• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
GreatMisdirect said:
Question: Does anyone here actually agree with the wars we're currently fighting? Talk about spending cuts, that'd save us a bunch of cash.

Truth of the matter here is that entitlements are sucking us dry and can't last forever, regardless of what X politician tells us (except for Ron Paul, just about). We have to cut eventually, as we're on an unsustainable path.

But yeah, raising taxes, I believe, would do pretty much nothing. Raising taxes takes away that much more money from individuals and businesses, making it more difficult to put back into the economy. 70,000+ pages in tax code don't help, either.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's incorrect. Spending cuts tend to always come back with lower benefits than suggested (i.e. - if we cut this, we'll save $48 billion - and then it turns out to be more like $18 billion). Tax hikes tend to come in much closer or over estimates (the Clinton tax hikes brought in MUCH more revenue than originally estimated).

If the Bush tax cuts were to expire in 2012, it would mean $3.8 TRILLION in government revenue over the next decade (and that would mean higher rates than in Obama's current proposal). And this is according to the WSJ and one of the conservative columnists in the NYT today.

If you were to spend that increased revenue on REAL infrastructure improvements (better electrical grid, improved highways, railways and bridges) - you would also create hundreds of thousands of jobs and fix the economy.
 
Let him keep it up. He's just guaranteeing he won't get reelected.
 
SPC said:
Let him keep it up. He's just guaranteeing he won't get reelected.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure, if it comes down to people losing their Medicare and SS or tax hikes for the rich, he will play that populist card like a ****ing fiddle.

He's not as stupid as you think.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Don't be so sure, if it comes down to people losing their Medicare and SS or tax hikes for the rich, he will play that populist card like a ****ing fiddle.

He's not as stupid as you think.
Click to expand...

That's very debatable.
 
Guy Incognito said:
They're not stupid, just Machiavellian.
Click to expand...
Or more like Pyrrhic.
apdst said:
It's amazing to hear Leftists compare Conservatives to Machiavelli. Plumb amazing!
Click to expand...

Maybe you meant Plum amazing but at any rate, I don't have an answer for why Republican congressmen are doing this. They certainly must know it isn't in their interest --unless there's some black market deals we don't know about.
Certainly they must know by now that if it comes down to the wire and expenditures are doled out piece meal, who is going to do the doling?
 
Your Star said:
Compromise is a two way street, we have to raise taxes to solve the deficit. Period.
Click to expand...
LOL. No we don't. I hope the Republicans do nothing. No deal. No compromise. If the one term Marxist president Obama wants to compromise then I say we let him. But we should not.
 
Thunder said:
closing tax loopholes is not a tax-hike.
Click to expand...
Lies! or if you prefer, propaganda of the left. Of course changing the tax laws to eliminate deductions is a tax increase.

a tax-hike is where the tax-rate is increased for certain income levels.[/QUOTE]
That is a great example. But it is not the only way to increase taxes. Do not buy their lies. Do not accept their propaganda.
 
Salty said:
Or more like Pyrrhic.


Maybe you meant Plum amazing but at any rate, I don't have an answer for why Republican congressmen are doing this. They certainly must know it isn't in their interest --unless there's some black market deals we don't know about.
Certainly they must know by now that if it comes down to the wire and expenditures are doled out piece meal, who is going to do the doling?
Click to expand...

The reason they are opposing tax hikes, is because they know that the reason they gained the majority in The House, is because the People wanted them to oppose tax hikes.
 
So do you guys think Misterveritis will continue to refer to Obama as 'the one-term president Obama' throughout his second term?
 
Swizz said:
So do you guys think Misterveritis will continue to refer to Obama as 'the one-term president Obama' throughout his second term?
Click to expand...

Probably. My guess, anyway.
 
apdst said:
If they move their operations out of U.S. territorial waters, all together and go to a country with fewer over-reaching regulations and out of control taxes, what have you accomplished? Because, if that happens, you've done nothing but screw the United States out of jobs and tax revenue.

Ultimately, what sense does it make to tax a business on money that it re-invests? That's idiotic, to begin with.
Click to expand...

many on the left think corporations' first duty is to pay taxes and provide jobs and they also engage in the moronic belief that its wrong for a corporation to move when a government squeezes more and more out of it
 
Swizz said:
So do you guys think Misterveritis will continue to refer to Obama as 'the one-term president Obama' throughout his second term?
Click to expand...

Only if Obama is elected to a second term, which is very doubtful.

Not that it has anything to do with the topic.
 
TurtleDude said:
many on the left think corporations' first duty is to pay taxes and provide jobs and they also engage in the moronic belief that its wrong for a corporation to move when a government squeezes more and more out of it
Click to expand...

It's all about the bull**** notion that corporations have some kind of social responsibility.
 
apdst said:
In a classical sense, yes. In terms of modern Progressivism, no.

One needs to learn the difference between Classical Liberalism and Progressivism. They are two very different things.
Click to expand...
left wing american "liberalism" is better deemed reactionary parasitic statism
 
cpwill said:
on the upside at least, good on Republican Leadership for getting the memo:


House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) today reiterated his party’s opposition to tax increases in a deal to raise the debt ceiling, arguing it would constitute a violation of the “Pledge to America” that Republicans successfully ran on to win control of the House in 2010.

“Our members did not come here to raise taxes,” Cantor said. “We’re not asking the president to violate his pledges to the American people, and we wish he wouldn’t ask us to do so.”...


Boehner: Tax Hikes Never on the Table

...Boehner reiterated his position that the debt ceiling “must be raised,” and praised President Obama for “making that case” at a press conference earlier in the day. Tax increases, however, could not realistically be part of the solution. “The American people will not accept, and the House cannot pass, a bill that raises taxes on job creators,” he said. “The House can only pass a debt limit bill that includes spending cuts larger than the hike in the debt limit, as well as real restraints on future spending.”...
Click to expand...

So in order to save the super rich some money by obstructing the removal of loopholes, the Republicans are saviors. Where as Obama is wrong because in an era of extreme spending and deficit where we may actually have to start paying for the friviolous spending of our government, raising taxes and cutting spending is unreasonable? I think it's kinda sick to hold the entire economy and most of America hostage to protect an elite class taking advantages of tax loopholes. But whatever.
 
Thunder said:
ok, important question: will this deal that they are working on mandate spending for whomever is President for the next 10 years?

how can they tell Congress or the President in 5 years, 8 years, 10 years, how to spend money?

I don't get it.
Click to expand...
How about a balanced budget amendment?
How about requiring a 2/3rds supermajority to raise taxes?
How about an amendment that requires the Congress to affirm that their spending is in support of a Constitutionally enumerated power?
 
apdst said:
It's all about the bull**** notion that corporations have some kind of social responsibility.
Click to expand...

faith based emotobabble substituting for economic reality
 
apdst said:
It's all about the bull**** notion that corporations have some kind of social responsibility.
Click to expand...

They don't have any real social responsibility. But they also don't have rights. Only individuals possess rights.
 
Misterveritis said:
How about a balanced budget amendment?
How about requiring a 2/3rds supermajority to raise taxes?
How about an amendment that requires the Congress to affirm that their spending is in support of a Constitutionally enumerated power?
Click to expand...

constitution? they don't need no stinkin constitution!!. remember the general welfare clause means whatever those clowns want, they get
 
Boo Radley said:
Giving you everything you want with nothing in return is not compromise. To anyone not looking through ideological colored classes, Obama is right here.
Click to expand...
And hopefully he will be there alone come August 2nd.

He created this mess. Let him figure out where to cut.
 
Thunder said:
indeed, demanding ONLY spending cuts and NO tax-increases, doesn't suggest you are willing to compromise much.
Click to expand...
All Speaker Boehner has to do is walk away. Then there will be no tax increases and the one term Marxist president Obama will have to figure out where to cut his spending. I hope he will roll back the size of government to pre-Obama levels.
 
Misterveritis said:
And hopefully he will be there alone come August 2nd.

He created this mess. Let him figure out where to cut.
Click to expand...

HE created this mess? Obama may just be another Bush clone, but the mess didn't start with him, he just went on precedent from government and made things worse. The Republocrats got us into this mess, it's high time the lot of them do their god damned job. Quit pandering to some elite class of douchebags and do what's right by the American people.
 
Misterveritis said:
All Speaker Boehner has to do is walk away. Then there will be no tax increases and the one term Marxist president Obama will have to figure out where to cut his spending. I hope he will roll back the size of government to pre-Obama levels.
Click to expand...

I'd hope they'd roll back the government to pre-Clinton levels, maybe even pre-Reagan levels. But when's the last time government cut itself? It ain't emo.
 
Ikari said:
So in order to save the super rich some money by obstructing the removal of loopholes, the Republicans are saviors. Where as Obama is wrong because in an era of extreme spending and deficit where we may actually have to start paying for the friviolous spending of our government, raising taxes and cutting spending is unreasonable? I think it's kinda sick to hold the entire economy and most of America hostage to protect an elite class taking advantages of tax loopholes. But whatever.
Click to expand...

What tax loopholes do folks making 200 grand a year enjoy that make them, "super rich"?
 
apdst said:
What tax loopholes do folks making 200 grand a year enjoy that make them, "super rich"?
Click to expand...

We're not talking about the poor bastards who are only sorta rich, we're talking Buffet level wealth. There should be no designation such as capital gains. All income is income and should be taxes appropriately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom