What remains unchanged or has worsened under Obama?

[hfojvt]

65. those New York Times people sure are not very good at math

the fiscal cliff deal "a victory that holds risks".

It goes wrong when it calls permanent tax cuts for the rich "substantial tax increases on the rich".

Here's a more accurate article

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=journals&uid=157743&year=2013&month=1

The first one shows that the betrayal (err, the "deal&quot was NOT a tax increase, it was a tax CUT

http://ctj.org/pdf/fiscalcliffdealrevenueimpacts.pdf

If all of the Bush tax cuts got extended that would have been a tax cut of $3.9 trillion.

Since only 85% of the Bush tax cuts were extended it means a tax cut of $3.3 trillion. Add to that the $369 billion in estate tax cuts which the White House is calling an increase in the estate tax. The total is $3.7 trillion in tax cuts.

Okay, fine, but how is the $3.7 trillion in tax CUTS divided up.

That is in the next report http://ctj.org/pdf/bidenmcconnelldistribution.pdf Read it and weep.

The bottom 60% gets just 19% of the tax cut.
The same amount as the richest 1% gets.
The top 20% gets 65% of the tax cut - $2.4 trillion over ten years.

Say hello to more income inequality. $2.4 trillion in tax cuts for the top 20%. $700 billion in tax cuts for the bottom 60%. Plus $124 billion in recovery act credit provisions. Is still only $800 billion for the bottom 60%


Taking tax cuts that would automatically expire and making most of them permanent is NOT a tax increase on anybody. It is what it is - a permanent tax cut compared to the old and better reality when the tax cuts were going to die. But some pusillanimous a$$holes would not let them.

And they've got morons and liars at the NY Times to paint that betrayal as a "victory".