Will Obama really end tax cuts for rich in 2012?

[niceypoo]

By Greg Sargent

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/will_obama_make_good_on_vow_to.html

The fact that many liberals and Dems answer that question in the negative is perhaps the primary reason the White House is having so much trouble selling them on the tax cut deal. Obama has promised to do this, but libs and Dems just don't believe him.

Here's a case in point. As I reported earlier today, the White House is circulating a chart designed to prove that Obama and Dems got far more from the tax deal, despite extending the tax cuts for the rich. But now MoveOn, which is organizing against the tax deal, has responded with a chart of its own demonstrating the massive bonanza Republicans win over the next 10 years if you assume the tax cuts for the rich won't really be repealed in two years:



The serious point that this chart gets at is that liberals and Dems just don't believe the tax cuts for the rich will ever expire, no matter how firm Obama's vow to have this fight again in 2012. As Ben Smith put it today, the extension of the high end cuts constitutes "moving a structural shift in the American tax system toward permanence, while the other large measures are much more temporary."

...

[polichick]

1. He's more likely to run on them imo. nt

[emulatorloo]

10. DEC 10th OBAMA - tax cuts for rich don't create a single job

Dec. 10 on NPR

INSKEEP: Let me ask you about something that we heard from one of our listeners... The question that we got was: "Please ask him how keeping the tax rate for the richest the same as it has been for a decade creates one single job."

OBAMA: It doesn't, which is why I was opposed to it -- and I'm still opposed to it

[Clio the Leo]

20. What do tax cuts for the poor do? What about unemployment benefits?

Do those with more money in their pockets with Obama's deal invest it? ..... or do they buy food? Or clothes for their kids?

[niceypoo]

22. Tax cuts do nothing to stimulate

They are the least stimulative thing that can be done. Tax cuts as 'cure all' is what caused the whole mess we are in.

[Clio the Leo]

25. Did you speak out against the "making work pay" tax credit?

And perhaps more importantly, what would an DECREASE in take home pay and end to unemployment benefits do to consumer spending.

Im seriously interested to read any research you've done on the matter.

[niceypoo]

29. Tax cutting as fiscal policy is a failure

We cant afford them, the CBO says they do not stimulate. We are on the brink of default because of them.

The CBO says that ending all of the Bush tax cuts alone will balance the budget by 2014. It's a no brainer, all it takes is a little courage.

[emulatorloo]

26. Democrats have been arguing for years that Middle Class and below need tax relief

DU'ers are acting like Democrats have never been in favor of tax relief for the middle class . They have been talking about that for years and years. Middle Class and below actually spend their taxcuts and put it back into the economy.

[niceypoo]

30. The CBO say they do not stimulate

THe GOP say they do

[emulatorloo]

33. Do you have a link to that CBO report. Seriously I would like to read it.

[niceypoo]

37. Yes

Apparently they are not controlled by Rupert Murdoch or the Tea Partys, so they have the wherewithal to print FACTS! And if you look at their FACTS, they found that tax cuts are the LEAST stimulative thing you can do for the economy

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10803/01-14-Employment.pdf

The report from September is even more scything

[emulatorloo]

39. Thank you! I will take a look at that.

[niceypoo]

46. Better yet:

Look here: http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/collections.cfm?collect=12

This is the CBOs collection on economic stimulus.

[Clio the Leo]

34. Links are always nice. nt

[niceypoo]

38. Here ya go:

[Clio the Leo]

43. Hmmm...

The figure for unemployment aid looks interesting. As does reducing employee payroll taxes. Pity he didn't get THOSE in the deal.

Oh wait....

[catgirl]

71. How about unemployment benefits?

You seem to ignore that part of the deal.

[emulatorloo]

27. That's what democrats have been saying for years.

I think it is something all DU'ers used to agree on. Suddenly all that stuff is bad.

[Clio the Leo]

32. Boggles the mind doesn't it?

While I can totally understand the frustration with the upper class tax cuts, the notion that we seem to have adopted that it's WORTH killing a tax cut for the middle class (something we hardly cared about a month ago) to get rid of it is .... odd.

[GinaMaria]

48. You may find the answers you seek here

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf

On Page 4
Table 1: Fiscal Economic Bang for the Buck
One year $ change in real GDP for a given $ reduction in federal tax revenue or increase
in spending

Tax Cuts

Non-refundable lump-sum tax rebate 1.02
Refundable lump-sum tax rebate 1.26

Temporary tax cuts

payroll tax holiday 1.29
Across the board tax cut 1.03
Accelerated depreciation 0.27

Permanent tax cuts

Extend alternative minimum tax patch 0.48
Make Bush income tax cuts permanent 0.29
Make dividend and capital gains tax cuts permanent 0.37
Cut in corporate tax rate 0.30

Spending Increases

Extending UI benefits 1.64
Temporary increase in food stamps 1.73
General aid to state governments 1.36
Increased infrastructure spending 1.59

Permanent tax cuts are the worst for the economy and return .29 - .48 cents for every dollar cut.

The real stimulus is in spending, specifically 4 types, which yeild more than was paid out.

The tired old tax cut strategy is part of what made this economy so bad. More of the same isn't going to help us.

[ProudDad]

77. Ah, but that was "Candidate Obama"

pResident Obama has a different take on it...for public consumption...to lull the sheeple back to sleep...

[yourout]

2. +1....a big ass K&R.

[ellie]

3. No, of course he won't

[zipplewrath]

4. the GOP owns the house in 2012

I don't really see how they get rid of them in 2012. The GOP will be running the House and will never advance such a bill. The MIGHT get it through the senate, but I'm dubious. So what will end up on Obama's desk is a bill to extend them again, or he can veto them and they will all expire. The only way he chooses to do that is if the economy is doing REALLY well.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[niceypoo]

17. The GOP has been in charge since 2001

Fact

[whosinpower]

41. Ah - but if the economy is doing really well.....

The spin will be.....SEE? Tax cuts work. We will never jepardize the health of the economy.

And if the economy is not doing well - it will be...SEE? We can't afford to further endanger the health of the economy.

The reality of course is that in the course of 10 years of Bush tax cuts - the inequity between the rich and poor has grown to levels not seen since 1928. The reality is that tax cuts never did stimulate the economy or provide decent full time jobs for workers in America. The reality is that even if demand were to go up - the only jobs that would be created are the ones overseas.

[demmiblue]

5. No. n/t

[Crazy Dave]

7. I'm sure he will just as soon as....

We get that public option he campaigned on and when Gitmo closes and hell freezes over.

[rurallib]

15. bring up the music:

"promises. promises, all kinds of promises"

ya' hit the nail on the head, crazy dave.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

9. What a ridiculous chart

The tax cuts for the middle class, which aren't included at all, over 10 years are more than $2 trillion.


Why create a bogus chart that doesn't include the current middle-class tax cuts and make a comparison on specualation about simply continuing just the tax cuts for the rich?

Absurd.

[emulatorloo]

11. Yes - Tax cuts in this package cost $544.3 Billion. $463 billion of that is for the Middle Class cut

That chart is both a bunch of speculation and inaccurate. DU didn't used to fall for this kind of fast and loose manipulation and scaremongering.

[OhioBlue]

75. why create a bogus chart?

propaganda - moveon does it just the same as Republican think tanks or groups like Freedomworks. I'm glad MoveOn is there to counter the right-wing propaganda - but truly wish they would use more intellectual accuracy when publishing charts like this.

they're just pushing the left to get more pissed off about something that isn't even accurate. damn it. They should at least be accurate when debating stuff like this.

Edit to add: the way they frame it, some people will probably think that the tax cuts for the wealthiest have been extended for 10 years in this bill.

[Enrique]

12. I assumed he was joking when he said that

I thought I saw him wink.

[stray cat]

13. Flat tax no deductions - I bet it will be overhauled completely

[BlueIris]

14. Can't say I think he will.

But that could be because I have zero confidence in his ability to do anything he says he will.

[Divernan]

16. Obama's moving the goalposts. 2010, 2012, 2014, ad nauseum

The longer a "temporary" cut is in place, the less likely it will ever be removed. What I fully expect is that the GOP controlled Congress will act before 2012 to not only make the cut permanent, but to increase it.

[niceypoo]

18. Try in 13 months when the unemployment extension runs out

Obama will be blackmailed again in 13 months. This time the GOP will demand NEW tax cuts for the rich.

[subterranean]

65. Probably a permanent repeal of the estate tax too.

[Autumn]

19. No he won't n/t

[Clio the Leo]

21. The President apparently insisted on the cuts ending in '12 instead of '13....

... read into that what you will.

[niceypoo]

23. The 'Bush tax cuts' will be the central issue in 12?

How wrong is that?

[whosinpower]

42. They are the Obama tax cuts now.

He owns them now....bought and paid for by the guys who make less than 20 000/year.

[Still a Democrat]

24. The dead enders will love this chart

Numbers extrapolated, others omitted entirely.

[emulatorloo]

28. It is pretty blatant, isn't it?

I remember a DU that used to see through this kind of manipulative stuff.

[Still a Democrat]

31. Blind outrage

I doubt some read beyond the headline, let alone take a good look at the chart.

[emulatorloo]

36. It feeds a narrative that must be fed, I think, n/t

[BrklynLiberal]

45. Statistics can be made to say whatever you choose. My college STATS teacher told us that years ago.

As indicated by the dueling charts...Neither of them may be truly a accurate representation of the long term results.



http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/12/07/comparing-priorities/
For comparison’s sake, here is a chart detailing both the number of people (in millions) who benefit from each side’s priorities, as well as the total cost (in billions). Obama’s components of the tax deal (extended unemployment benefits, the payroll tax cut, and the extended credits) will cost $214 billion to aid 156 million people. The Republicans priorities (extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich and cutting the estate tax), meanwhile, will cost $133 billion, but only benefit roughly 4.8 million people.

xcluded from this analysis is extension of the broad-based Bush tax cuts, on which everyone agreed. The total package will cost about $900 billion over the next two years, entirely financed through deficit spending.

As CAPAF’s Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger noted, the various components of the tax deal (outside of the broad Bush tax cuts) will save or create about 2.2 million jobs. If, however, the GOP’s priorities were discarded in favor of further cuts in the payroll tax, that number would increase to 2.7 million, an addition of 500,000 jobs.

Of course, the lost revenue of the bonus tax cuts and the estate tax cut could also have gone towards reducing the deficit, which Republicans spend so much time complaining about, while simultaneously expanding by cutting taxes for the rich.

<snip>

[bowens43]

35. no. nt

[BrklynLiberal]

40. I would not hold my breath waiting for the tax cuts for the rich to disappear.

[BrklynLiberal]

44. That chart does not begin to show the long term tragedy that is going to ensue due to the

"foot-in-the-door" that has been provided for dismantling Social Security. That is thanks to that so-called Payroll Tax Holiday. The repukes are so far above the dems when it comes to messaging...they even gave Social Security's death knell an appealing name.

Once Social Security can be said to be no longer self-sustaining..an "insurance" that is paid into by the people, it will become just another government expense..an "entitlement" that the repukes will totally eliminate the first chance they get. The facts of the situation, that it DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE AT ALL THE DEFICIT..will never be mentioned.

Everything about this Tax Bill Capitulation is disgusting, but the Social Security part is what pisses me off the most.

WHY AREN'T ALL THE DEMS SCREAMING ABOUT THIS FROM THE ROOFTOPS?????????????????/

[whosinpower]

66. Obama doesn't want them to scream from the rooftops

That is why they are frantically selling it as a democrat gain, even though it was the GOP who put it on the table. They have already stated that.

[ProudDad]

78. Hell, OBAMA'S already calling Social Security an "Entitlement"!

Hear the death knell yet? :banghead:

[bvar22]

47. Nope...These are now PERMANENT....

And everybody in Washington KNOWS that.
It was easier to SELL this a "temporary", and there are enough fools more than happy to BUY that scam.
Nothing in the political environment will change over the next two years to make it possible to end the Bush/Obama Tax Cuts for the RICH.

Even MORE troubling is the "temporary" Payroll Tax "Holiday". :puke:
THIS is also PERMANENT.

Sat "Goodbye" to Social Security.

[harun]

49. Of course not.

[TheCowsCameHome]

50. This is a joke, right?

No way will he fight.

[Sheepshank]

51. I'm pretty sure I could make just an impressive and serious 'what if' chart

what is the point of posting this?

Attempting to read tea leaves, and getting outraged over a prediction that has no substance, is quite silly imho.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. what is the point of posting this?

To portray the president as a liar.

[Sheepshank]

60. the article is patently false...the op is misleading

to the point about lying that Obama is a liar proves what? a fucking waste of time...unless of course there was another reason. What was the point of posting a lie as if it were a truth?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. He Will Run On Repealing The Tax Cuts For The Rich

If the economy improves he will be reelected. If the economy doesn't improve he won't.

The 012 election will not be a referendum on tax cuts but the health of the economy.

[whosinpower]

67. Not a hells chance

These are the Obama cuts now. He owns them. He is going to run against his own policy?!?
That is beyond daft.

[mix]

54. k&r nt

[closeupready]

55. Of course not. They will continue extending it.

Republicans will come up with some way to hold something important hostage until they get their tax cuts. By now, this should be entirely predictable to anyone who's been paying attention.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

56. Sure he will.

When monekeys fly out of my butt.

Unless the Senate rules are changed dramatically before them, there isn't a chance in hell they will be ended. And even then, I am not sure he would be willing to end them, especially if we are still in a financial shitter (which I think we will be).

[JamesA1102]

57. Dishonest chart

It projects "what they got" over 10 years not two. This is more honest.

[mtnsnake]

61. No it's not

Always think in the long term, not the short. Maybe we wouldn't go bankrupt so often. :)

[JamesA1102]

69. That's just spin

You people have no shame. You're as bad as FOX.

[TheKentuckian]

72. Why are you selling a payroll tax holiday that we despise, capital investment write offs not tied to

American jobs and investment, and a shitload of taxes for the top 20% or so as Democratic objectives?

[JamesA1102]

81. I'm not selling anything

The chart was done by Erza Klein of the Washington Post who has more credibility on these matters than anyone here.

[TheKentuckian]

82. Not on long term political and ideological goals

We've been fighting the Republican calls for a "payroll tax holiday" since Ezra was in diapers.

Nor have we been obsessed with tax cuts for top income earners outside of the top 2% but certainly in the top 20%.

Nor is it "in the blood" to be demanding a 100 billion dollars so that the corporations can write off capital investment in China.

Maybe Ezra was brought up by the DLC and has our aims distorted.

[JamesA1102]

86. That's the point Ezra is not being ideological

Which gives him a lot more credibility.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hulka38]

58. It depends on how often you ride in a turnip truck. n/t

[skepticscott]

59. These cuts are as permanent as

the Social Security payroll tax "holiday". Does any sane person think that worker's SS tax will just pop back up to 6.2% a year from now? In the middle of an election cycle? In the middle of a recession?

Let's face it...it will NEVER be in the best short-term interest of the economy to raise these taxes again, and every politician worth their earmarks know that you cannot get re-elected by providing long-term stability in exchange for short-term hardship.

[dflprincess]

62. They should really put the payroll tax holiday in the "what they got" column

because it will be used to undermine Social Security. A goal the Republicans and "new Democrats"/DLC have had for a long time.

[subterranean]

63. Obama has NOT promised to end the tax cuts after 2012.

He said he would "fight" to end the tax cuts for the rich after 2012, even though he could end them by just doing nothing and letting them expire. He said he "can confidently say" that he would not extend the tax cuts beyond the next two years. But he has very consciously avoided saying unequivocally that he will not extend them again in 2012 (and if anyone can prove otherwise, please let me know). Pay attention to his exact words. He is leaving the door open for another capitulation.

[ProudDad]

80. Gee, he could have begun fighting against them in 2009...

AWOL...

[egoclothes]

64. I rather doubt that.

[Exilednight]

68. No, and this may be one of the reasons he might lose re-election. If unemployment stays ..........

hovering around 10% and he capitulates on tax cuts, again, he will lose worst than Carter did in 1980.

[Hippo_Tron]

70. If the country is ever on the brink of going into default we're going to have to tax them eventually

My biggest concern isn't the fact that we just extended rich peoples' tax cuts which will expand the deficit. My biggest concern is the fact that the new Republican House isn't going to spend a dime to stimulate this horrendous economy whether we tax rich people or not.

[sad sally]

83. Nailed it! The new Republican House majority will hold up any/all

spending on those American children the incoming speaker cries over. Almost all States are in deep deep financial trouble, and I seriously doubt the new majority will care whether schools close, kids are hungry or people are sleeping on the streets, or if unemployment is unchanged. Heard their plan is to make unemployement benefits loans instead of insurance.

President Obama's tax cuts for the wealthy will be permanent; however, I'm not that sure the same will apply to his tax cuts for the middle class. As for taking up the cause to end them all, may happen in late Oct. 2012, just before the November elections, so obviously there won't be time to do anything.

Call me a pessimist - have lost faith in all branches of government, 'specially since corporations bought and own them.

[WiffenPoof]

73. I Don't Know...

...Do you have any indication from the past that tells you he will?

-PLA

[Warren Stupidity]

74. no

[ProudDad]

76. Not a chance in hell! They will either be extended or made permanent in 2012/2013

And those charts are incorrect...

On the "What the pResident got" side are two items -- Equipment Expensing and the "Payroll Tax Holiday"

Equipment Expensing is a gift to Big Business and...

The "Payroll Tax Holiday" is, to paraphrase Mr. William J. Clinton, "the beginning of the end of Social Security as We Know It..."

And both are republican WINS!

So the ACTUAL totals should be:

pResident: $104 Billion
Republicans: $832 Billion

and I'm not sure about "alternative energy"...it depends on how much of that is for Nuclear!

[subterranean]

84. Part of "alternative energy" is ethanol subsidies.

That's a Chuck Grassley earmark, so it belongs in the red column.

[ProudDad]

85. That's right!

Thanks for the reminder! :hi:

So it's;

Repuke: $835 Billion
Dems: $101 Billion...

Pretty good deal, eh?


I Do know that there's $8 billion in nuclear subsidies in that Omnibus spending bill (that I guess didn't pass)...

[slackmaster]

87. Congress makes laws in this country

It's up to Congress to change the tax structure.