Obama's plan to hike taxes meets fierce opposition

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: Yahoo News

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's call to raise taxes on high earners and greenhouse gas polluters met fierce opposition Tuesday from congressional Republicans and also a few Democrats. "I would never want to adversely affect anything that is charitable or good," Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said of Obama's call to limit high-income taxpayers' itemized deductions for charitable donations and mortgage interest.

Republicans said the president's plan to charge fees to industries that spew greenhouse gases amounts to a stealthy tax increase for all Americans that will far exceed the new $400 annual tax cut for workers that he wants to extend beyond 2010.

"The president's budget increases taxes on every American, and does so during a recession," said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner argued that the Obama proposal would reduce taxes for most Americans. Any increases, he said, wouldn't occur until 2011, when the economy is "safely into recovery."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090303/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_taxes

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. ...from the wealthy.

:dunce:

[Demeter]

2. Too Bad! Soak the Rich

This is their deficit, not ours. We get nothing out of it, not jobs, not healthcare, not pensions, not education, not infrastructure, nothing!

[Optical.Catalyst]

6. Don't soak the Rich, just make them pay their fair share

First, they need to pay their share of the benefits of this country. They reap more of the benefits from the infrastructure of this country, therefore they should pay their share of the benefits they receive. Just as the Government provided transportation systems advance the rich, the rich should pay more for those systems.

Second, they got a free ride from the Bush Administration. Tax breaks only for the rich were unfair to the rest of us who still had to pay taxes. The rich should be taxed extra to make up for the deal they received from Chimpy.

Third, the excessive lifestyle of the rich is harming the environment. Their energy use and lavish living is drawing on what belongs to future generations. The rich should be taxed to even up this theft they are taking from the future.

Just don't soak the rich.

[tonysam]

7. Don't Soak Them,

just drown them. I am tired of indirectly supporting them.

[aquart]

23. Yep. Don't soak 'em. Bleed 'em.

Why waste water?

[Thothmes]

36. As far as environement impact is concerned

it seem to me that the middle class with their 200,000 homes in suburbia are a much more widespread and adverse impact on the environment than the 5,000,000 mansion in the Hamptons. There are considerably more of them spread out over the country. Should we tax them heavier because of that.

[damntexdem]

3. LOL! He's not 'hiking' taxes, he's calling for letting tax cuts lapse.

It will happen automatically if Congress doesn't extend the cuts. And even if a MAJORITY of both houses were to vote to extend the cuts, President Obama could veto such a stupid bill.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Go To 91% Top Tax Rate, Like Ike Did

The economy did just fine, and an average family could make it on a single salary.

[avaistheone1]

19. At least roll back the Reagan tax cuts on the rich.

Even with Obama's tax cuts the rich pay far too little taxes.

[tonysam]

5. Too Bad, So Sad.

Taxes should be raised back to 1950s levels, as far as I am concerned. The GOP and blue dog Democrats can bellyache all they want, but the only constituents they care about are their fat cat donors.

It makes me sick. The wealth HAS to be redistributed downward. A tiny number of people having the vast majority of the country's wealth is ruinous.

[AlbertCat]

8. I'm tired...

....of this fantasy world with no taxes that the GOP keeps promoting. It's as big an impossible myth as an entire world (or country) with just Christians (or Muslims for that matter)in it. I'm also sick of the meme that your taxes are YOUR money and that you get little in return for them. At any rate, you certainly get a lot more for your tax dollars under Dems than Repugs.

[llmart]

34. Hear, hear......

As someone who worked for a taxpayer funded, public entity (public library) do these anti-tax people realize that taxes also create jobs? Lots of jobs. Useful jobs serving the public. I'm sick of the Repuke anti-tax meme, too, and in my experience it was mostly the "Greatest Generation" who complained the most even though they built their lives on benefits supported by taxpayers.

[oldtime dfl_er]

9. Boo hoo hoo

eom

[Hannah Bell]

10. why wait until 2011? Rescind bush's tax cuts now. Top .05%'s share alone would redeem SS Trust Fund

over 10 years.

No one seems to have any money. But "someone" has some, & "someone" = the super-rich.

[Thothmes]

37. How will that money go into the SS trust fund

There is a cap on SS taxes at about $190.000 if I remember correctly. Rescind the Bush tax cuts will help the general fund, not the SS trust fund.

[CreekDog]

11. it's a mile deep but an inch wide

:eyes:

[Fire1]

12. Surprise! Surprise!

[maxsolomon]

13. FAIL:

"The president's budget increases taxes on every American, and does so during a recession," said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee.

Dave Camp, you're full of shit.

[depakid]

14. "Fierce" opposition from the American corporate media

not from the American people.

[Peace Patriot]

15. Always note the little "ap" in the url. AP = Associated Pukes.

They are martialling arguments here for their uber-rich and corporate monster bosses. They are a Republican 'news' service (shit spewer). They make me want to puke.

:puke:

As all the newspapers are downsized, looted and destroyed, all the real journalists are fired and American journalism goes down for the count, the toadies and asslickers at the Associated Pukes are vacuuming up more and more "newsspace" so that there is nothing left but their brainless blackholes where the news should be.

I hate them.

This shit posted above is typical. Don't mean to dis your post, Amerigo Vespucci. It's not your fault. We need to know how the enemy is framing their false narrative. And I don't mean just the assholes quoted in this 'news' story. I mean "ap" itself. They construct the false narrative ("fierce opposition"), then they go find the quotes from one corrupt politician or another.

Ask 95% of the people in this country what they think of the tax code. You'll hear some real ferocity if you do. They don't give a fuck what Charles Rangel and Dave Camp think. These are way, way, way tiny views of a way, way, way tiny minority--the uber-rich. Why do they highlight these views, rather than those of the millions and millions of Americans who have lost their jobs and lost their homes, and are still fucking getting taxed, while the urber-rich have paid little or nothing for years and years?

Why aren't they investigating these fuckwads--Rangel and Camp, not to mention Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld? They haven't the time of day for that! But stop tax cuts for the rich? Oh, they're on that. That's their program. That, and demonzing leftists in South America!

Remember: The small "ap" somewhere down in the url. One of the worst corporate 'news' monopolies on earth.

[No Elephants]

29. Agreed. AP pimps for Pubs. Sadly, it looks as though most our news may be coming

from AP, UPI and Reuters in th enot too distant future.

[Blue_Tires]

33. very true

as a former reporter (who actually loved his job for awhile), the current state of journalism makes me weep...

[Dumak]

16. Raise their taxes, and reduce their assets

These family empires are leeches and only harm America. We don't need the degrading servant jobs they provide. We don't need their ridiculous levels of consumption, without providing anything of value in return. We don't need their children, who only grow up to consume, consume, consume. And we don't need their contribution to the inflation of real estate. Buying multiple properties as an investment? Ban it. One residence per citizen. Good riddance to the wealthy. Please - just go away.

[Thothmes]

38. Right, we should do everything we can to wipe out

any wealth that Joe Kennedy made that was passed on to his heirs. They are a not entitled to a red cent. Lets make sure that George Soro's is reduced to a 1,500 sqft rancher and has to clean his own toilet. Heaven forbid that John Kerry makes more than minimum wage. Good ridance to the wealthy. Please- just go away.

[debannbull]

17. They're the "fierce 5%" - don't laugh at them or mock them!

Yes, they don't get much redder or insufferable than Camp.

[Pharaoh]

18. Let Them eat Cake!

Fuckheads! :party:


And then.................Off with their heads!

[bemildred]

20. We're fierce, we're plutocrats, and we're on the move!" nt

[ArcticFox]

21. Increase Taxes and End Corporate Advantages

Wealth needs to be taken out of hiding and distributed downward. Corporations, like vampires, never die, they just suck the blood from the living for all eternity.

We need to end corporate personhood (they can't be executed or go to jail, so why should they have a right to free speech?) and require their winding down (i.e., "death") at least as often as the average person's working life (on the order of 40 years).

While we're at it, we should outlaw ownership of real estate by non-human entities as well. This country would be a much better place if the people were in control again.

[Abq_Sarah]

22. The cap and trade provisions

Are a little worrisome. They will effect the prices on everything from fuel to food to consumer goods. My business can't afford a doubling or more of fuel bills. Cutting back on driving is not an option and I'm a little disgusted with idiots like Geithner who tell us we need to cut down on our energy use as if we were keeping all our homes hot enough to grow orchids in the winter. Furthermore, Geithner is the last person to lecture anyone on tax avoidance. I have always paid every cent I owned, no matter how much of a hassle it was to get the information together and no matter how much it financially hurt. At least it isn't illegal to take every available measure to avoid paying more taxes than necessary and I find it extremely troubling that members of President Obama's administration have conflated avoidance with evasion. Avoidance is when I use legal measures to make sure I only pay the taxes I am legally required to pay. Evasion is when you do not pay what you legally owe.

[christx30]

24. Don't you know?

You're supposed to pay everything you get a chance to pay.
It doesn't matter how much it hurts you, your clients, your family. You might have to pay 50 different kinds of tax. But if you avoid tax number 51, you are Satan. :sarcasm:

I find it very troubling that most of Obama's cabinet picks have been found out to have owed large amounts of tax. Ordinary Americans would have the IRS so far up their butt they would be coughing out calculators for 2 weeks. But as long as you are rich enough to be in high levels of government, it's just fine. But still... These are the people that say that we need to tighten our belts and give and give until it hurts. It already hurts a heck of a lot. I have two kids to feed. I've been turned down for assistance so many times I've given up. Lost my job in November and now I am trying to make it on $8 an hour, which is $6 less than what I was getting at my old job.
I fail to see how this stimulus is going to help my family in the least. All I see it doing is driving business away from the US. Just like U2 did (in Ireland) when their taxes were going to go up, more and more businesses are going to leave the US, leaving people like me with no way to support our families. I want to believe in Obama. I truely do. I voted for the man in the primary and in the general election. And before someone jumps on me and accuses me of being a freeper, let me see your paycheck stub, as well as receipts that show that along with your income taxes, 50% (or more) of your income went to helping other people. You wouldn't do that? You can't afford that? Now imagine if you didn't have a choice in giving to charity, and that you lost half of your earnings all the time, and that wasn't enough for people. You would get sick of it too and would find a way to avoid any unnecessary taxes. You would not simply bend over and take it all the time.

[No Elephants]

30. A lot of the people who owed tax were not in govt. when their debt to the IRS arose, though.

[high density]

25. I agree, Geithner's words have been concerning on this issue

I think individual businesses and homes will be the ones paying these cap and trade taxes. The power generators and other large industries that actually generate this pollution will just pass them on to us. It won't have the intended effect of getting these industrial polluters to change their ways.

[christx30]

26. You are exactly right

We raise the taxes on the businesses, then wonder why the prices for our goods and services are going up at a staggering rate?
It'll be the same when the carbon tax goes through. Gasoline will cost a lot more, as will heating fuel. The corps don't care. Taxes are just another cost of business. If the price for steel goes up, a company that makes auto parts that use steel will start charging more for the parts.
They are not going to be hurt by the tax. We are.

[harun]

27. I have heard a lot of people saying this but is there any truth to it?

[Abq_Sarah]

28. The increase in prices?

Oh, yes. President Obama and Peter Orszag admit this will cause energy prices to rise. The estimated "revenue" will be 112 billion dollars over the next three years and that will be paid by consumers in the form of higher prices. President Obama has been very consistent in this position over the last year. This was part of the reasoning behind the "making work pay" tax cut for workers. The $400.00 per year is supposed to take a little bit of sting out of the increased prices we will all be paying.

Personally, I think this would be disastrous to a fragile economy. It would be cheaper for the government to either retrofit coal fired plants with direct payments or tax credits than it would be for the consumers to pay the freight on this. If the goal is to reduce greenhouse gasses, isn't it in our best interest to mitigate the problem at the source rather than punish consumers with a hidden tax? This cap and trade program as it is being suggested will decrease the amount of money in consumer's pockets and that is going to harm businesses that depend on consumers having extra money to spend on non-essentials.

[harun]

31. I welcome the punishment. Has to be done if we are to make any progress on emissions.

[Abq_Sarah]

35. Perhaps you'd like to offer

All the employees who will be laid off a job at your business?

[Steerpike]

32. Well...

How are we supposed to bring down the national debt? Where is the money supposed come from if not from the wealthier taxpayers?