Is Obama Backing Off Tax Hike Pledge?

[guido911]

It seems the "rich", whoever that is, will get a brief tax reprieve:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20081123/NEWS-US-USA-OBAMA-TAXES/

[we vs us]

The "rich" would be those in the top income bracket.  These would be the people that Bush decided needed the extra tax cuts way back in 2000-something.  Obama will simply let those cuts expire in 2010.  

Why?  We're in the worst recesson since the Great Depression.  Probably not a good time to do anything like belt-tightening.  

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The "rich" would be those in the top income bracket.  These would be the people that Bush decided needed the extra tax cuts way back in 2000-something.  Obama will simply let those cuts expire in 2010.  

Why?  We're in the worst recesson since the Great Depression.  Probably not a good time to do anything like belt-tightening.  

I understand your first point. Maybe I am just tired, but I do not understand your second point. Do you support the idea of holding off on letting the tax cuts expire?

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The "rich" would be those in the top income bracket.  These would be the people that Bush decided needed the extra tax cuts way back in 2000-something.  Obama will simply let those cuts expire in 2010.  

Why?  We're in the worst recesson since the Great Depression.  Probably not a good time to do anything like belt-tightening.  

I understand your first point. Maybe I am just tired, but I do not understand your second point. Do you support the idea of holding off on letting the tax cuts expire?

I think it proves two things about Obama:  1) he's willing be flexible based on the very fluid situation our economy is in -- and based on the fact that he won't be president for another 50 something days, and in that time anything can happen, and 2) I personally think he's making the right call.

"Belt-tightening" referred to rescinding the tax cuts on the upper income brackets. It's probably not the time for that. We're in a situation that's unprecedented for a variety of reasons, and anything that knocks consumers any farther off their game is probably a bad thing.  This would include "the rich," as well.

PS, I think you're going to end up liking Obama a lot more than you think you will.  He's a real pragmatist and is making consistent choices that simultaneously make the progressive wing of the party froth while showing that he's committed to putting Lincoln's  whole "team of rivals" to the test.  He's really trying to find the center, and you can gauge that by just how pissed a lot of the webroots folks are.  And take it from me, a lot of them are pissed.

[Red Arrow]

I didn't vote for Obama but the man's no dummy. If he stays just a little left of center (instead of way left) he will probably get a lot of support from people that didn't expect to support him.

[RecycleMichael]

Accept what you cannot change...especially in large denominations.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The "rich" would be those in the top income bracket.  These would be the people that Bush decided needed the extra tax cuts way back in 2000-something.  Obama will simply let those cuts expire in 2010.  

Why?  We're in the worst recesson since the Great Depression.  Probably not a good time to do anything like belt-tightening.  

I understand your first point. Maybe I am just tired, but I do not understand your second point. Do you support the idea of holding off on letting the tax cuts expire?

I think it proves two things about Obama:  1) he's willing be flexible based on the very fluid situation our economy is in -- and based on the fact that he won't be president for another 50 something days, and in that time anything can happen, and 2) I personally think he's making the right call.

"Belt-tightening" referred to rescinding the tax cuts on the upper income brackets. It's probably not the time for that. We're in a situation that's unprecedented for a variety of reasons, and anything that knocks consumers any farther off their game is probably a bad thing.  This would include "the rich," as well.

PS, I think you're going to end up liking Obama a lot more than you think you will.  He's a real pragmatist and is making consistent choices that simultaneously make the progressive wing of the party froth while showing that he's committed to putting Lincoln's  whole "team of rivals" to the test.  He's really trying to find the center, and you can gauge that by just how pissed a lot of the webroots folks are.  And take it from me, a lot of them are pissed.

I hate his position on abortion. That will never change. As I have said previously, I am willing to hear him out on health care.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

The "rich" would be those in the top income bracket.  These would be the people that Bush decided needed the extra tax cuts way back in 2000-something.  Obama will simply let those cuts expire in 2010.  

Why?  We're in the worst recesson since the Great Depression.  Probably not a good time to do anything like belt-tightening.  

I understand your first point. Maybe I am just tired, but I do not understand your second point. Do you support the idea of holding off on letting the tax cuts expire?

I think it proves two things about Obama:  1) he's willing be flexible based on the very fluid situation our economy is in -- and based on the fact that he won't be president for another 50 something days, and in that time anything can happen, and 2) I personally think he's making the right call.

"Belt-tightening" referred to rescinding the tax cuts on the upper income brackets. It's probably not the time for that. We're in a situation that's unprecedented for a variety of reasons, and anything that knocks consumers any farther off their game is probably a bad thing.  This would include "the rich," as well.

PS, I think you're going to end up liking Obama a lot more than you think you will.  He's a real pragmatist and is making consistent choices that simultaneously make the progressive wing of the party froth while showing that he's committed to putting Lincoln's  whole "team of rivals" to the test.  He's really trying to find the center, and you can gauge that by just how pissed a lot of the webroots folks are.  And take it from me, a lot of them are pissed.

I hate his position on abortion. That will never change. As I have said previously, I am willing to hear him out on health care.

I didn't say you had to marry the guy.  I'm just saying he might be more palatable than you think.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Accept what you cannot change...especially in large denominations.

Wait a minute... I thought this was all about change.  Now you tell me to accept what I cannot change?

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

I hate his position on abortion.....

That explains quite a bit about you, Gweed.  I understand now.

[8D]

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

I hate his position on abortion.

Then don't get one.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

quote:Originally posted by guido911

I hate his position on abortion.

Then don't get one.

Who farted in here?

[cannon_fodder]

I actually think we need to loosen our abortion laws to allow retroactive abortion up to age 20 or so.  

Per taxes... I have three points:

1) Don't tax more than is needed, but tax as much as is needed.  Keep government as small as possible and spending to the minimum.  But when you spend it, you must pay for it.

2) Progressive taxation is valid only to the extent it protects people from becoming a ward of the state.  Taxing "really rich" people more than "rich" people more than "middle class" people makes no real sense.  Don't tax Joe the Garbage man so much it will preclude him from feeding his family, but if paying a full share of taxes stops Joe the Plumber from buying a new boat or Joe the Accountant from getting an HDTV the argument does not hold.

3) The entire system sucks.  Scrap it and start over with a value-added/national sales tax/fair tax system. It would be more progressive than currently, but geared to progressively tax consumption not earning.  Encourage earning, tax consumption.

Frankly, when a CPA, a tax attorney, and the government all go to dispute a tax problem and no one really knows what the rule is... something is wrong.  Hell, when I can't call in to my government and get a straight answer to a simple tax question. For that matter, when, as an educated citizen, I can't figure it out my damn self... something is wrong.

Scrap the system.  Start over (but think of all the jobs that would be lost.  We need to get a crappy system to ensure unneeded jobs.  The same reason I want to outlaw the cotton gin).