$$$ Breakdown of Tax Bill

[Still a Democrat]

Cost of keeping tax rates for the middle and lower income groups: $127 billion

Cost to retain the top two income tax rates Obama originally opposed: $61 billion

Keeps capital gains and dividends taxed at a top rate of 15 percent. Obama and Democrats had sought a 20 percent top rate. Cost: $54 billion

Repeals certain limitations on deductions for high-earning individuals. Cost: $21 billion

Extends a $2,500 annual college tax credit, favored by Obama, for two years. Cost: $18 billion

Extends a $1,000 child tax credit, which phases out at higher incomes, for two years. Cost: $72 billion

Boosts earned income tax credit, which benefits low-earning working individuals. Cost: $12 billion

Obama conceded to Republican demands on the estate tax Cost: $68 billion

The bill extends long-term unemployment insurance for 13 months Cost: $57 billion

Amends the alternative minimum tax by indexing it to inflation Cost: $137 billion

Lets businesses of all sizes write off investments faster in 2011 Cost: $21 billion

The bill lowers the payroll tax rate for workers to 4.2 percent for one year Cost: $111 billion

Tax credits for ethanol Cost:$7 billion

Research and development tax credit Cost: $13 billion

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BG3CJ20101217

[earthside]

1. Hurrah for us!

Screw you, grandchildren.

[MH1]

2. Unless your grandkid is trying to figure out how to pay for college.

I guess that 2500 credit will come in handy.

Or if your grandkid's parents need that unemployment check to feed him/her.

Lots of scenarios. Some the grandkids make out better with this bill, some they don't. I think the latter bucket is those who are doing a-ok now.

[T Wolf]

3. By the time your grandkids go to college - IF they can, that $2,500 will pay for books for one term.

[MH1]

4. You have no idea how old I am, or my kids or grandkids.

But thanks for thinking I'm a youngster!

[supertruck97]

5. Here's the thing

I am still at a loss over how this is a cost...

It's not a COST. It's simply NOT a raise in everyone's taxes.

The nomenclature the media and others have been using is akin to yous boss coming up to you and saying:

I WAS going to cut your salary from $35k to $30K, but I decided not to. Because of that, you COST me $5k this year and you should feel bad about it.

This was not a tax cut AT ALL. It was simply not a tax hike for anyone.

[Yupster]

6. It's because of a scam congress pulls

The president is complicit of course.

Congress passes Bush's tax cuts with an expiration date. That way the budget doesn't look too bad because magically 10 years from passing hundreds of billions will show up in extra taxes. The scam part is he hopes the tax doesn't go up. If they don't, then all those budget projections are hopelessly optimistic.

In the same way, the health care bill is funded by $ 500 billion in medicare cuts. That makes the budget look doable. Are those cuts going to actually happen? Of course not. So those projections will be hopelessly optimistic.

The budget assumes millions of American families will pay the alternative minimum tax each year. Do they? Of course not. Congress "fixes" the problem each year and wipes out that revenue. But the next year's budget will project that extra revenue again making the budget look better only to have congress "fix" the problem again next year.

Years ago congress voted to reduce payments to doctors by a little bit each year. Over time that is a huge boon to the budget. The problem is that the reductions got to the point where doctors are screaming so for the last 5-10 years, every year congress votes to do the "doctor fix" where it cancels the cut to the doctors, but only for one year. That leaves next year's budget projecting a huge cut to the budget saving the taxpayers a hundred billion dollars. Problem is everyone knows that $ 100 billion won't happen. Congress will vote in another "doctor fix" like it does every year.

You don't get a trillion dollar defecit easily. It's been dishonest accounting by congress, both parties for decades. If any company ran their books this way, they'd have their CFO in handcuffs.

[rucky]

7. Call it what you want. It still leads you to the same place:

A budget shortfall that leaves us with less money to:

Pay down the debt, or at least prevent more heavy borrowing.
Support social programs needed to control rising poverty.
Pay for programs that actually create jobs.
Support agencies that enforce regulations currently on the books.
Pay for the wars, since the Defense budget will never be touched.

If any of these tax breaks actually created jobs, we wouldn't have as much of a problem about it. But not only do they not create jobs, they have alot to do with the 10-year net loss of jobs created that coincide with the tax cuts first being enacted.

We need reform. We need people benefitting in a poor economy to start making sacrifices needed for recovery, so we can have the resources to fix it for the rest of us. Instead we're continuing the sickness and calling it a remedy.

If we're paying for it, and it's not a benefit to the greater good, I'm calling it a cost.