• 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.

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,485
Reaction score
39,816
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
....and then he has the gall to accuse Republicans of being obstinate?

seven months ago Obama said that the last thing we wanted to do was raise taxes on a poor recovery, but now he thinks that we are doing So Awesome after the last jobs report that it won't effect us? I don't think so - he knows precisely the game he is playing. At least now we know for sure who's holding this whole thing up. Obama knows perfectly well that no package that includes tax hikes will pass the House. His insistence that they be included means he is delaying. Guess he really does want to use this to campaign on after all. Everyone get ready for Obama to start threatening Seniors.


President Barack Obama declared on Monday there would be no deal on raising the government's debt limit if Republicans won't compromise, and he said he would not sign a short-term extension — raising the stakes on volatile negotiations with the clock ticking toward an Aug. 2 deadline.

"I don't see a path to a deal if they don't budge. Period," the president said in a challenge to his political opponents, accusing Republicans of having a "my way or the highway" posture on taxes.... But Republican Boehner said that tax increases are a nonstarter: "The American people will not accept — and the House cannot pass — a bill that raises taxes on job creators."...

...Sunday's sometimes testy session was shorter than some had anticipated, and it's clear neither side is willing to budge on taxes. Democrats say tax increases are a prerequisite for big spending cuts; Republicans rule out the idea unless taxes are lowered elsewhere....

even before Obama was finished speaking, Republicans were disagreeing with his insistence that a deficit-trimming deal include cutbacks in tax breaks for the wealthy and some big corporations. While the news conference was under way, Boehner's office sent two emails to his news list saying tax hikes never should have been in the discussion.

The president warned that failure to reach agreement could create another recession and throw millions of Americans out of work, painting a picture of catastrophe if a partisan stalemate is not broken and Congress fails to act....​



yup. the President needs an economic narrative for 2012, and he's going to make himself one.
 
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.”...
 
Compromise is a two way street, we have to raise taxes to solve the deficit. Period.
 
closing tax loopholes is not a tax-hike.

a tax-hike is where the tax-rate is increased for certain income levels.
 
IMO, to raise revenue by closing loopholes/exemptions/freebies/welfare/etc., isnt raising taxes.
and where the hell are the so called "job creators".. theyve had these breaks for about a decade, so where's the jobs? or should i ask 'in what country are they creating the jobs?'
 
"Raising taxes in a recession is the last thing you want to do." - President Barack Obama



we are willing to compromise on plenty. whatever the President wants to cut, we'll cut. but raising taxes will not bring in any revenue, it will hurt the country's struggling economy, and it's not a political possibility. we might as well demand that Obama pass the Ryan Plan, and then accuse him of refusing to compromise when he doesn't.



At best, Obama wants to hike taxes, but doesn't want the blame for it, so he wants to make Republicans his enablers. At worst, Obama knows that this won't pass the House, and so he wants to go past the Aug 2 deadline to see how much he can scare the American public about the "eeeeevil Wepubwicans" [/Elmer Fudd Voice].
 
closing tax loopholes is not a tax-hike.

a tax-hike is where the tax-rate is increased for certain income levels.


you are confusing nominal with effective tax rates
 
The first three months of the year were good to the oil industry -- although American drivers and their elected leaders are not offering congratulations.

This week, the world's six largest publicly traded oil companies reported a combined $38.1 billion in first-quarter profits. Of the so-called supermajors, only BP (BP)'s earnings declined from the year before.

Now why should we be expected to continue to pay record prices at the pump and grocery store and every other outlet that has had to increase prices because of rising fuel costs, and at the same time continue to subsidize these companies?

I am aware that crude prices are certainly driving some of the increase, so where are the record setting profits coming from?
 
...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.
It's good that Obama understands the importance of raising the debt ceiling, but too bad that he's chosen to turn it into such a campaign issue. Perhaps he sees this as a way to blame the dismal economy on those 'darned "oil-grubbing, private plane flying" Republicans and shift attention away from his failed policies.

He's also not leaving himself much room to negotiate by also refusing to entertain any sort of short term remedy to keep the government going. Chances are high that he'll have to rethink at least one of his ultimatums.
 
IMO, to raise revenue by closing loopholes/exemptions/freebies/welfare/etc., isnt raising taxes.
and where the hell are the so called "job creators".. theyve had these breaks for about a decade, so where's the jobs? or should i ask 'in what country are they creating the jobs?'
What are you talking about? They've created or saved millions of jobs. We'd be in a depression right now if they hadn't.
 
How misleading can you be?
1) It wouldn't be raising taxes in a recession since we aren't in one and haven't been for 2 years.
2) Taxes wouldn't go up for another 2 and a half years.
3) Taxes would only raise on the rich...you know, the same people who are sitting on record profits as we speak.

Obama is not the one being obstinate here. There are two sides to this issue: the spending and the revenues. It is not as if, in creating this deficit problem, taxes stayed the same and spending went up. If that was the case you would have something of a point. The reality: tax rates went down and spending went up. We have to rectify both of those things, at least to SOME extent, to solve this problem. Denying that and taking an entire side of the equation off the table entirely is stubbornness...not Mr. Obama's position, which is that you need some of each (and yet much, much more of spending cuts). Your position seems to be that for Obama to NOT be stubborn, his only option is to role over and give the Republicans exactly what they want. Newsflash: the Dems have the Senate and the White House. The GOP is in no position to run the show entirely. There need to be compromises, period.
 
Last edited:
It's good that Obama understands the importance of raising the debt ceiling, but too bad that he's chosen to turn it into such a campaign issue. Perhaps he sees this as a way to blame the dismal economy on those 'darned "oil-grubbing, private plane flying" Republicans and shift attention away from his failed policies.

that is precisely correct. he see's a way to turn this into a campaign issue for himself, and hopefully get attention off of the Stimulus, the high unemployment rate (or give him the ability to try to link republicans to it), and Obamacare.

He's also not leaving himself much room to negotiate by also refusing to entertain any sort of short term remedy to keep the government going. Chances are high that he'll have to rethink at least one of his ultimatums.

eventually yes. we'll see how much chaos we all have to suffer before the President deigns to descend from Mount Olympus and bless us all with a speech denouncing strawmen extremists as he accepts what, at this point, we all know the final deal will be anywho.
 
It's good that Obama understands the importance of raising the debt ceiling, but too bad that he's chosen to turn it into such a campaign issue. Perhaps he sees this as a way to blame the dismal economy on those 'darned "oil-grubbing, private plane flying" Republicans and shift attention away from his failed policies.

He's also not leaving himself much room to negotiate by also refusing to entertain any sort of short term remedy to keep the government going. Chances are high that he'll have to rethink at least one of his ultimatums.

The GOP are the ones who made it into a campaign issue. During Bush's eight years, the debt ceiling was raised seven times. Only after Obama took office did it become a political football. The bi[artisan debt commission came to the conclusion that both spending cuts and increases in revenue are needed to bring down the debt. Obama has offered up 4 trillion (4 TRILLION!) in cuts. The GOP has to agree to revenue increases. This is supposed to be a negotiation, not a hostage situation. Both sides give in negotiations. It's not all one-sided.
 
How misleading can you be?
1) It wouldn't be raising taxes in a recession since we aren't in one and haven't been for 2 years.

so are you suggesting that the President was lying when he stated that in 2010?

2) Taxes wouldn't go up for another 2 and a half years.

this is incorrect - the President wanted taxes to go up immediately

3) Taxes would only raise on the rich...you know, the same people who are sitting on record profits as we speak.

AP: Obama's Proposed Trillion Dollar Tax Hike Would Hit Middle Income Families

Obama is not the one being obstinate here. There are two sides to this issue: the spending and the revenues. It is not as if, in creating this deficit problem, taxes stayed the same and spending went up

um. that is, in fact, exactly what happened. tax rates haven't changed since 2003. the trillion-dollar-plus deficits started in 2009.
 
It's good that Obama understands the importance of raising the debt ceiling, but too bad that he's chosen to turn it into such a campaign issue. Perhaps he sees this as a way to blame the dismal economy on those 'darned "oil-grubbing, private plane flying" Republicans and shift attention away from his failed policies.

He's also not leaving himself much room to negotiate by also refusing to entertain any sort of short term remedy to keep the government going. Chances are high that he'll have to rethink at least one of his ultimatums.

It's almost like Jimmy Carter is giving him console.. :)

Even Hillary is like... "dude, chill out, we lost big time in 2010 and the issue was the economy.. Perhaps we should listen for a change?" :)


Tim-
 
The GOP are the ones who made it into a campaign issue. During Bush's eight years, the debt ceiling was raised seven times.

Important to remember. Reagan raised it too - more than once.
 
IMO, to raise revenue by closing loopholes/exemptions/freebies/welfare/etc., isnt raising taxes.
It was just a few months ago, at the state of the union address, that Obama called for a "revenue neutral corporate tax reduction." Now he wants to raise taxes on oil and private planes (7.5% of GDP) in a blatant political gesture to make the republicans "the party of the rich."

Can we believe anything this man says?
 
The GOP are the ones who made it into a campaign issue. During Bush's eight years, the debt ceiling was raised seven times. Only after Obama took office did it become a political football. The bi[artisan debt commission came to the conclusion that both spending cuts and increases in revenue are needed to bring down the debt. Obama has offered up 4 trillion (4 TRILLION!) in cuts.

no, he didn't. he offered up 3 trillion in cuts and 1 trillion in tax hikes - the problem being that many of those "cuts" were nothing of the sort.
 
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.
 
cp I think you need to quit being intellectually dishonest. You are using terms as so many of the crooked lawyers that we have on both sides will use to define "tax hikes". Getting rid of a bunch of obscure tax credits that do not effect a high percentage of Americans is not a tax hike. Furthermore, these "tax hikes" as you refer to are not going to destroy jobs as the very top percentage these credits expunges will effect would have used the money saved to otherwise simply get richer. One has to only look at the fact that the recovery is alive and well for the top earners in the US, not so much for the bottom and the middle.
 
The GOP are the ones who made it into a campaign issue. During Bush's eight years, the debt ceiling was raised seven times.

It's all a campaign issue in Washington, and if it isn't, you make it one!

This is supposed to be a negotiation, not a hostage situation. Both sides give in negotiations. It's not all one-sided.

This is where, in my opinion, the Ann Coulters of the world have poisoned the well. Turning "compromise" which is a good thing, into "caving." I feel for the Republicans, because to too many of their base, "compromise" is a four-letter word.
 
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.”...

Giving you everything you want with nothing in return is not compromise. To anyone not looking through ideological colored classes, Obama is right here.
 
so are you suggesting that the President was lying when he stated that in 2010?

When he stated what?

this is incorrect - the President wanted taxes to go up immediately

I'm not going to read every article you throw at me. Please quote to me the part in the Wall Street Journal article that claims taxes would go up immediately.


I have heard nothing about raising taxes on the middle class, from anyone. Obama confirmed that again today when he said his proposals include only the upper bracket ($250,000+) and the closing of loopholes. Mark my words: Obama will not propose a hike in the income tax rate for middle class families. I did not even know this was up for debate. I have not even heard Boehner or Cantor claim that he is trying to do this.

um. that is, in fact, exactly what happened. tax rates haven't changed since 2003. the trillion-dollar-plus deficits started in 2009.

You are bending over backwards to spin the facts. Bush turned the surplus into a deficit starting in 2002. That deficit more than doubled the following year, the year the tax rates changed. So yes, a change in the tax rate has absolutely been a factor, and to deny that is to simply ignore the facts.
 
Last edited:
indeed, demanding ONLY spending cuts and NO tax-increases, doesn't suggest you are willing to compromise much.
 
The first three months of the year were good to the oil industry -- although American drivers and their elected leaders are not offering congratulations.

This week, the world's six largest publicly traded oil companies reported a combined $38.1 billion in first-quarter profits. Of the so-called supermajors, only BP (BP)'s earnings declined from the year before.

Now why should we be expected to continue to pay record prices at the pump and grocery store and every other outlet that has had to increase prices because of rising fuel costs, and at the same time continue to subsidize these companies?

I am aware that crude prices are certainly driving some of the increase, so where are the record setting profits coming from?

5% profit margin …. price at the pump $1.75 = 8.5 cents profit
5% profit margin …. price at the pump $3.50 = 17 cents profit

yep made a bigger profit selling the same product at twice the price .. go figure …
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom