing the tax on his take home pay, but leave his real paycheck stock taxed at 15% alone.
Wow, I'll say your profit is significant. If you'll lose $700K in capital expenses, based on a 3% increase in taxes (forget about the first $250K), then your netting $23,333,333.
End of discussion.
BTW, I noticed when David Gregory interviewed some top businessman on MTP, when this tax issue first came up, Gregory asked, "whats the biggest thing slowing down your business?" the businessman first said, "low demand". Then, after a rather long pause, realizing he wasn't taking advantage of the situation he quickly added, "and the tax rates are being raised so that's a concern". I see the complete lying going on.
For example, if I netted $250k in my business, and I had the opportunity to hire someone else, pay them $100k and get another $200K in business, I would now net $350K ($250K +$200K -$100K). If I was so worried about making the $350K (because I would pay 3% additional on the $100K over the $250K), well then, why not pay an extra bonus of $100k. That will then get my net down to $250. But for me, I'd rather make the extra $100K and pay an additional $3,000 for the opportunity (but what do I know).
Actually you know how to type fast........but I think that it about it.
I think if you were capable of small business owership and leadership you would be one. However you have made it very clear that you are not as you just do not understand. No worries though I will keep paying for you to live in this country and vote for those who choose to take and not give.
@ Stop,
CAPEX goes from 1.2M to 700K (sorry, wrong math reduction of up to $500K). And MN with a Dem gov, and now Dem Sen and Dem house is calling for a 5% raise, totalling 9% for our company. And yes, at trystar.com our profits are significant.
But please answer the question, how does taxing the money left in the business to secure growth and increase financial heath benefit the middle class? And why is Obama focusing on this tax and not the 15% capital gains on the uber rich that seem to set off the left?
Now we will see if Obama stands up for the little guy. Will the little guy have something in his Christmas stocking? I hope he doesn't disappoint those who voted for him, expecting him to protect the common people. I hope he did not cave to the rich.
Actually, I'm a Controller for a $50 million Sub S, sole owner organization and have been a Controller for 25 years. I make plenty and don't desire to work 24/7. I admire business people totally, but I also know the lying, cheating and conniving most are known for (if they aren't regulated). Not a life for me and I'm not a huge visionary anyway.
Jeez Stop.
Then you clearly have to see the negative effects of taxing the profits left in the business. (Unless your ownership has abused the system to the point where they have become an IRS liability.)
I guess that now I can't understand that from your perspective why you wouldn't be more in favor or reducing loopholes, taxing capital gains, redefining options as income, etc. and rewriting the code. Just trying to have an honest discussion here and offer a small perspective from one point of view.
I believe that it was American Girl that stated she would be more open to another point of view without the name calling, so I'll start with this.
Everyone has to recognize that if we raise the Federal Income Tax it will:
I can't think of a single reason why the Dems. are so fixed on Income Tax, unless it is because it is their way of keeping their based energized and know that "Tax the Rich more" will be a bugle call in 2014.
So please tell me why you would support a governement who puts more pressure on the very business that enables you to put food on your table? - I just do not get it. I can understand if you were unemployed or a low income family unable to find a job, but your support of Mr Obama and his government works against the employer that offers you employment?
cdahl........boo hoo.......So repubs take up the chant the last year on the deficit problem...then complain when they are asked to participate in solving the problem by adding a few pennies to the problem they caused.......Oh however shall they get by?........They wil have to give up their Grey Poupon and settle for regular mustard.
Stop....Nice simple presentation!
We had a shoe store in my neighborhood when I was growing up. There was a big sign above the store that read...I once complained because I had no shoes, until I saw a man with no feet.........
Cdahl...again...boo....HOO! capital gains tax will be on the list....just a matter of time taking care of all the inequities......
come on really?: Aug 1, 2012 the House voted to extend it and it passed. The Senate? DOA! 19 dems voted with the middle class. The rest voted for revenge and against the middle class. Of course, it's not just a tax increase for employers that the dems are after, they know that employers aren't going to hire more people and are likely to fire a few if they have less money to run their businesses. A double whammy for the middle class. Don't reduce government spending? A triple whammy for the middle class.
The dems aren't content to steal the goose that lays the golden eggs, they want to eat it too.
cdahl, it's actually to share the responsibility of lowering the debt. Democrats have already said spending needs to be cut (even though most Republicans don't ever mention this). Obama stated he's willing to cut spending 2.5 times (maybe 3 times) for every $1 in extra revenues. Obama has also talked about raising the retirement age for medicare (even though all workers (and their employers) have paid all the medicare taxes they were supposed to and to make additional cuts (like the inflation factor being used). Obama has said he will NOT cut Social Security because again, folks have paid the SS tax (and employers too) based on what they were supposed to pay.
If you paid any insurance plan money and they came back to you and said, "we don't want to pay you the benefit you paid for because we ran out of money", what would you do......rollover?
Democrats refuse to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, retirees, government employees (in a 2 year pay freeze already).
Is that a good enough reason?
@ starsailing,
You are missing the point, and that is, if the FEDERAL INCOME tax increases, it will have a negative effect on the economy from this small business. Not in a big way, but none the less negative. May I assume that you would be for business putting profits not in the hands of owners, but reinvesting in employees, inventory, equipment? Because your posts hints otherwise.
In order to have an honest discussion with the citizens of this country, you have to have an understanding of the effects of basic decisions, acknowledge them them and make a decision before moving on. If you stance stays, so be it. But also realize that if you are one of the "fair share" group, our taxes could potentially (after deductions) near 50%. Federal 33% to 37%, state of MN 8% to 13%.
Is that honestly what you had envisioned?
Based on your statement, why should businesses pay ANY tax?
Answer: because they have the social responsibility to do that, among other things like prevent pollution, price gouging, unfair trade practices, etc.
Do you not remember when Rockefeller, Carnegie, Mellon exploited everyone and everything back in the early 1900's to obtain more money? Do we really need to repeat that? Are we doomed to repeat that?
Stop,
I'm with you on the fundamentals, I just believe that the Dems. are focusing on the wrong tax. Close loopholes, increase capital gains taxes, redefine what counts towards capital gains (starting with redefining public stock options as income). And revise the tax code to maintain or reduce income tax left in the business for S. Corps.
The only thing I have an issue with regard to the increase in taxation, is that from my perspective they are focusing on the wrong tax. When they finally increase the Federal Income Tax rate to 60%, and Buffet / Romney's tax rates go essentially unchanged and hover around 18% did Obama and the Democrats accomplish their goal? Possibly, depending on what that goal really is.
cdahl, i don't disagree. I wasn't trying to get into the weeds too much. But I will say, the more complicated the fixes, the more likely there will be loopholes found (especially for those that have the means to pay for special treatment).
The rates might even be lowered for businesses in the end.
Cdahl: I don't understand your point. If you choose to incorporate as an S corporation you knew taxes would be at your personal level. Raising them 4.6% to what they were doesn't sound devastating to me. It's always seemed to me that capital expenditures were usually increased more when tax rates are higher not less. Why would anyone delay upgrades when capital expenditures are deductible and not making them reduce the value of your company that you pay more taxes on? Obama stated he wanted to lower corporate tax rates but that won't help anyone with an S corporation. Sounds to me like you're complaining when you don't even know what the final deal will be. Obama wants to hit people like Romney paying 10.3% not businesses. Whether it works that way or not probably depends on the republicans. Will they fight for businesses or the elite.
i will say finally, that most companies became "pass-thru's" (pay taxes on the personal return(s) of the owner(s)) because they generate LOSSES that can offset other w-2 wages on their personal returns.
that's why 97% of them fall under $250K net. those that don't usually "strip out" any net earnings at the end of year thru bonuses.
@ Larry
Fair question. And for starters, we are not complaining, but pointing out possible ramifications for raising the Federal Income Tax. For argument sake, our effective tax rate is 43% (33% for Federal and 8% for state, there are some minor deductions that move the rate closer to 41% for both).
One Caveat and warning. If you raise the Federal Income Taxes higher than the corporate tax rates, Small business will shift from an S-Corp. to a Corporation and pay the current 35% rate. Romney will still pay 15%, with Buffett, and the Treasury will be slightly better off taxing small business at a rate of 35% vs. 33%.
Seems that most businesses complaining . . . and threatening to reduce their workforce . . . are simply using Obama as an excuse to move forward with their greed-based decisions.
For instance: We have businesses with less than 50 employees claiming that "Obamacare" is the reason they have to fire people or reduce pay. In reality, "Obamacare" has no affect on them, because they have less than 50 employees. They are simply using this as an excuse to reduce their employee costs, pocket more money for themselves, and not come across as the greedy a**hole they really are. Again, if you have less than 50 employees, "Obamacare" requires NOTHING from you.
The business owners you see complaining today are the same ones who complained when child-labor was outlawed. They are the robber barons of the past.
What is really ironic is the fact that if Republicans would have allowed a single-payer system to go through . . . you know, what liberals originally wanted . . . then no business would have any health care requirement. Businesses would not have to worry about healthcare costs, they would not have to manage for it, they would not have to work around it. Republicans had the opportunity to take the healthcare costs completely out of business . . . and they refused to even consider that idea. Think of all the extra money these Republican business owners could have pocketed for themselves (because we all know that savings would not be passed down to their employees).
cdahl
I agree that capital gains taxes is the primary reason that people like Romney pay so little. However, do you really expect anyone to believe that Republicans would be willing to raise capital gains? Romney, the GOP candidate, wanted to eliminate that tax all together. So are we to believe that the party he represented will turn from that position?
@ Indieo.
I simply question why the Democrats are not raising Capital Gains. The left is up in arms stating that the Rich need to pay their fair share, and 15% is too low as compared to middle class taxation.
Since the Democrats have no problem telling the right to take a hike, they are mandated to raise taxes on the rich Ergo Federal Income Taxes will be raised, why don't they attack the tax that the Uber-Wealthy pay, and small business doesn't. Capital Gains @ 15%. Ask yourself, why?
With regard to your point on business complaining about the costs of Obamacare, I haven't seen that. We certainly are not complaining. With over 100 employees we offer a good healthcare program, and to be honest the costs of Obamacare will not be fully realized until 2018. Therefore, it is pointless to argue about costs that we have no perspective on.
Cdahl: Both sides claim it's businesses like yours we want to protect. The feeling of unfairness isn't directed at the true job creators but those that have seemed since Reagan to have a goal to pay nothing. Obama said he'd like to give breaks to companies that employ here rather then over seas. You're right that raising the tax rate won't affect those like Buffet and Romney who earn almost all their income from capital gains, carried interest and dividend income.
@ Indie071
The reason capital gains tax rates are lower is to encourage people to invest in our economy. If the rates rise, it discourages people from investing. Less investment also means less job creation.
@ Larry,
To be honest, many of us don't even need breaks to hire domestically. Either way we would make a decision that is (hopefully) in the best interest of the company. Don't get me wrong, we'll take the break if given, but I don't know of a single business owner that said, "I wan't going to hire X people, but now that Washington is offering a credit of Y, I've changed my mind."
With regard to shipping jobs overseas, I'm a manufacturer and on the "we need to tariff goods from countries that have economies that are not as strong as ours" bandwagon. But I'll save that for another day.
Just to be clear, I've never heard someone complaining about all those damned Canadians taking our jobs.
cdahl
If I was to be honest, I would say that the reason is because most of America is not intelligent enough to understand what capital gains taxes are. So the masses are complacent with the idea of income tax increases, while the wealthy elite keep their lower rates.
It is the same reason that Republicans supported Romney's idea of removing deductions and reducing the tax rate. They hear "reduce taxes" and start to cheer, even though removing deductions would end up costing them more money.
People are stupid, on both sides. They focus on income tax and ignore everything else.
If we really wanted the wealthy to pay their "fair share", then we need to increase capital gains, remove deductions on 2nd homes (not primary), remove tax shelter deductions (like a mormon church), and limit total deductions. Although I doubt that will ever happen.
And I have seen small businesses (with less than 50 employees) scream like a banshee about Obamacare. These are primarily Fox News viewers who believe everything Hannity and Beck say, without researching anything themselves.
kfilly
That is a false assumption. People still invested when rates were higher.
It is quite simple: If you are paying a capital gains tax, that means you have made money you previously did not have before. It means that you now have more money than you previously did.
So regardless the tax rate, people will still invest because they will only pay taxes on money they did not previously have.
Indie, I hear you, but it is only partially false.
If my investment earnings are taxed at a 15% higher rate, then I have 15% less to invest the next time. Then 30% less the next time.....and on, and on, and on. Our earnings on each investments will be less, resulting in having less to invest in the next venture.
Increased tax means less to invest in future ventures. This is not a mental thing, it's a math thing. However, you are correct that investors will continue to invest. They just won't have as much to invest with since more of their previous earnings are paid in taxes.
Bottom line, for each positive trade we make, the government will be taking more out of the equities market, meaning less equity, which equates to less growth opportunity.
Indieo,
Right on, on the last (2). See people, there is common ground.
@1.28 -- Doug, those are very peculiar actions for a business owner to take, given the reason you stated for taking them -- namely, higher taxes. I didn't hear you mention a word about costs, revenues, gross margins, competitors, or demand for your products or services.
Every successful business owner I've even known is more than happy to increase his profits if he is able to, regardless of whether the income taxes he pays on those profits are the same as last year, a few percent less than last year or a few percent more than last year.
Certainly it is not always possible to increase profits. Demand for your product or service may be declining, or perhaps a new competitor has entered the market with a lower cost structure than you and has driven down the price so that your gross margins are lower. Or perhaps you are losing your best employees to that competitor because unlike you, his gross margins are still quite healthy and unlike you, he is still willing to pay decent salaries and/or bonuses and a decent company matching percentage to their 401(k) plans. Now that you've lost your best employees and had to train new ones to take their places, your production efficiency has gone down, raising your per unit cost and making those gross margins even worse.
By failing to take care of your most important asset -- your people -- you have got yourself into a death spiral of declining revenues and profits, and eventually that new competitor will have all your customers too.
But I doubt I am talking to a real business owner anyway. Real business owners do everything they can to maximizing profits, regardless of the fact that they have to pay income taxes on those profits.
Backhouse "Half the potential danger to our economy by the fiscal cliff/curb, can be removed by extending the middle class to tax cut to 98% of Americans, and 97% of small businesses."
So you think that just giving the government more tax money, without any cuts in spending, is a 'compromise'?
Somehow, I don't think that will fly. Personally, I think we should fall off the 'fiscal cliff', since all it does is return the tax rates to where they were under Clinton, when everyone says they were 'fair', and I'm sure the 'sequestered' spending cuts are livable.
The sooner we start the 'austerity', the less severe the problem will become in the future. We've been 'borrowing from the future' for far too long - time to 'pay the piper'.
Roy, how did you decide that fixing the tax part of the fiscal cliff for 98% of the population means no spending cuts?
Sadly, after both sides dug in their heels on the issue of renewing the Bush tax cuts for ALL taxpayers vs. all but the very top bracket, now the negotiations have shifted to discussion of the "sequester" -- the automatic spending cuts that I firmly believe should take place as scheduled. Those negotiations are aimed at cutting LESS than what the sequester calls for, not more.
So our politicians seem to be heading us toward the worst of all possible outcomes -- negotiating a "compromise" on the spending cuts that ultimately means more spending than we would otherwise have if the automatic cuts are left alone, and at the same time they will fight to the bitter end on renewing the Bush tax cuts and neither side seems willing to compromise on that issue of what to do about the top income bracket.
I have to agree with Backhouse -- half of the potential danger to the economy could be removed by extending the Bush tax cuts, and I don't really care that much if it's extending them for everyone or just for the bottom 98% of Americans.
But the other half of the fiscal cliff -- the automatic "brutal" spending cuts demanded by the sequester -- should simply be allowed to happen. The government spends way too much, and the only way those clowns in Congress seem to be able to cut spending is by this type of automatic formula.
Warning=Republicans in the House, you better work with the President and move the country forward or we start a DUMP THE REPUBLICAN FUND NOW! To get rid of you Republicans in 2016!!! People will be saying, I remember there used to be a Republican party at one time.
Robme/Lyan Ryan 2016
....Huh .....no one here remembers republicans signing the Norquist pledge to not raise any taxes...at least on the rich.....So all over the nation, including all the republicans here in Minnesota, including state governmment...took the Norquist pledge not to raise taxes on the rich.....Now a few days after the elections...they are wondering why capital gains taxes aren't being raised.......Tell me I am on Candid Camera please! After listening to Romney Ryan bragging how they need to cut capital gains taxes to near zero.....Republicans on here are saying....why aren't capital gains taxes being raised....? ahahahahahaha How about the republicans taking the pledge to vote against america 4 yrears ago...voting against and creating record amount of filibusters to stop the economy from recovering.....Now repubs pretend they want to help the economy....uh huh!!!
Oh yeah....Mn now has state senate and state representives under control of Democrats.....Enough of kicking the can down the road Pawlenty and repubs....The last 30 years has seen obscene wealth made by the top 2-1% while the middle class and poor have been losing year after year.....
Let's start with the republicans stop blocking the bills to end tax breaks for companies that take jobs overseas......the monster feeding the offshore tax avoiding accounts! This trickle down will help take care of feeding the accounts the rich are drawing on when they pay little capital gains taxes, then raise the capital gains taxes to what the middle class pays....
Roy,
We all seem to agree there needs to be some spending cuts. I'd love to see the Pentagon's budget cut 50%, but know that won't happen. The republicans have refused ANY tax increase for revenue increases for 4 years. They have agreed to some things and then walk out? Economics #101 says there has to be both cuts and increases in revenue. Why can't the republicans admit that ? Oh, some of them are now!
If republicans worked with President Obama at the start of his first term like he asked them to instead of trying to make him lose an election that was 4 years away, a lot of this financial mess the country is in, would be on it's way to being solved.
Two heads are better than one, republicans and democrats working together for the common good, is a very good thing, but, I must add that i'm not quite ready to trust republicans just yet.
To me, first, have to stop lying about everything, second, stop the teaparty nuts from ruinning their party, third, stop the religious nuts from trying to force their belief of the entire nation, fourth, stop believeing Grover Norquist is God.
They are off to a good start, even if it is the first day, time will tell if republicans are serious about working with the president, or if they're going to go back to disrupting things again.
All these comments from the ill informed, astonishing! As one of the other posts state. If you make over $250,000 then your tax rate will only go up 3%. Really? Where on earth do these loonies think that extra 3% IS GOING TO COME FROM? Most business's in this area only operate on a 3% to 5% net profit margin to begin with. If they think that business owners are just going to eat that 3% increase they must be living in fantasy land.
Restaurants such as Appleby's and Burger King are already in the process of adding a surcharge of up to 5% to their customers.
SO THANKS TO ALL THE UNINFORMED CITY DWELLERS THAT VOTED FOR THIS MORON IN OFFICE. YOU NOT ONLY GOT WHAT YOU WANTED BUT YOU EFFED YOURSELVES AS WELL AS EVERYONE ELSE.
KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK.
Cdahl....I take back my Boo hoo....your last two posts I agree with......We hve a great imbalance on tariffs compared to the other "powers".
I used to work for Jostens ring company...when NAFTA hit the books the very next day they announced a plant to make rings in Mexico.... was just a few months away....It happened....fortunately they hired people who could not read or write, children, etc, Quality was ZIP....I blew the whistle on quality and failures, the very next day they closed the plant.....The point is all the jobs that were lost, all the lives turned up side down, and the comapny suffered because of poor qualty product......I don't believe they ever recovered.....Manufacturing in the United States needs to be supported.....and the Dems are trying to get it done....Repubs need to support America or get out of the way.....
Probusiness: And EVERY economist in the country and most right wingers on here says it's irresponsible to continue to spend 1 trillion dollars a year more than we take in. Isn't it nice when the man you hate will be wrong in your eyes no matter which path he takes? You're always quick to point out how Obama's way is the wrong way but never offer what you think is the right way. You're a hate filled fool. You lost, get over it.
Not to mention the FACT that "the middle class" has had to pay higher prices on everything from gasoline, to food, to electricity, you name it!
I am so glad we have President Obama in there who understands "who" has been paying "what" for the past decade!!!
If you really think the middle class are going to get out of paying more taxes then you're actually dumber than you sound. Especially when your president is talking with pieces of @!$%# like sharpton about the deficit.
And Job1/Fiesty
Get the @!$%# over Romney, you libs seriously need some new talking points. Maybe you'll have some when you finally use up all the money the people working are supporting you with.
WOW! What a GREAT! first thread!!! It reads like A LOT of "all-Life-is-about-nothing-but-gaming" being exposed! I can't wait to see the first thread after the proposed LOOPHOLES-FOR-CLOSING are finally named!!!!!!! (and, of course, which ones ARE NOT named!)
Spending cuts need to take place at the "Minion Class Middlemen" that took over the Middle Class, No? Follow the Dynamic of what was exposed by the "Dark Money" being run through "supposed" SOCIAL SERVICE Organizations, No?
Here are some "FRESH" and actual figures from today in a very small City of only about 65-70,000 People, and how much is being spent on "keeping the Homeless, HOMELESS!" by ALL Agencies involved in "THE" Shelter System. $6.74 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. (spending $25,086 on "1" single Homeless Person for the year. SPENDING, on what?) And that doesn't count any loop-holed "Couch-surfing" Homeless. We don't need anymore "Administrative" Job Creators....a.k.a....GRANT WRITERS, Congressional included, (that kill "shovel-ready", right off the page, btw). Multiply this one drop-in-the-bucket cluster of Social Service Agencies scenario by how many different Social Service Agencies for how many different "supposedly addressed Societal Ills" in all Cities, big and small, all over this Country... CASH FOR CLUNKERS...a.k.a..."Perpetuosity"....they take 80% of the resources to produce 20%; and "INEFFECTIVE" 20%, at that! Except on paper, showing that "the funding" for another year is still needed.
Cut "the CLUNK SPENDING", which will produce "REAL" Jobs that produce "REAL" off-paper results that will produce "REAL" positive, not Corporate Administrative Minion Middlemen, impact to the Economy.
Message sent to republican congress on 11/6: Stop obstructing and GET TO WORK!
Sounds like they may have finally gotten the message.
sorry but i will not support the theft of mine nor the citizens money to the hands of greedy corrupt politicians and special interests. the rich pay WAY MORE THAN THEN FAIR SHARE!!!! 10% tax from 200 thousand is more than 100% tax from 10 thousand. your mad that the rich pay a smaller % which is meaningless when you count real dollars, not %. ITS MY MONEY NOT YOURS!!! what did you do for me to enable me to make money? NOTHING!! so you do not deserve money that is not yours. you deserve nothing that you have not earned!
i am not responsible for paying down the national debt, i did not receive one dime of that debt and i did not approve of any debt spending nor voted for anyone who approved it. i will not give any of my money to pay for someone to have 'things' without earning it, i will not give my money to politicians who cannot and will not tell the truth nor stop blaming other parties for their mistakes.
this "we won, you lost" attitude that the left is once again exposing is the very things that is destroying this country. thats a bully attitude and counter productive to any progress. real leaders do not talk like that but i would never expect democrats to know what a real leader is. i truly hope the republicans block any measure that does not address the core problems of government corruption and blatant theft of tax payer monies. obama has zero real world experience so i have no hope of any success.
keep blaming others. that really works great for a slogan dont it?
The very angry wingnuts are out in force today.
Republicans, not the president is responsible for the mess this country is in.
Republicans, not the president, caused this recession
Republicans, not the president, caused all of this government gridlock
Republicans,not the president, paid all expenses for companies shipping jobs overseas
Republicans, not the president, declared war on women and women's healthcare
Whatever your personal demons are that makes you think the same group that caused this mess can do the same thing again, but this time fix everything, you need some very serious help.
Republicans, if you had actually listened to what they said, you would have heard what the majority of voters heard. They told you flat-out what they are going to do to you.
Retirees did not want to lose social security if republicans were able to privatize it knowing that doing so would bankrupt it.
Seniors didn't want to lose medicare once it was turned into a voucher system
The list goes on and on about the things republicans told everybody what they are going to do to them, only die-hard republican voters with suicidal tendencies didn't hear or didn't care what damage republicans were about to inflick on the nation.
You have a job, big freaking deal, the republican agenda cost millions of people their jobs, most likely, a lot of people that used to think like you until reality set in and they became unemployed. If republicans had won the last election and did the same thing they did when Bush was president, millions of more people would lose their jobs, and just maybe one of those lost jobs would have your name on it.
You were willing to risk letting republicans do the same thing again, the majority of the rest of the nation were not and did not.
garcher,
The extra 3% will come from my neighbor who makes $5,000 a week not taking 4 trips to Cancun each year and cutting it to 3. Also, not bringing back a new diamond trinket on his wife's wrist or blouse each trip!'
lol just read where obama not only met with sharpton, but he met with a rep of la raza, one of the most racist organizations in the country. What exactly is he doing meeting with all of these racists about the cliff?
@1.12 -- garcher, perhaps you should study up on how the U.S. tax code works and especially on the topics of marginal tax rates and effective tax rates. If Obama gets his tax increase for the highest brackets, it will be a 3% increase only on the marginal income that exceeds the threshold -- income above $200,000 for an individual or $250,000 for married filing jointly. Income below that threshold will still be taxed at the lower Bush tax cut rates.
To calculate the percentage tax increase for any individual or married couple that makes more than the threshold, you need to calculate their effective tax rate. For example, for a couple making $300,000, the effect of paying 3% more taxes on that last $50,000 will amount to a small fraction of a percent in their effective tax rate.
You said "Restaurants such as Appleby's and Burger King are already in the process of adding a surcharge of up to 5% to their customers."
If that is even true, they are taking a big risk that they will lose customers to their competitors who are not adding a 5% surcharge. Your implication is that the 5% surcharge is because of taxes, but no rational business owner makes business decisions based on taxes -- he makes them based on supply & demand, competition, costs, revenues and gross margins. If he raises prices relative to his competitors, he runs the risk that demand for his product relative to his competitors will drop, his revenues will drop, and he could end up making less money, not more, as a result of that price increase.
Just like some pizza guy who says health care costs will add 14 cents to each pizza, but he decides to raise prices by 50 cents just to be a douchebag. It's a competitive market, and such decisions may very well come back to bite him.
Good luck on finding a job after you tax the rich and then when Obama-care hits without spending cuts good suckers
And I do have an account and a tax lady so you can all kiss my $$$$
And Americans that are on food stamps hit an all time high at 50,000,000 go Obama king of lost hope.
So his franchize owners should just take the 300 dollar a day hit thats 9000,00 a month it addd up fast think about 360 thounds a yaer f it and shut down .
You people have no clue on how this all works start a business and YOU WILL FIND OUT FAST.
Hey rgsdca1965, I'm in my own Business for over 50 years and I voted for President Obama for a better America, what "W" did to this nation is a total disgrace, I hope we don't go into Bankruptcy for "W's" mistakes, so what are you talking about again !!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you have a Clue, I don't think so - you are part of the Problem !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh bull@!$%#. Keeping those tax rates would just kick the can down the damn road. I say let the fiscal cliff happen; it'd the only serious deficit reduction package on the table to reduce the deficit over the medium term. Personally, I would make two or three changes to it; one, I would reduce the cuts to social spending from $1 trillion to $400 billion and the defense cuts from $1 trillion to $800 billion; two, I would patch the Alternative Minimum Tax over the long-term by indexing it to inflation permanently (probably indexed based on 1990s inflation levels) and pay for that by raising the rates; and thirdly, I would seek to offset the entire cost of the fiscal cliff on the economy over the short-term by spending approximately $1.5 trillion over 3 years purely on infrastructure rehabilitation. And by the way, the so-called "successful" have benefited for 30 years while everyone else has gotten the stick; it's time they (along with the rest of the American people) start paying more to fix this nation.
Yet every economics textbook in the country also tells you NOT to cut spending during an economic crisis; yet conservatives and right-wingers tend to omit that so they can "starve the beast." In addition, history shows us that the United States economy has had the MOST economic growth and job creation when tax rates were high, even when the top rate was at 91%. Now, we can argue about the global factors at the time, but the recent economic expansion under the Clinton administration under those tax rates shows that higher tax rates do not necessarily curb growth.
For the first time in quite a while, I'm willing to disagree with numerous liberal pundits, including experts like Robert Reich (who I deeply respect). The only way I see the United States raising enough revenue to both reduce the deficit and fund social services without draconian spending cuts is the expiration of the Bush tax cuts as a whole. For one thing, they cost $4 trillion over 10 years; letting them expire would halve the deficit with little effort. For another, they were a stupid decision; they all but eliminated the surplus and gave the wealthy a huge tax cut without any measurable benefit for the average American. And finally, taxes on the median American are the lowest they've been since the 1950s at 5.6%; I would prefer them to go back up to 9.6%, which they were in the 1990s. However, I understand (and actually argue) that the middle class is getting squeezed; that is why I propose a simple expiration of the Bush tax cuts for everyone, a larger tax hike for the wealthy (roughly the top 10%), and a restoration of basic economic rationality and middle-class interests. That includes greater healthcare reform, restoring the prominence of manufacturing in our economy instead of finance, securing the financial industry, increasing the minimum wage, and restoring unions to their historic postwar prominence.
Yet every economics textbook in the country also tells you NOT to cut spending during an economic crisis;
That gives me absolutely no faith since you libs took over the education system decades ago. Ever wonder why you keep spending more and more money and kids get dumber and dumber?
AlexM,
You have no faith and probably have been over exposed to FOX "Fair and Balanced" (LOL!) reporting that has O'Reilly, 7 days in a row being negative and out and out lying about why the republicans lost . Now, however, he's starting to turn on Romney! I'm loving that!
Obama ran his entire campaign on telling the American people that we cannot return to the failed policies of the past. Yet the Democrats and Obama are offering nothing more then tax, borrow, and spend which have also failed. The Democrats claim the Republicans are against the middle class, and yet a massive debt and deficit is the single biggest threat. There is simply no concern for the amount of debt being amassed in Washington. If there were, why does every supposed plan to address it take 10 - 25 years and never balances?
I frankly don't care who anyone feels caused the problem, solving it should be the only discussion. Allowing this country to run trillion plus annual deficits will end the middle class. Seems amusing to me that all we hear from the liberals is that someone else needs to pay more. That is a clueless attitude as there isn't enough revenue to be generated by raising taxes to solve the problem. Maybe the real solution is to stop sending the same people to Washington but expecting different results.
Liberals like to point fingers of blame, but no Democrat controlled Congress has balanced the federal budget in over 40 years. It was a Republican controlled Congress that gave Clinton a balanced budget for part of his term. Likewise no Republican president has signed a balanced budget in over 50 years. So the reality is that neither side can solve anything. Term limits for Congress, a balanced budget amendment, and a total tax overall is this nations only hope.
Where the hell were the cons when there was no budget deficit, only surplus. Federal spending and debt only went up dramatically under Republick (this spelling for the right wingers who say Democrat party instead of Democratic purposely because they want no linkage to real Democracy) presidents. The debt could've been paid down considerably, instead, "starve the beast" is what we heard. Corporate welfare, wars (more corporate welfare) and tax cuts skewed heavily toward the very rich, this is how you feel about debt? Toss in a depression, didn't see any cuts from W then either. Reagan signed tax increases, HW signed tax increases, Obama hasn't signed any tax increases, yet it's Obama leading us to Socialism. I get it, if a republick does it they're fiscally responsible, a Democrat does it, Socialism. Good God, to hear the "job creators" whine, evidently there were no businesses in America making a profit in 1994 and no millionaires either, and they had Democrats in charge, higher union membership and higher taxes, and jobs in America instead of China. Additional taxes at 3% over 250K now equals communism. I don't care if you think you made all of your money yourself, you didn't, you should not tax "capital gains" lower than regular income. This is what Wall Street gets for buying the US government from corrupt lawmakers. They make money the old fashioned way, they steal it from poor people.
Wow Joe...you must be psychic! How did you know what we have planned? Then you won't be surprised when we come for you guns, your bible and force your daughter to take birth control, right?
These political clowns don't know what their doing. Each one is trying their best to hoodwink the other. But for the country, this dog and pony show is getting kinda old and losing some steam as we go along, although that won't make that 16 trillion elephant in the room thingy go away, and my question is: what will?
Spending cuts. That's where the rubber meets the road. It's easy to raise taxes, but no one wants to give up their govt program, which means no meaningful reduction in spending. Get ready for higher taxes to pay for it all.
Ag99,
"It is easy to raise taxes." You haven't been talking to the republican leadership for the past 4 years! Da!
clwyd: lol! Yes, all right. Guess I should have said it would be easier to raise taxes than decrease spending, historically speaking anyway.
We have already seen what happens when programs lose their money, (Benghazi). I won't bitch if it saves lives.
Confused,
There was plenty of money available for embassy security - that wasn't why Benghazi happened. Yes, there was a bill that was voted down in the House, but subsequent bills funded the security. Also, are you really going to try and tell me that the Federal government is so strapped they couldn't find an additional $100 million or so if they felt the security was too lax? (in a $3+ Trillion budget)
They are all pathalogical liars and self serving losers, on both sides of the aisle. The "Democracy" is just an illusion. I pity those who still believe it actually exists.
Here is 75% of the Federal Budget -
Social Security ~ 20% - This is only going to grow unless old people start dying quicker.
Department of Defence ~ 19% - The Cold War is over. Most of the warfare taking place today can be accomplished via technology and special forces, especially the fight against terrorists. If they pull forces out of Afghanistan, this budget item could be cut significantly. Also, why does the DoD need six branches: Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, and National Guard? Couldn't a couple of these departments be reconsiled? IOW, this is a big area for budget cuts.
Unemployment, welfare, etc. ~ 16% - Get people back to work and off welfare, and this would shrink significantly. Ergo, this needs some real reform to get the budget under control.
Medicare and Medicade ~ 21% - On the Medicare portion, unless old people start dying sooner, this will continue to grow. However, if there are less poor people (IOW more poor people reaching the middle class) then there is less of need for Medicade.
The first ones Obama met with were the unions who want paid back for buying his election and
“There is no fiscal cliff,” Trumka says in prepared remarks to the National Mediation Board Conference in Washington on Thursday. “What we’re facing is an obstacle course within a manufactured crisis that was hastily thrown together in response to inflated rhetoric about our federal deficit.”
Obama met with Trumka earlier this week, in addition to other far left leaders, to discuss economic policy. Apparently a $3500 tax increase on every family doesn’t serve as a “crisis” in Trumka’s opinion, not to mention the climbing $16 trillion debt and trillion dollar deficits posted every year since Obama took office.
Will, eliminating Social Security entirely would not reduce the debt or deficit one cent. The problem with Social Security is that people just aren't dying when they are supposed to.
And Crystal, it always amazes me that unions, which represent less than 20% of the workforce, can be the cause of our fiscal woes.
The only problem with cutting the miltary, and this is a huge problem for Democrats, is that they believe government creates jobs. So if they cut back on the people who wear the uniforms, they save money, but the unemployment rate skyrockets due to the influx of people into the private sector, so it ends up being a wash if not a minus since the rest of the tax base will have to pick up the slack in benefits.
Brian -
You can reduce military spending without impacting the number of soldiers by ending the War in Afghanistan, scaling back or eliminating a few 'big ticket' programs, and targeting less costly and more efficient purchasing practices.
TNSEVOL ..
Amen! And actually looking in to what is contracted out. Imagine how much could be saved if federal programs were actually encouraged to manage their budgets rather than having to make sure they spend all that was alloted for the year to ensure funding for the next.
Moments ago, when he arrived at Capitol Hill, President Obama referenced "our strong economy" in an interview
With the huge increase in unemployment claims, to include many long terms, Poverty reaching an all-time high, the Dow falling below 13,000 and continuing to drop
Companies closing and letting people go - by the thousands
What was he talking about or is he really that clueless and incompetent?
Yes, he really is that clueless and incompetent.
Only in the minds of the republican bubble people.
maybe its time the American people side step the GOP and tell Obama, we will do our part, WE AMERICANS will pay a bit more in taxes, there now does that help? Forget the GOP.....Tax the 1% at the pre-bush rate, and increase it for us too...but allow the American people to see where you spend every dime, and if we dont like it, then we end the tax increase....Its time to work with the American people and not just the 10+ heads in the GOP/Lib....we matter....they (the elected officials) dont listen to us, they have never asked me anything....how about you...they tell me what they are going to do, they never ask us.
I am willing to do my part. It will be ok.
i live with 4 soldiers and a brother who is in Navy, well he was until this week, he was forced into retirement early with a tiny lil 40k to show for it, 14yrs wasted when he could have worked a normal job and advanced in society by now....
anyways, they are all sitting at home with no job...one got a job, but its only temp for xmas for a few hours a week...
so yeah.....the flip side is, we have tons of new unemployed eager soldiers....my roommate hopes for a war so that he can go back to work...theres not much out there for a guy who's resume says: Iraq soldier, who threw bacon at prisoners, some ate it
How about the American people decide what bids/proposals (individual contracts) to accept when it comes to spending....we know how to balance a budget and work within our means.....
Obama, why cant you just ask a committee of families that make under 25k a year but maintain a balance to help you out on this....clearly you all are way too use to spending like this, that you cannot see if from this view.....its unacceptable.
I worked the bid for Luke AFB furniture (Case Furniture) for their uppity ups, and they made sure that it was more expensive brand, even though wood is wood, on the sole grounds that they had to spend more this year than last to get even more for the next.....
I did the bid for the Superior Court employees for "Sit-on-it" chairs....they actually did a decent job deciding on reasonable chair prices as opposed to "Humanscale" chairs (as seen on Fox's House)...they even made sure that if you were large, you got a large seat, and if you were small you got the correct seat and will even change the seats out for them as employees come and go....
This is the root of the problem in our government, the State spending was reasonable, the FED spending, way out of hand and with a snooty tipped nose to boot....The Luke guys are nice, they just want it to be expensive even if the quality does not matter.
Brian,
Im going to assume (and maybe this is wrong) that you expect that soldiers coming home from these theaters will continue to work for the military when they get back. To that I say, has Vietnam not told you anything? Many soldiers came home with no jobs and unemployed. This has similarly happened following Afghanistan and Iraq.
The problem is, as youve pointed out, our military is ran on techonology, which costs WAY MORE than enlisted 50 soldiers at $40,000 a year. So shutting down wars is not fool proof.
Additionally, Im becoming increasingly worried that people really believe the Federal Government should be involved in all these social programs and to drastically shrink defense. The fact is this, we've had 2 (count them, 2) attacks from outside invaders on US soil in the past 200 years. This is because the Federal Government has always spent heavily on defense because thats what it was created to do (and Commerce). The states should control their own social programs and allow the government to control national defense and inter-state commerce. It would probably just work more effectively.
The problem with shifting all responsibilities to the states is the federal government has instituted all these taxes to pay for these different expenditures and won't give them up. If they shift all these programs to the states they'll keep the revenue they justified to pay for social programs and simply spend them on the military and pet projects. When the federal government did little but pay defense and regulate commerce about the only source of funding was tariffs. No income, payroll or the myriad of hidden taxes they take now.
You're argument that we should keep soldiers to lower unemployment is the same argument those in congress use to justify building tanks, planes and ships that the military doesn't want because they'd lose jobs in their districts. In most cases the cost to employ people in this fashion does nothing but keep people employed making 50K a year but costs 1 million a year for each job. It makes better sense to hire these people directly then enriching Haliburton and similar companies merely to save jobs.
A navy base closed nearby some yearas ago. There was a huge hit to the local economy and much wailing and hand wringing.
A decade later that old navy base is creating more income and taxes than it ever did before.
Whodathunkit!
are you insane? do you know anything about the military? active duty military personnel are ON DUTY 24/7 and as such get paid for it. when ACTIVE DUTY soldiers come back from combat zones, they are still ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY and will get paid as such. is this hard for you to understand? you bring up vietnam but you dont even know what you are talking about because it was a draft war and as such when drafties leave the combat zone and do not enlist, you are no longer active military, draft wars suck like that. reservists do sometimes have a hard time returning to their normal careers but they are offered help before and after deployment.
having a job is not a right and i do not support government employment beyond the basic needs outlined in the US constitution. government does not create wealth so it must take from earners to maintain function, the problem lies with giving money back to people who are not earners just to pander votes. you have no right to money you did not earn, none. i will not give my money over to the government so they can in turn hand it to someone who does not take care of their own.
my taxes have been going up for years but i have yet to receive anything for it. roads are crappier, traffic is crap, schools are crap, foreign relations are crap, social relations are crap but i see we have more takers now than ever before. maybe i should just learn from them and start taking things from others, i will use a middle man of course much like they use our government against us.
@Bruce
Yeah, as I said, this budget item will only grow unless old people start dying sooner - which I sincerly hope does not happen. I think about this country before Social Security, and I also think about other countries where social security programs do not exist. What do older people do? Historically, they have lived with their children until they died. These are countries where the family unit is much closer and multiple generations live under the same roof. Of course, in these countries, having lots of children was important so that you would have someone to care for you when you were older.
In the US, I think it would be very difficult to transition back to a society like this now that Social Security has been in existence for decades. Therefore, eleminating or reducing social security is probably not a viable option.
Hmmmm, why do you suppose that is?
Couldn't have anything to do with the disastrous economic policies of the last Republican administration, could it? By the end of Bush's last budget, Sept. 30, 2009, there were 14.1 million unemployed and another 3.2 million that had given up looking for work, and so were not counted, for a total of 17.3 million. If you are looking for the reason there are so many more "takers", you don't need to look any further than the last Republican administration! No other administration since the Great Depression has transformed sooo many "makers", i.e. people with jobs who pay taxes, into "takers", i.e. people with no jobs who consume government money.
A large part of the reason Romney lost the last election, whether Republicans want to admit it or not, is because he wanted to double-down on the failed policies that led us into this recession in the first place.
If you are really concerned about the economic health of America, then I suggest you talk to your Republican Congress-critters and get them to work with their Democratic colleagues to come up with a new plan, something besides the same old tax-cut BS that hasn't worked in the past and that the American voters have soundly rejected!
EEngineer, you're talking to a brick wall, all they see are the poor and unemployed sucking up government money and living on their tax dollars while they have to work. They won't face the fact about who put these people in their current situation.
Everything they have to say, has nothing whatsoever to do with the real world. They try to make it sound like the people out of work and struggling just to live day by day, is their own fault because they're lazy, and are only looking for a handout, the republican party had nothing to do with it.
The republican leadership told them what to say and think, so that's what they say and think. Nothing will change that.
Only a handful of republicans think it is urgent business or in need of urgent action. I think that if a person is making $5,000 or more a week they could pay more especially when many are paying income taxes rates of 14% or less. My rich neighbor gloats over his 9% rate. Then I think about my 20% rate!
Must depend on where your money comes from. I'm not rich, but I only paid 9.7% last year (federal).
first of all stop being jealous of your neighbor. secondly i bet your tax rate is 20 percent but at the end of the year, after filing taxes, with all EIC's your effective tax rate is less then your rich neighbor. if your neighbor who lives in same place that you do, probably isnt rich. probably has a better job and you just envy that he has more than you. sorry but you sound petulant!!!
Many of us Republicans believe the so called Fiscal Cliff is not a bad thing and the current tax increases and spending cuts should proceed.
It is the best way to increase income to the Federal Govt while reducing spending by a needed margin.
I for one see no reason to keep these Bush tax cuts in place past their intended duration. I am willing to pay a bit more and believe EVERYONE should!
You don't pay a 20% overall rate on Federal income tax, though you might have a marginal rate at 20%. By the time you look at what you pay on your gross earnings, it is probably less than 10% actual Federal income tax.
Nope! 20% without any loopholes!
clwyd: You should take a look at the options available to you, depending on your age. Traditional IRAs allow you to reduce your taxable income, while Roth IRAs have tax-free distributions, as do many municipal bonds. Immediate annuity payments are partially tax-free for 20 yrs after you buy them. Some mutual funds are specifically designed to reduce taxes, while income from capital gains and dividends are taxed at reduced rates. None of these are rich-man vehicles.
I pay 0% taxes. why, no job! I think the cigarrett company is the only one getting taxes from me this year.....i mean how else was i going to suppress the hunger pains? ....just hope that FSC stuff kills before i starve....at least then i could have food and maybe a hospital bed from the new healthcare....you all will be forced to feed me then.
BINGO, i got it.......holy cow i just solved my woes....GET SICK, on Obamacare....I could have food, and someone serving me all day long if I could just get SICK....think ill go smoke the entire pack and get started now..... gross ( i dont even smoke, use too but i quit 3yrs in Dec)
Holy cow and yet another revelation: how many homeless will start checking into healthcare centers when Obamacare goes into effect....or will it make a difference? If i was homeless then hells yeah, id be hopin from one place to the next for survival....dang
as an aside: Is anyone really sure that this administration can get anything done when they've failed to pass one year long budget in the last four years. NOw dont get me wrong, its clear that all politicans are to blame here, but most you re-elected them anyway ignoring this, the trillion a year plus debt (worse than Bushs 8 years in less than 2), the volitale market (a clear indication of false growth) and historic unemployment.
I'm doing pretty well for myself since I retired from the military about 3 years ago. Found a job. no debt -- I'm renter as I'm likely to move far away from the area I'm working in and did not "buy" when I move here just before the bubble burst "lucky choice"
Even with maxing a 401K input (tax deferred), about 3% of gross to charity and what other deduction I have to get the AGI as low as I legally can.. I'm in the marginal rate of federal income tax at 28% with an effective overall federal income tax of 23%......
personally - I not near the 200K-250K AGI - but do not have a problem with paying bit more for medicare tax, or having the lift or dramatically lift the SS CAP or even having them moving the capital gain go back to the 20% level of the 90's to help on the overall budget deficiet and paying for things like SS, Medicare, SNAP, DOD (work for DOD for a long term -- there is waste here and DOD needs to play in cuts like everyone)
i will not pay one dime more to our corrupted federal government as they have showed the inability to balance a budget, reduce spending, go after corruption or just plain follow the US constitution. why should any tax payer pay more taxes when we all know the outcome, increased spending! history has proven this over and over.
Roadlesstraveled, Your attempt at humor could have a very serious backlash. When I thought I was on top, I laughed at and talked about people struggling, then fate stepped in and made me live their lives for 2 years. I'm back on my feet now, but I will-not talk about people less fortunate than me because now i know first hand what they are going through.
Increase in after-tax income group, 1979-2007;
Top 1% 281%
Top 5% 160%
Top 10% 125%
Top 20% 95%
Forth 20% 35%
Middle 20% 25%
second 20% 23%
Bottom 20% 16%
Figures are adjusted for inflation.
Source; Congressional Budget Office "Average After-Tax Household Income" June, 2010.
As you can see, there is plenty of extra disposable income on the part of the top income earners to contribute more to reduce the deficit.
Since 79 that may be true. Try running the numbers since 2007 and you will find top earners incomes down 40%. Along with those income reductions a massive reduction in Federal revenue.
This is why the Bush era tax cuts should simply be allowed to expire and the cuts already in place should take place.
Just because they have the money does not mean the masses have a right to take it. What ever happened to equal protection? For anyone who keeps comparing percentages rather than actual payments your lying about who pays more. 10% rate on the wealthy is still more money than anyones 20+%. Most of us only pay a few hundred in taxes. The wealthy pay millions. If we are are equal then why do they pay more? The tax code needs to be changed to $1000 from everyone regardless of income. Equal tax for equal representation.
LaVall -
Your premise that we all have equal representation is a false one. The wealthy have the disposable income to influence elections and gain access to the lawmakers that the average citizen does not possess.
Why should the top income earners contribute more than their fair share? Didn't they earn it?
Make everyone pay 10% of their income. 10% of capital gains, add a vat tax to sale items, luxury items should be taxed at 50%. If you can afford a porshe you should pay more. million dollar diamonds, and 10K dresses should also be taxed at 50%
The wealthy have disposable income because (most of them) worked hard and earned it. Those poeple had the same opportunities in life as everyone else did. They chose to work hard, go to school, work longer hours, forge ahead, etc....
You chose to spend your money (and the government handout money) on cigarettes and beer. Your choice, your decision.
What is the deal with everyone wanting to punish people with money when (most) of them earned it themselves.
Damn....get off your ass and go make your own million. You have a brain and air in your lungs just like the rich do. Fill your brain with knowledge and power in stead of entitlement!
Reality disagrees with you, Lee:
In fact, reality disagrees with you even more than previously thought:
It appears that a full 69% of your rich folks who work so hard to make something of themselves actually didn't have to work all that hard at all.
Lavall: Under your logic if it's unfair to tax those making 100 million more because they pay so much more in real dollars than those making 1 million then it's also unfair to tax those making 1 million more when those making 250K pay less actual dollars and when someone making 50K pays so much less. Eventually you end up at the people making nothing. So do we just tax everyone the dollar amount the poorest person in the country can afford to pay? Every first world country in the world has a progressive tax structure and have prospered. The time in this countries history when most working people made $1 a day which was below the poverty line was before our current tax system. One man was worth 600 billion in today's dollars. Millions of working class Americans lived in shanties surrounding most cities. Allowing the richest to pay nothing created a country none of us today would want to live in. Why fight to bring it back. Let those who make so much off of the 99% pay their share.
Romney claimed to be self made because he donated his multi million dollar inheritance to charity. He failed to mention he didn't make that donation for 3 years until he'd rolled the millions into many more. That's still quite an achievement but was deceptive.
Chattanooga, Tenn. — Despite the federal pay freeze, the biggest federal employer in East Tennessee is boosting its year-end bonuses -- which average $12,000 per employee -- to nearly 12,000 workers next week.
Fiscal cliff is only for those not in the Federal Government. Hang on!!!
please try to take more of my money from my hands, i dare you. this is my money, not yours and you have no right to take it from me to give to others.
regardless of how anyone got their money (sans crimes), you have no right to take it through votes.
reality does not disagree with lee but im sure you dont care as long as you can tell people what to do with their money.
At what point will Obama and the Libs own the economy and stop blaming Bush and the GOP.
At what point will they come up with a plan to jumpstart the economy rather than just think taxing the rich will take care of everything.
At what point will increased dependence on government become a negative campaign agenda
At what point will successful persons and business looking to make a profit stop being demonized and made out to be the bad guy.
At what point will the President act like a leader and come up with real solutions and a real budget, instead of kicking the can down the road and blaming the GOP while Americans continue to lose jobs
Charlie,
The answer to all your questions are, never. Deep down they know they can't keep giving out all the goodies but have been backed into a corner with their promises. Everything is going to blow up in their faces, give it time. Blaming Bush is almost run its course so now we have to blame the republicans in Congress. That too will run its course and the American people will finally see through the smokescreen!
So Charlie, what's your point? Seriously, I don't look for any of those things to happen even though they all should.
When Congress finally realizes that wars are expensive in both blood and treasure, maybe we can someday see light at the end of the deficit tunnel.
It would be helpful, as well, to understand that if a war is worth fighting, it must be financed by American taxpayers rather than Chinese credit. If Americans aren't willing to pay for military action, it isn't a war worth fighting.
Bruce,
I agree with you on the reasons why war should be a last resort, and that we should pay for it if we do go to war.
But, we also have to be realistic about entitlement spending. Using the presidents projections for Medicare/Medicaid, those programs are project to run deficits of over $6 Trillion the next 10 years - and get worse after that. That is not sustainable - even if we triple the requested tax increases on the wealthy. We either need to start talking about real spending cuts or raising taxes - or probably, a lot of both.
after we get rid of the tax cuts for the rich.
Ron-
Medicare and Social Security both require relatively minor adjustments in order to make them sustainable. Options include increasing the maximum income at which Social Security is taxed, phasing in an increased Medicare tax rate, or phasing in a delayed benefit schedule.
Any or all of these options can preserve the system for current and future beneficiaries without any reduction in benefits.
No argument about the seriousness of the Medicare/Medicaid projections. I wonder, however, why Congress chooses not to address the underlying problem of costs. For example, the Medicare Part D (drug benefit) was passed with a provision that it is unlawful for the Federal government to negotiate drug prices. In addition, I have to buy private insurance to enroll in Part D and my carrier just notified me that my premium will increase 29.9% in January. Drug companies charge whatever they choose to, the private carrier gets my premiums, and then pays for the drugs then bills Medicare for the difference. The private health insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies are earning huge profits with absolutely no risk all at the expense of taxpayers.
And on another note, the hospital bill alone for my wife's recent routine appendectomy was over $20,000 for just 32 hours in the hospital. Compared to other industrialized nations, we are being grotesquely overcharged.
TNVESOL,
I agree with you, but the problem I see is neither party is open to even relatively minor changes now. Neither party wants to consider tax increases that will hit the middle class - and without that (or benefit cuts), the math doesn't add up. (unless we run something like 5% annual GDP increase - which I think is extremely unlikely)
Never. Pointing out the truth isn't diverting blame but denial is.
You've been spinning that line for 4 years anda still 53% of the population blames Bush 100% and only the far right at 29% blame Obama. It isn't just liberals but most reasonable people that realise when someones been president 8 years and the economy tanks his last 6 months he's to blame. The economy under Bush lost 11 trillion in net worth. Tax revenue fell 500 billion a year. 5 million more unemployed with 800,000 his last month. Unemployment hit over 9% while still under Bush's last budget which runs from Oct. 2008 through Oct. 2009. Millions losing their homes. The biggest bank meltdown since 1929 that required 800 billion from Bush to prevent an actual 1929 style depression and hundreds of billions more in freebie money to keep them afloat.
Now why can't you sell it's all Obama to anyone but the far right who believes everything bad about Obama from he was born in Kenya, is a secret muslim and is really a martian?
The Great Depression belongs to republican Herbert Hoover.
The Great recession will forever belong to republicon bush/cheney.
They can deny it all they want but the vast majority of Americans never bought it and never will. The buck always stops with the president from whichever party. It's not limited to democratic ones.
At what point will successful persons and business looking to make a profit stop being demonized and made out to be the bad guy.
When those successful people stop trying to buy candidates to pay even less in taxes.
There's a dreamer!
Let's put that right up there with "the recession happened on Obama's watch" and "well, maybe he didn't start it but he made it worse" and "well, maybe he didn't start it and he is making it better but he's not making it better fast enough!".
You don't get it, do you? You cannot rewrite history to make it favorable to the Republicans. Because it didn't happen that way. The American people remember. And, no matter what they put out there for public consumption, the Republicans remember too. When was the last time a living ex-president didn't campaign for his party's presidential candidate?
Fiesty, still spitting your garbage from that wrinkled old face, take a break from ignorance and stupidity, the elections are over.
I hope the President stands firm on rate increases. Closing "loopholes" won't do it, especially for individuals. Is the deduction for charitable contributions a loophole? How about the deduction for home mortgage interest? Don't we want to encourage home ownership?
Just an example of why loopholes can be more important than rates...most government bonds generate tax free income. So, if that "loophole" stays, you can raise the rates to 100% and people still won't pay any taxes.
If you want to get more money out of people, loopholes are just as important (if not more so) than rates.
Home Ownership is what got us in this mess eh?
Closing some loopholes will definitely help. Tax deductions on second homes to name a simple one. I take every deduction available which for me is not many. But looking from the other side, how does the renter feel about others getting a break for owning? Or the childless person who gets none of those deductions. Flattened brackets with fewer deductions will even it out. There surely is a cap coming to us from either side.
lulu98,
I'm ok with removing the 2nd home mortgage deduction, but keep in mind - it will most likely result in a rate increase for renters. The monthly margins on rental housing is very low (if not negative) for most people I know that own rental property.
Ron, it is complicated and we need to really understand the consequences of these changes. And we all know that unintended consequences are everywhere. My Canadian friends tell me that they have no deduction for homeownership at all. And they have to put more in a down payment to buy. Canada did not suffer the housing meltdown that we did.
once again, the government doesnt have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem. i bet their are a hundred social programs that are not needed, but you libs will trot out one person out of a thousand and parade he/she around. youll scream, see who you are hurting!!! the normal everyday citizen. then youll wave your finger and proudly say" how could you." cut spending, cut spending, cut spending!!!!!!!
Jeff,
Take off your rose colored glasses. Revenues have dropped because we have changed into a service industry country instead of a manufacturing industry country. Jobs have left, we no longer have the wages to tax so therefore we have lost revenues.
And that is why Lulu. When they have to put more down, they borrow significantly less, thus the chances of defaulting on the loan is less. Banks are alot tighter, or were, in Canada until the banks here had to pull credit way back since as everyone knows, "The Everyone Needs A House Agenda No Matter The Income" failed miserably with Fannie and Fred leading the march and the rest of the banks lockstep directly behind them until it all blew up in theirs and subsequently our collective faces.
sorry but it was not the " everyone needs a house agenda " it was those greedy ones trying to get rich leveraging what they could and then some.
we have a revenue and spending problem.................
revenue is down to historical lows (40 years of lower tax rates and all kinds of deduction/credit loopholes has an effect).. This true even when have not be in recessions or immediately after recessions). Revenue needs to be in a sustained 19-20% of GDP range
We clearly have to also work on reducing spending and pork to a significant degree
these two things have converge together to get "debt level" at a sustainable level..
not likely to go totally to no "debt" -- there are good reasons to sell "bonds".. you just have to be able pay them off and reasonable interest at maturity
Someone define for me shared responsiblity. This would require 100% of us to participate...
Does anyone else think that the body language of this photo speaks volume? Boehner can't even look the President in the eyes; however, President Obama is looking right at him while shaking his hand. The President looks confident and cooperative; Boehner looks like the kid that just got caught with his hands in the cookie jar, needing to get away quickly.
Perhaps because Boehner knows that he has to play a war of words with an unarmed person for at least another two years?
Well I seem to recall that the last time Boehner shook hands with the President claiming a deal had been reached he went back to the capital and nixed it.
The result was a loss of the nations AAA rating.
Lets hope he does better this time around.
teller -
I doubt you even know what truth is. Too bad you are lying here. Yes there was an agreement, and then Obama allowed Pelosi and Reid to double down on the tax increases without additional negotiation. As the democrats did not keep their portion of the 'bargain' why should the republicans have signed on to it?
In actuality, what caused the downgrades - and yes there has been more than one - is that Congress has not made sufficient or even adequate cuts to the budget (they have not even had one pass the Senate in all the time Obama has been in office, but at least the republicans have sent budgets from the House since they have controlled it) to show that the federal government is serious about trying to get it under control.
You can't spin your way out of what happened.
He did not have the votes to pass the agreed plan, even though his party has the controlling votes in the house.
Anyone else notice the ironic coincidence of the seating chart, Boehner sat on President Obama's right and Reid on his left. Not important or significant, just ironic.
I was so caught up in noticing how Boehner's orange tie matches his face that I didn't notice the seating arrangements.
Wow, good catch.
Boehner looks limp wristed.
Somebody should write some lyrics entitled Tan In a Can Man, sung to the tune of Rubberband Man.
Holy smokes! Hillary is on top of me and Bill is under me. I'm getting out of here before this gets any kinkier.
Boom times, tough times,war or no war it doesn't matter.
Both sides spend like drunken sailors.
It's time for the bitter medicine whether we like it or not.
Reducing or eliminating credits, exemptions and deductions - the so-called 'loopholes' - primarily affect earned income in any meaningful way. Earned income is what you see on a W-2 Form; investment and interest income is on a 1099.
The very wealthy rarely see income on a W-2 because they do not ordinarily receive wages.
The Republican approach to a balanced plan relies on cuts in spending and reliance on closing 'loopholes'. In other words, cut programs that help the lower and middle classes, and eliminate deductions that benefit the lower and middle classes.
Doesn't seem too balanced to me.
and thats exactly what needs to happen. sorry if the pill is too big to swallow for you. taxing the rich will only fund the government for what? one day, two days. the government has a spending problem not a revenue problem
No, you are wrong Jeff Hyle, the government has both a spending problem and a revenue problem due to republican supply side economics. Its time to hold those accountable that have skinned their way around paying their fair share and it is also time to cut back on spending, like the over bloated military budget so we can be butt in ski's around the world. To hell with that, we can no longer afford war.
John, the only way to ensure a "fair" share is paid by all is a flat tax with no deductions whatsoever.
Neal -
A flat-tax is only one definition of 'fair', and studies on most of the known proposals show a dramatic favorable impact only on the wealthy.
Seems like most want to cut funding that helps those in need here at home, but no one unless i missed it, has said anything about making cuts to our foreign wellfare system ( foreign aid ).
Some of you don't realize Rich have versions of Rich. Their version of high end, middle class and poor. High class the ones that make a few billion a year. Middle class, those many over 500million, poor the ones making 50 mil a year.
donna,
I posted the same observation above.
Totally agree with you.
Have a great weekend. I think Boehner will be burning the midnight oil. LOL
I say screw it, we should let taxcut/taxes happen. They used this to get passed passing a bugdget and not are trying to stop what they failed to do. Time to face the music.
The tax cuts can end and deep spending kick in without any immediately serious effects. The media makes it sound as if one day after it kicks in, the world ends. It would be at least a few weeks later that the problems would start being felt. So we may see a temporary agreement reached either in December or shortly after we pass the "fiscal cliff".
President Obama is in a much better position than House Republicans, between the mandate of the people, not running for another term, and the automatic expirations if nothing is done. Every member of Congress has to run for another term eventually. Even his first press conference after the election showed a very confident, determined President Obama.
He has no mandate but you keep telling yourself that.
Clotho, what mandate. Yes, he got re-elected but the House is still in the hands of the Reps. So the people said "have another four years of gridlock". This is a mandate? NO.
Neal -
Liberals do not understand what the term actually means.
But what else can one expect out of today's failed public education system?
Damn, I am a little disappointed...Boehner had one hand on him already...the other one could have (fill in the blank).
They are carefully lining up the can to kick it further down the road. They Will reach some sort of deal that will let them stand in front of the cameras and proclaim how hard they have worked to "solve" the problem, but in reality, do nothing to solve the real problem. Business as usual......
Those spiteful hateful Republicans spent the last four years hoping for America's melt down just so they could get the White House back. Since they failed are they going to spend the next two on the same mission? They have already been notified by the polls that America will lay the blame for the economic crash at their feet. Are they really spiteful enough to ignore the polls again?
And if that Haley Barber and Bill Bennett did not look like a couple of ................. jack a**es talking about what their party needs to do.
The GOP are sore losers You can tell by what was said by Romney a few days after the election, Maybe is the GOP would get some one to run for President that the american people could respect rather than the rich jerk they ran they could have had the white house..
Its called Obama @!$%# THE BED spent trillions on stimlious that didnt work. Atleast Romney who im not the biggest fan of either had a decent plan. STOP trying to get free hand outs all the @!$%#ing time and our country would be fine!
What about the foreign free hand outs.
Dan - Im sure you'll tell me that Gore and Kerry were different in acting the same way in 2000 and 2004. Your perogative.
Ross - you are on point, all the countries that hate us get our money. Just two countries that shouldnt get a dime (and we know why) Pakistan = no money, Lybia = no money.
Regarding the rich paying more, the rich are already paying for all those who didnt work, collected government assistance and have passed the attitude on generationally. I know of at least 6 people in my immediate or near immediate family that have this attitude and its disgraceful. The unfortunate part is these are the people who are taking from those that really need it during these tough times.
I would rework the tax laws, but also put more "regulation" on welfare and food stamp payments. The government and the taxpayers of this country can no longer afford to pay for people who have no intention of climbing the ladder. welfare should work like unemployment and have cutoff dates and active job searching requirements. Welfare reciepients should also NOT be afforded a tax return (totally mindboggling that the government would tax its own money and then give it back to the recipient at the end of the year). People on welfare should also be drug-tested.
Following this, cuts to all agencies across the board and closing of agencies/departments that do little more than spend tax dollars for no reason. The government needs to be more serious about cutting waste and either not spending that money or diverting it to high priority issues (Re: national debt).
People like to hate the rich, but face it, if you could the top 2% out fo the equation, the moderate through poor classes would likely be paying 500%of their annual take. Fact is, we owe way more now to the national debt than we ever did during the 00's and it will be the end of us if the train isnt turned around.
The so called fiscal cliff was just a page marker until the elections were decided. Of course there will be a deal and life will go on. Susan Rice will be approved along with the President's other new appointments and we will continue to see McCain's splotchy mug on the TV every Sunday morning. Same as it ever was.
Everyone is talking about compromise, but I remain skeptical that anyone is willing to sacrifice their sacred cow. The one positive in this whole mess is most of the parties agree that doing nothing is probably worse than even a "bad' compromise. Apparently, that was the whole idea behind the agreement establishing the fiscal cliff as a condition for raising the debt limit in the first place. The politicians have painted themselves into a corner where they have to actually do something. It reminds me of the old adage "Be careful what you wish for; you might just get it"
They don't have much choice, if they don't come up with something they will be cooking the cow. The Bush tax cuts will expire and a few trillion will be cut and they have no choice it is law.
It does not matter. Our country is already screwed. Think about this little piece of information. Our country has nearly a $70 trillion debt. The $16 trillion debt everyone refers to only incurs loss sustained in the operating budget. The nearly $55 trillion dollars in debt our owed by our government to people who hold bond's, treasury notes, and future entitlements. We are screwed. One could take the nearly $3.5 trillion dollars in currently circulating in our economy and put it all towards the debt, and it still would not make a dent. Good luck.
Spend more money that you don't have greedy pigs. God is calling all the families, from all the nations to stand up. Show your true faith by speaking against all these criminal acts we witness daily in our governing systems. Out of the North a great evil will break out against all the cities of America. Your own kings will run and hide in the mountain bunkers they have built. But the wicked will search them out and even the kings own people will give them up knowing how much they lie, deceive and oppress even their own in their selfishness and greed’s. Their great hideaway will burn with their own fires, the War machines which they sold themselves in their Arming of all the nations for Wars. For these wicked kings have committed the greatest of evils against their own nations, their perverted ways and fornication that they hide in the closets, yet God sees all their wickedness and greedy war intentions. The American people becoming slaves to this governments massive debts when they themselves should be the owner of the plagues coming because of it. There is one king who lies right to their faces and the media outlets are proof of each day. His falsehood from the beginning of his birth till the day of his deceptions upon the people. A voice was heard saying, his deceptions will be known throughout the world when the blind open their eyes, the deaf racist agenda can hear. This kings fruitful place will become his devastation and he will live in the wilderness of his own wicked heart, his crooked soul burning, his rotted flesh will be stink for all them to smell his rottenness. For this the whole country will sing praises and the whole world will find some peace away from this kings wicked intentions. Kings of America so spoiled, what will you do when all this comes down on you, your children will even weep and cry for your rotting souls, the mothers of your children knowing your fornications, your perverted intentions. Stand today American people and ask, where are the old days, where are the days of good and clean intentions, where did the Kings go that should nurse your nation, not deceive and devour it like some beast. Why has your nation turned to Sodom and again in this election you proved you only see, you only hear deviate, greedy ways as your future. God forgive us for standing silent and blinded against these deviate dictators who promote the sick and perverted agenda over anything good and clean. God said Americans,, if you thoroughly amend your ways and your wicked doings, if you Americans execute judgment on these wicked rulers, then he will cause us to dwell in the greatest of nations again, now a nation of fools. But you trust in their lying words, deceiving works and kings of fornication not even born in your country, swearing falsely and walking after other Gods, standing in the house of your God where they deliver all these O-Abominations upon their own foolish, selfish people. I HAVE SEEN IT Daily,,,It’s called instant media and Reality, Not some Disney land Ride into Hell…
He works in mysterious ways...
http://imgur.com/gq4Yv
What you have is a serious and debilitating illness, seek help while you still can, lucky for you we have Obama Care
Effin drama queen.
Obama lied and 4 people died. Now that the General has outed him, who is going to take the fal for the messiah ?
I'm betting obama blames bush
If Obama lied, and I seriously doubt that, they were already dead and nothing would bring them back.
bigdogg, do you ever get tired of standing up for obama? If everything that is going on and he doesn't know or didn't know, he has to be the least informed president ever. Could it be all the security briefings that he misses on a regular basis. Could it be because he is black and the dems don't want him to know? Or, could it be that he simply doesn't care and lied his ass off.
Unreal,
I think you are wrong on all fronts. Keep trying..........
Empirical evidence please,Ditto Head...
I am so glad that we hired Barrack Obama to do the job, he will get it done despite those in congress that would take America back to the dark days of George W. Bush.
The Bush days look pretty good right now. And Obama is an expert on dark. I'm sure you are too.
Typical! I am a republican but have never, ever acted like an elected official is God Almighty. Some of the post liberals make are sickening, he is not the King, he is a man.
Come on now libs, call me a racist, that's what you do when you have nothing else.
Jasper, you are in idiot if you believe that.
Chances are if you are a republican, you are a racist. Most are.
Chance are that if you are a dem, you are a socialist. Most are.
That is funny John during the bush days i had a good paying job and money in the bank.Now i have no money in the bank and a crappy paying job because it was all i could find after my good paying job was sent to Korea by none other than GM the company Big Ears Odumbo bailed out.
Obama's reelection only proves that if you give enough people welfare and make them dependent on it and you give 800k illeagal criminals a free pass to stay in the US you can buy the election.
Chances are that there are both racists and socialists in both parties. What is true is that everybody needs to set aside the anger and vengeful diatribes and find solutions to real time problems. I am 64 years old and have seen some of the worst social crises but the attitude in society right now is appalling. The anger, hatred, and lack of civility takes us nowhere good and prevents us from solving our issues. None of us are 100% Democrat, Republican, or Independent. We are all a mixture of everything so compromise shouldn't be this hard.
absolutely nothing has changed
dems worship obama, everyone that doesn't is a racist.
those drums we're hearing aren't in kenya, folks
they're in the middle east and are from a coming war not made by repulicans, but by a weak democrat.
how many presidents have had 20+ states submit petitions to secede?...this is obama's mandate
Thanks for helping me win a bet. I told several friends that I could make you say racist. I'm enjoying the beer that you won me. Many of us looking forward to the coming days and watching you leftist anti-white creeps fail and squirm.
Greyfox, what war are you talking about? I do seem to remember a war in Iraq which was never put in budget, and GWB got his tax cuts passed. Now, it seems to me if you start a war you'd better make sure you've got funding for it. Barack was elected in 2008, much to Republican white racists dislike and he made good on a promise to put everything on the budget; guess what that meant the country was in the hole big time because Rumsfeld and Cheney contracted with Halliburton and their subsidiaries and were paying them exorbitant fees to do what US troops could do much cheaper.
Mr. Obama did start a war (in Lybia) with no backing from Congress. Helped rebels eliminate and Saddam like dictator and then allowed terrorist to kill 4 americans. PLus theres Kenya, plus he talked about "saving money" by allowing Bush's agreed Iraqi drawdone to take place and then sent most of them to Afghanistan. Yet nobody cares now. So what changed for opponents of these issues?
Further, Ed Orr, being white and disagreeing with the president is no comparable to being racist. This is why the problem exists, because bigots like you cant understand that.
PS: wouldnt want to burst your bubble, but Bush Sr. and Clinton are friends for one reason, and it aint their common ties as presidents. Its their Haliburton Board positions. I guess since MIchael Moore didnt tell you that, you wouldnt believe it.
Funny that people claim that because we believe Obama was the far better candidate than Romney and best for the country we consider him a messiah. If he was the messiah we'd have no debt and prosperity for all. As for your being a racist I have no idea. You don't have to be racist to be a fool. I guess Romney was your messiah. One thing I do notice is no one on the right ever explains how Romney would have made a better president or what could have excused Bush's destruction of the economy. All they have is bashing Obama. Saying Obama sucks didn't win you the election because you couldn't explain why Romney wouldn't have been worse.
Ok I am going to explain to you my very smart liberal friend. We elect officials to be that not our gods as you people all have decided Mr. Obama is. I am not sure what kind of President Romney would have been because he wasn't elected but I am sure it would not have been run with the corruption this administration is running theirs with.
And to your last point Obama sucks!
Thanks for helping me win a bet. I told several friends that I could make you say racist. I'm enjoying the beer that you won me.
The reason why you're enjoying your beer is because you knew it was a racist comment when you posted it. Doesn't mean you won anything. Just means you were guaranteed a beer when you posted your comment.
Oh, and you're on Ignore now.
Gov't needs to cut it's spending not tax us more. Obama is a POS. I'm starting to hate this country.
Obama is very street smart and the majority of law makers are not. e, Obama, p lays them like an expert does a yow-yow.
Actually it's called a Yo-Yo and it's a child's toy that you are using to compare the abilities towards the worlds strongest (well used to be) super-power. BTW; "street smarts" allow you to get the best deals on drugs, know where the prostitutes are, and which police can be paid off. Exactly the skill sets I want in the POTUS.
Bill,
Street smarts teach you how to survive.
I don't buy drugs, visit prostitutes or bribe officials but I can and will survive in just about any environment.
A yow yow .... lolololol what's a yow yow?, is that what African-Americans do when Obama asks then to genuflect?? loolololololo yowsa master
Clearly race has nothing to do with your hatred of Obama. Right, wink wink.
Larry ... clearly it doesn't wink wink, of course anyone who disagrees with lefties on issues or doesn't approve of some of the aspects of African-American culture is a racist ... right? wink, wink We are all biologically equal , but some have better systems of values and more advanced cultures.
What I can't understand is why neither Obama or Romney discussed this during the presidential race? Now it's urgent.
Can't stand the POTUS but why neither chose to discuss this is beyond me.
Because it calls for immediate, objective tough choices.
Things voters NEVER want to hear about.
and things congress won't do because it may hurt re-election
Grow up people. Entitlements are killing this nation.
Amen!
entitlements defined = insurances taken out of working americans pay '' all their lives '' !!! now it's time for america to pay , but the filthy rich are calling them the 47% bums of america. YOU PEOPLE MAKE ME SICK !!!!
Tether - Define entitlements. I worked and paid into Social Security for 50 years. I paid into Medicare since its inception in 1965. Medicare is still deducted from my Social Security and will be increasing to $246 per month in 2014 which, of course, means that my Social Security will be over $100 less each month. As far as SS and Medicare are concerned, we've already been cut. I can't get cut anymore, plus my SS is taxed as my husband is still working at 69. I always wonder who you posters are talking about. Are you considering putting Grandma and Grandma out on an ice floe or toss them under the bus? Other entitlements would be veterans care and compensation. Of course we could always eliminate Congressmen/women's pay, perks, benefits and retirement. Now that would be an entitlement cut I could support.
Actually summertime YOU are the exact individual entitlement programs where initially set up to protect You paid and should receive those benefits. It's the expansion of benefits to those who simply walk in, attach themselves on and never get off that are the problem. Additionally te political pork projects in the past and Obamas future pay backs that are killing this nation.
Summertime, my wife and I are in the identical situation you and your husband are in. Years ago a former Governor of Colorado said that the main reason that Social Security will eventually fail is that people just are not dying when they are supposed to. I laughed then; I'm not laughing now.
I agree, we've paid into SS/Medicare, it should be removed from the category of entitlements.
What needs to be cut are the extra programs that were mentioned yesterday in the news, and I'm sorry I don't remember them. However, there are millions and millions of dollars going to "research" programs for stupid stuff that could save a lot, if they were cut off. Those programs do nothing for the public. Oh, one was a "study of an ancient bird skeleton that they only conclusion they came to was that it's feathers were black!" Several millions dollars went into that grant. And crap like that could be eliminated!
I truly believe that had Mr. Romney won, he would be cutting those wasted dollar trists -- rapido! I don't think he would have turned a blind eye to the waste that is going out for these bogus grants, etc.
Barry is back to his old habits rather quickly and we will see the fall of these United States within his hopefully this, his last term.
I also agree with the comment above that cutting the military and putting those soldiers back into the private sector is just a wash. I attempted to state that yesterday in another post, but the term "wash" evaded me.
With all the employers beginning to announce their lay-offs, these people will also be going onto government dole if they can't or won't take something else at a lower pay rate. It's no embarrassment to take lower pay, it's an embarrassment to have to put your hand out to the government who will only screw you anyway.
And unions -- maybe they should go. Hostess is one down, and thanks to the union membership who wouldn't work with the company, shameless, just shameless. 18,500 will now be added to the unemployment lines, and a majority will probably be added to the government dole.
"Broken Arrow" applies here. (Fire on our position as we are being over-run)
Patricia I agree and I also am on SS and Medicare, plus I am a retired Air Force Veteran on VA Disabl. I heard Romney refer to that as an entitlement. Excuse me Mitt but I spent 20 years in Air Force defending your right to escape having to serve, I guess and allowing you to amass your millions. I think, to a limit, labor unions are okay but when they encourage workers to strike like Hostess they are an enemy.
Overspending is killing the nation. You can't say Romney wanting to increase military spending 200 billion and starting a new space program that would be hundreds of billions more isn't a problem or Bush's 100 billion drug plan was fine but 70 billion a year on food stamps is crippling the nation. Responsible people realise both parties use our tax dollars to promote their own agenda and spending less isn't one of them. Those that ignore spending no matter how large from one side is the childish one. You grow up.
If President Union Puppet wants to help the Middle Class, then he should RESIGN IMMEDIATELY........
Better a Union Puppet than a corporate stooge. 15 of the largest super pac donors were super wealthy people that would have saved billions under Romney. Unions represent millions of Americans. Obama supports millions of Americans while Romney was bought and paid for by a handful. Sheldon alone would have saved 2 billion in the first year under Romney. You fools actually think Romney cared about you because he was willing to throw you a few crumbs while he was tossing T-bones at his wealthy friends. You're not only cheap but easy.
Obama may just have his ass impeached when this is all over.
Aren't you the same guy who predicted:
1) Romney would win the 2012 election
2) SCOTUS would overturn the ACA
3) Gay marriage would never win by popular vote
Obama will not be impeached.
McCain and Graham are idiots.
bigdogg, I could care less about what happens to obama. He can serve his four more years, then fade away into the sunset.
The thing that really bothers my is that a piece of shi..... like you can set there and call McCain a idiot. Is that the way you treat all people that spent years in a prison in the country we are fighting. I see by the picture you have inserted infront of you name is clinton. Did he give your wife a cigar? I could go on, but the bottom line is you are a disgrace to our nation.
Unreal,
Go up, then we'll talk.
U seem desperate.
Dream on! Obama will not be impeached, Bush,Cheney,and Rumsfeld were not, their lies about WMD and a war for profit did not do it so doubt Bengazi will either.
Keep in mind that is was Saddam Hussein HIMSELF who said that HE had "weapons of mass destruction" first and foremost........way before the war started......you guys always blame "George W. Bush" for that........we took Saddam at his word since you take someone seriously that first said he was going to invade his neighboring country Kuwait...........and then actually went through and did it. We had no reason to question his provocative comments regarding "WMD" after his invasion of Kuwait.....!
The liberal biased media always conveniently forgets to tell the people that........just to make "George W. Bush" look bad was their primary goal and we saw right through them as they fool no one.............this is one of the reasons why the people hate the national media from both sides of the aisle......they do not report the news, they report on what "they want you to think" because they view themselves as above the law and as the fourth branch of government!
Our national media sounds more like journalists from the Russian newspaper Pravda rather than American journalists.............
romancaesar the cia the u.n and iaec all said there were no WMD goggle it.
Sign in an INDIANA store front window
'WE WOULD RATHER DO BUSINESS WITH
PRESIDENT OBAMA, NANCY PELOSI, HARRY REID, AND ALL THE ELITES OF
CONGRESS, THE MASS MEDIA, AND HOLLYWOOD ,THAN WITH ONE CONSERVATIVE
AMERICAN!'
This sign was prominently displayed in
the window of a business in Whiting, Indiana. You are probably
outraged at the thought of such an inflammatory statement.
However, we are a society which holds
freedom of Speech as perhaps our greatest liberty.
And after all, it is just a sign.
You may ask what kind of business would
dare post such a Sign.
Answer:
" Owen's Funeral Home"
You gotta love it!!!
God Bless America
That is tooooooo funny!
When we lose the freedom to express our views, we lose the most important aspect of our society. And while this funeral guy seems to be wishing many liberals would die, I am sure he meant it to be a bit funny, and not threatening. Still, I could never use his services now that I know how he feels about me.
The sign was funny but I'm sure he'll lose business because he's angry he didn't get his 20% tax cut. Since his business is unlikely to grow more jobs just because he builds more caskets he doesn't deserve a break. Unless he's figuring on increasing his clientele.
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
Mark Twain
I am a democrat but that is funny Blue.