• 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 Seeks to End Tax Breaks to Pay for Jobs Plan

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama would pay for his $447 billion jobs plan by ending a series of tax breaks for oil and gas companies, hedge-fund managers and people making more than $200,000, the White House said Monday.In total, Mr. Obama's plan would end about $467 billion of tax breaks over 10 years, said White House Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew. The president has previously proposed ending the tax breaks, but has faced stiff resistance from Republicans.
Enlarge Image


OB-PP422_0912ob_D_20110912143206.jpg

OB-PP422_0912ob_G_20110912143206.jpg



ReutersPresident Obama holds a copy of the "American Jobs Act" he will send up to Congress for passage while standing next to Vice President Biden in the Rose Garden Monday.



By choosing to end the tax breaks, the White House is likely setting itself up for a fight with Republicans. Obama Seeks to End Tax Breaks to Pay for Jobs Plan - WSJ.com

What else is new, other than the amount Obama now says is the evil "rich" just went down to $200K from $250K....Funny how that keeps creeping down...

j-mac
 
It's $200k per individual and $250k per household -- nothing new there.

This is a perfectly reasonable way to pay for the plan.
 
But...but...but...Obama didn't say anything about raising taxes and the bill is already paid for!!!
 
It's $200k per individual and $250k per household -- nothing new there.

This is a perfectly reasonable way to pay for the plan.

It's a perfectly reasonable way for his dumbass to get voted out next year. Because of that, I applaude his efforts.
 
You know oil and gas, hedge funds, and people with individual income over 200K don't really come to mind when I think "who should get a tax break with the amount of federal debt that exists." Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes, but the simple fact is that to cut the debt we need BOTH spending cuts AND tax increases, there's no way around it.
 
What a travesty!

The idea of making wealthier Americans pay just a little extra in taxes (temporarily) so we can have some short term cash to help fix some of our budgetary and economic problems is just sickening. It warrants a giant complaining session in fact.

Look, I'm all for lowering taxes at times when it makes sense strategically, but this is not one of them. Let's try to fix our budget without making deep cuts to programs that may be the difference between life or death for some folks, and then reassess the situation when when things even back out.

I don't think an approach based on revenue increases and spending cuts is a crazy idea.
 
Last edited:
What a travesty!

The idea of making wealthier Americans pay just a little extra in taxes (temporarily) so we can have some short term cash to help fix some of our budgetary and economic problems is just sickening. It warrants a giant complaining session in fact.

Look, I'm all for lowering taxes at times when it makes sense strategically, but this is not one of them. Let's try to fix our budget without making deep cuts to programs that may be the difference between life or death for some folks, and then reassess the situation when when things even back out.

This ignores the possibility that, without deep cuts, things would not even back out. Saying we need to fix our budget problems without controlling spending is like trying to sober up without stopping drinking.

I don't think an approach based on revenue increases and spending cuts is a crazy idea.

Who in DC is saying anything about spending cuts???

Let's get serious. Raising taxes in any significant way is political suicide, and cutting spending in any significant way is political suicide. Stop trusting these clowns. They are driving us off a cliff.
 
Isn't this a socialistic agenda? To take from one type of class and give to another? Or, is this called legally stealing because the gov approves it? I wouldn't accept a rich persons money if the government takes it away from them because it's not mine
 
Isn't this a socialistic agenda? To take from one type of class and give to another? Or, is this called legally stealing because the gov approves it? I wouldn't accept a rich persons money if the government takes it away from them because it's not mine

So is it safe to say that you pay more taxes than the government says you owe to make up for the extra taxes that rich people pay?
 
Wiseone said:
You know oil and gas, hedge funds, and people with individual income over 200K don't really come to mind when I think "who should get a tax break with the amount of federal debt that exists."

Really? It does for me. Can't give a break in something to somebody that doesn't pay a cent of it anyway. We already have "Making Work Pay" as well as EIC available to people with an adjusted tax liability of zero. You want to give them more "breaks"?
 
Americans want higher taxes? If I asked 100 people if they "wanted" higher taxes, 90 of them would look at me like I was a moron. As for the solution being taxing the rich, if you taxed the top 1% of the income in the US at 10% more, you would only equate for about 2% of spending in the federal budget, so we all know good and well that, thats not the solution.
 
Look, I'm all for lowering taxes at times when it makes sense strategically, but this is not one of them. Let's try to fix our budget without making deep cuts to programs that may be the difference between life or death for some folks, and then reassess the situation when when things even back out.

How is cutting the baseline increase from 8% to 6% proposed increase over ten years, much of that time Obama or these demo's in congress now will have no control over how future congresses vote, even a real cut?

j-mac
 
the top rates would still be historically low even if the rates were rolled back to the 90s. austerity measures aren't just appropriate for European countries which are in debt, and we need people working as soon as possible.

the Obama plan isn't enough on its own; we need to take a serious look at our trade agreements, and we should consider even more preferential rates for corporations who hire a high percentage of their workforces domestically.
 
You know oil and gas, hedge funds, and people with individual income over 200K don't really come to mind when I think "who should get a tax break with the amount of federal debt that exists." Don't get me wrong, I don't like taxes, but the simple fact is that to cut the debt we need BOTH spending cuts AND tax increases, there's no way around it.

Those aren't tax breaks, they tax deductions. Are you one of those anti-tax write off Liberals that thinks it's ok to to tax a company on it's gross profit?
 
Really? It does for me. Can't give a break in something to somebody that doesn't pay a cent of it anyway. We already have "Making Work Pay" as well as EIC available to people with an adjusted tax liability of zero. You want to give them more "breaks"?

Now, those are tax breaks. The, "mo' taxes", Libbos seriously need to learn the difference between a tax break, tax cut, tax deduction and a subsidy.
 
Those aren't tax breaks, they tax deductions. Are you one of those anti-tax write off Liberals that thinks it's ok to to tax a company on it's gross profit?

Why is it okay to tax a billionaire hedge fund manager's income at 15% and your income at 25%?
 
Why is it okay to tax a billionaire hedge fund manager's income at 15% and your income at 25%?

Why is it ok for me to pay 15% on $40,000, because I'm self employed and can't qualify for the earned income credit, because I'm self employed and my employees--who made more money last year than I did--pay nothing?
 
On top of the fact that the gross amount of taxes still greatly favors me, his taxable income comes with an inherent amount of risk, whereas mine does not (I show up to the office, I don't completely fluff off all day, I get paid).

I am also an employee whereas he may indeed be an employer. Benefits should come to those who would allow for me to work and pay taxes as well.
 
Seems obvious that OBama knows the republican house will never OK the tax increases. He's not even serious about the jobs bill. just interested in playing politics... you know... as usual.
 
Last edited:
This ignores the possibility that, without deep cuts, things would not even back out. Saying we need to fix our budget problems without controlling spending is like trying to sober up without stopping drinking.



Who in DC is saying anything about spending cuts???

Let's get serious. Raising taxes in any significant way is political suicide, and cutting spending in any significant way is political suicide. Stop trusting these clowns. They are driving us off a cliff.

Mostly saying that the severity of the theoretical cuts could be eased with a revenue increase.

Agree with you here on your points.
 
the top rates would still be historically low even if the rates were rolled back to the 90s. austerity measures aren't just appropriate for European countries which are in debt, and we need people working as soon as possible.

the Obama plan isn't enough on its own; we need to take a serious look at our trade agreements, and we should consider even more preferential rates for corporations who hire a high percentage of their workforces domestically.

you are 100% correct. our trade agreements are crappy! The chinese are killing us. Pandas plan of racing the rich more is crap and won't do anything. we are also keep ing medicare and social security off the table...our number one spender. We need reform
 
What a travesty!

The idea of making wealthier Americans pay just a little extra in taxes (temporarily) so we can have some short term cash to help fix some of our budgetary and economic problems is just sickening. It warrants a giant complaining session in fact.

Look, I'm all for lowering taxes at times when it makes sense strategically, but this is not one of them. Let's try to fix our budget without making deep cuts to programs that may be the difference between life or death for some folks, and then reassess the situation when when things even back out.

I don't think an approach based on revenue increases and spending cuts is a crazy idea.

Sounds very similar to the plan he proposed in 2009 when he had a filibuster proof Senate to fund Obamacare that was defeated. What ever happened to the proposals from the Bowles/Simpson commission ordered by Obama. Guess the attack the rich wasn't part of the recommended proposals thus was discarded. Anyone who thinks this guy was qualified to be President is out of touch with reality. He is an incompetent empty suit
 
Seems obvious that OBama knows the republican house will never OK the tax increases. He's not even serious about the jobs bill. just interested in playing politics... you know... as usual.

Why does it seem "obvious that OBama knows the republican house will never OK the tax increases "?
 
Back
Top Bottom