Another Perspective on The Tax Cut Fiasco......

[Trey9007]

Did Obama cave, or did he provide political cover for every Dem in Congress? And maybe even some Republicans...

I think its safe to say that the GOP was not going to cave on the tax cuts for the rich, and if you were going to make a 'deal', its better for Dems to have done a deal in this Congress, and not the next Congress... Yeah, the Dems could have used this fight to paint the GOP in a negative way. The headlines would have great to see. Plenty of high-fiving would have been seen here and across the blogosphere. But, in the end, we would have had an across the table tax increase, and an end to Federal UE extensions, all to have occurred in a Dem controlled Congress.

The fact is, we are nowhere near election time, so negative GOP headlines at this point of the game are pretty useless, politically. 2 years from now, all people will remember is that taxes went up, and that their taxes went up when the Dems controlled the Congress and the Whitehouse. Also, it only takes one Repuke to kill the deal, and we all know there are certain Red states and certain Red Congressional districts, where certain Congressmen would have the FULL support of their constituents to kill any bill that did not contain tax cuts for the wealthy.

Obama making this deal has, IMO, made it much easier for other Dems to do something not that was not very popular with their base, including myself. But was something that probably had to be done. All you hear in the news, and see on the internet is 'The Obama tax deal' and things like that. Obama is the Dem taking the hit for this thing, and Im starting to think this was all by design.

Obama has the best poll numbers of all Dems in Washington. Obama has the highest poll numbers of all politician in Washington. It is because of this, I think this was designed for Obama to take the hit that most Dems, and even some Repukes, couldn't/wouldn't take. So maybe the person we are calling weak, just took a hit that only the strongest of politicians could take.

Just my opinion. Now go ahead and chop it up...lol.....

[TBF]

1. Yes, we are well aware that this is the meme this week.

Talk to us about the payroll tax holiday, tell us how that helps social security... If we are going to engage in magical thinking we may as well have a field day.

[elias49]

2. Meme of the week? In your mind maybe. nt

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[Trey9007]

12. What are you implying here....

[Trey9007]

3. Correct me if Im wrong...

But isn't the tax holiday only for one year, paid for, and does not require an act of Congress to restore the current rate after the holiday?

[TBF]

4. Paid for out of general funds - which puts Social Security out there on the blocks

to be cut along with every other program. There is no good reason to do this - it was pushed by the republicans because they want to turn social security over to wall street (for the profit potential). Just like everything else with capitalism. A good thing for the very wealthy maybe, but folks are going to wake up and realize that we're gutting one of the best programs this government has ever had (not to mention the many years of paying in & how those of us under 50 will likely lose all those contributions).

[Trey9007]

7. Im not undesrtanding...

Yes, its paid for out of general funds for ONE year. After the holiday it does not take any legislation to restore the current rate. In reality SS is no more on the blocks than it usually is.

[TBF]

10. Yup, just like the original tax cuts. "Oh they'll just expire". Right. nt

[hfojvt]

8. well it was push by Republicans for another reason

It is their favorite type of tax cut. The more you make, the larger your cut is. People making over $90,000 a year get a much bigger check than people making under $20,000 who get a tax increase because the payroll tax cut replaces the original Obama credit of $400.

[TBF]

9. that is true as well. nt

[Trey9007]

14. Thats the truth about most tax cuts......BUT...

SS is a little different because it is only paid up to, about the first 120K of income. I cant remember the actual number. But after you make 120K or so, you dont have SS deducted from your earnings. So this tax cut actually does VERY little for the very rich.

If you earn $1m a year and only pay SS tax on your first $120K, this tax cut does VERY little for you. However, if yo earn $50K a year this tax cut does alot. This tax cut does MUCH more for the middle class, than it does the rich. If you were going to target a tax cut to the middle class, this is actually the taxt book way of doing it.

[hfojvt]

19. no, it does not have to be true for any tax cuts

but many tax cuts are designed to benefit the rich.

This one, does much more for the rich, than it does for the middle class. So, it stops at $106,000. As Obama said in the campaign, only 6% of workers make more than $106,000 a year. About 50% of the country makes less than $50,000 a year. So they get less than $1000 from this cut. You say it does very little for the rich, but in fact it does more than twice as much for the rich as it does for the middle class. $2000 (or more) for them, and less than $1000 for us. Just compare it to what it replaced http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/135

Less than $6 billion of the payroll tax cut will goto households making less than $20,000 a year. And there are 22 million such households. On the other side, AT LEAST $14.5 billion will goto households making over $150,000 a year. And there are only 6.6 million of those households. Another $18 billion at a minimum is going to households making over $80,000 a year.

Those are underestimates too, because of the 1.7 million households making over $250,000 a year, I do not know how many people are working, nor what they are making. If each spouse makes over $106,000 then they get the maximum amount of $4,200. With over 12% of the benefits going to the top 6% I don't consider that to be a big boon for the middle class. And it certainly benefits the UPPER middle class more than it benefits the lower middle class.

[katnapped]

6. "Only for one year"

Oh right, just like those tax cuts were "only for ten years"

[Trey9007]

11. You're right.....

However, there are some differences. This POTUS will still be the POTUS when the tax holiday expires. So there is some accountability.

[awoke_in_2003]

16. yeah, just like bush's tax cuts...

so yeah, the tax holiday will be extended, too, because we cannot give the republicans ammo against us. We have to keep our fucking powder dry, doncha know.

[Trey9007]

17. But unlike the Bush tax cuts.............

When they expire this POTUS could still hold the veto pen. Bush passed this responibily to the next president. Under no circumstance was Bsh going to be Presient 10yrs after he passed those tax cuts.

[awoke_in_2003]

18. "could still hold the veto pen"...

you think he will veto it? Puff puff pass.

[niceypoo]

13. The right wasn't going to 'cave'?

Cave on what strength? They are the minority, all Obama had to do was let them expire. Doing so would balance the budget by 2014, but it would have taken courage.

[Trey9007]

15. You're only looking at one aspect of the argument.....

Letting them expire sonds great. But all the revenue you would get from the tax increase could be off-set by the millions added to welfare programs. Remember, UE extensions and other middle class tax breaks were tied to this bill. If someone earns $700 month, and have $675 month in bills, there is a very fine line that could be crossed if someone saw an increase in taxes.