Obama budget signals election-year tax battle

Comments (34)
QuantumForce wrote:

@sniper: Nonsensical, despicable, racist stupidity.

Feb 10, 2012 11:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Talleywhacker wrote:

Sniper, I am sad to see your comment. It reflects the angry and bitter GOP dogma against a great man and a great president. Your party, GOP has locked an anchor on anything substantial BO is trying to do. What we really need is a return to the upper tax rate of 75% on incomes over 1 million as it was in the 70′s. That could reduce the debt by nearly a trillion dollars a year all by itself. We have to do that or we will be like Greece and other insolvent countries. Forget the propaganda about job creators. They have had 10 years to create jobs and have not done so. Forget the GOP and grover norquist-all traitors who are determined to starve the country into default and then find someone to blame it on. When its over the rich will have their money and you will have your angry attitude.

Feb 11, 2012 12:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
idlespire1 wrote:

agrees with Quantum. Sniper…take your meds.

Feb 11, 2012 12:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
wrote:

So he “cut” the deficit in the proposed budget from $1.3T to $900B. Great plan. Grand strategy at the national level has been replaced by a permanent election cycle that will end us.

Feb 11, 2012 6:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
zucccchini wrote:

BUDGET? BUDGET? That is not in Obama’s vocabulary. Reid and Pelosi and all the other Dems have no clue what a budget is. He has had ONE budget presented (probably not followed) since he has been in office. Spare the web space talking about HIS BUDGET.

Feb 11, 2012 9:27am EST  --  Report as abuse
zucccchini wrote:

Sniper is correct. Live with it. The truth hurts.

Feb 11, 2012 9:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
Markb16262 wrote:

With the economy growing and the republican opposition to the Presidents policies, gives voters a stark but compelling decision this election. How can the republicans talk about decline, when the state of the union after 8 years of a republican administration, that nearly bankrupted our country and did nothing to advance the social agenda that is so widely espoused, is expanding. When will the republican base ever realizes that the established leaders of the republican party only use social issues to enrich the wealthiest of people with low taxes or no taxes for the elite, with low wages, limited regulation, (bank bailout of up to 6.6 trillion dollars before 2009) that does not benefit small business or the average American. As a small business owner when, as it is happening now, our customers make less money we make less money. That is why the republican candidates have to change the attack against the President from economic issue to social issues.
I realize the current wisdom of the contraception debate states that The President made a mistake. I disagree! He gave the republican candidates an issue, then it was snatched back with the compromise. In the end the republicans will be perceived as against women’s rights.

Feb 11, 2012 9:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
jennifer1982 wrote:

I was raised GOP and I hear my family talking about the poor and how good they lived. When I was out of work my family offered no support and told me the govt gives everything away I was dropped at a shelter with 3 babies. My husband and I seperated and after 3 states we lived in a garage in California for 3 months from Dec – Feb. Of 2009. From there we rented rooms. I bought a lap top with my taxes and was told by the cab driver who drove us home from best buy a car would’ve been a better investment. During those months that followed I would wake at 5 a.m. with the goal of 100lications a day. During that time my unemployment was getting low and I started noticing how the GOP demonized me. I love Cali and it turned out I was able to land a job in a high corporate office without anyone finding out I was homeless. At 29 I am returning to school to finish my degree in paralegal studies with my employer footing the bill. I am free of govt programs and no longer worried. The GOP made it harder as each cut ended access to the programs I applied for. Its cheaper for my husband to stay with the kids but he helps and makes money on odd jobs. I will vote for Obama because he has shown heart. The GOP absurd comments that entitlements are just spent on the lazy was a slap in my face when I was out of work and lived on potatoes and lemonade and saw my children crying. I became stable in 2010 and I am so thankful I was hired with no degree but my employer saw a hard worker who would succeed. I know what the poor are living and i donate to charities like never before. Right now I am just screaming no more cuts as each cut will represent a new laid off worker with no where to turn for help.

Feb 11, 2012 10:16am EST  --  Report as abuse
Sal20111 wrote:

Obama’s intentions may be alright, especially since it’s election year, the year politicians at least try to make the right sounds, but the results of this proposal will be disastrous. What Obama needs to do, he doesn’t have to ask for more power for the government: ie to print more money, to spend more, and to thereby tax more. He’s acting like Bush who wanted to centralise more “security” power, while Obama is seeking to centralise more “economic” power. The results will be the same: damaged dollar and a harmful transfer of resources for the economy. All I can say is I hope Ron Paul starts a winning streak from Maine, because it looks bleak between Obama and Sanotorum.

Feb 11, 2012 10:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
Sal20111 wrote:

Obama’s intentions may be alright, especially since it’s election year, the year politicians at least try to make the right sounds, but the results of this proposal will be disastrous. What Obama needs to do, he doesn’t have to ask for more power for the government: ie to print more money, to spend more, and to thereby tax more. He’s acting like Bush who wanted to centralise more “security” power, while Obama is seeking to centralise more “economic” power. The results will be the same: damaged dollar and a harmful transfer of resources for the economy. All I can say is I hope Ron Paul starts a winning streak from Maine, because it looks bleak between Obama and Sanotorum.

Feb 11, 2012 10:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
rwbplastic wrote:

Please name a year when there has not been a tax battle

Feb 11, 2012 10:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
rowettd wrote:

Add me to the critics of Sniper (appropriate screen name) and those who share his/her attitude. It seems that Republicans have been overcome with nothing less than irrational, blind rage against a president who entered the office with arguably more disadvantages against him than any U.S. president who came before him.

During the G.W. Bush years, the stage was set for everything to go wrong with our country that possibly could go wrong. And sure enough, as President Obama took office, he walked into a perfect storm of economic, military and social disaster. While I am disappointed by the amount of progress that has been made by the Obama administration, I always remind myself that every inch of progress has been made against the irrational opposition of Republicans in Congress, who have been obsessed with handing Obama political defeat rather than working for the benefit of the American people who elected them.

And despite this Republican campaign of opposition, the U.S. economy is making a sluggish recovery. Imagine how much better off we’d all be if Republican extremists had been focused on repairing the nation’s problems rather than their hatred for Obama.

Feb 11, 2012 10:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
SanPa wrote:

Not to take the conservative caucus’ position, the President’s proposal is yet another band-aid.

The bold approach would be to end supply side policies that have cripple industry and job creation alike, end gratuitous subsidies like those crediting oil extraction, conversion of corn to fuel, and brink more coal to markets, and all the while separately reinstating a true progressive tax structure.

Feb 11, 2012 10:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
txgadfly wrote:

Our Republican alternative? War, war, and yet more war. Millions more cripples. These, we can easily afford. We will gladly sacrifice you, and any promises made to you, and any services you have already been charged for, so that we can meet our production quota of invasions and new cripples the world over. You must understand our national priorities! And if you disagree, why then you are no American at all (other than for taxing purposes) and are a disgrace to the flag and your ancestors. Never mind that yours were here centuries before ours. It is our country, not yours. So shut up, pay up, and go get your brains scrambled so Israel will not have to make its street signs bilingual or grant the vote to the natives.

Republicanism in a nutshell.

Feb 11, 2012 11:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
HAL.9000 wrote:

Haters will hate no matter what Obama does…just becuase.
Think what you want, the Repugs have no one or nothing to offer over Obama…that is why he will get re-elected, easily.

Feb 11, 2012 11:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

The republicans offer no serious alternative. More wars and more money for the rich? Seriously? Say something real republicans. Oh sure, you want to invade our homes and bedrooms and dictate our morality. Perhaps those into self mortification will enjoy that, but the bulk of us are not masochists. You speak of freedom and then at every turn reduce our freedom. I understand the comments of the crazies (they’re crazy) and those of the shills for big business (some people can always be purchased eg FOX NEWS), but no one with a brain cell left will buy this swill. Your best chance for victory is what has always been your best option, to tap into the racial hatred of the south.

Feb 11, 2012 12:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fgarnett wrote:

Since the Republican right wing conservative bunch are so adamant that raising taxes on the 1% would hurt small business, why doesn’t the white house put in a “Small Business” exemption, I mean after all this is a painful time that EVERYONE needs to bear equally.

When the 99% who have to work for their income and are paying income taxes twice what the 1% pays, in addition to SSI, SDI, MEDICARE, ETC ….. for the 99% to pay the majority of taxes while the 1% doesn’t is completely unacceptable.

Feb 11, 2012 12:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

“It would make our economy worse by imposing massive tax increases on small business and still pile up enormous debt that stirs greater economic uncertainty,” he said.

Seriously? Haven’t heard this lie in a while. I guess Republicans figure they haven’t used it in a while so maybe people have forgotten by now that it’s complete bullsh1t.

The average small business owner in America makes $31,000 a year. Tax increases on those who make $250k a year or more will have no impact whatsoever on small business or our economy. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Feb 11, 2012 1:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Larry001 wrote:

Perhaps President Obama should use his spending policies to help Greece out. They desperately need someone like him.

Perhaps he should move there?

Feb 11, 2012 1:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Larry001 wrote:

Obama should be out there helping the Greeks

They would LOVE to have him solve their debt crisis

Feb 11, 2012 1:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IntoTheTardis wrote:

Sniper speaks for the White Nationalist Party, what we once called the GOP. It’s people like him that will ensure Obama another four years. Every person whose skin is a shade of brown or red knows the score. You can’t let people like Sniper have any power. They’re vicious and dangerous.

Feb 11, 2012 2:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
heavydev wrote:

“Small businesses” what a sham. You mean small businesses like Bain Capital small businesses? Or the Hedge Funds on Wall Street? Those small businesses? It’s time that the Mitt Romneys of America to pay their fair share. I can’t understand how it is fair that someone like Romney pays on 13.9% when real small business people like myself with an average income pay much more in taxes. How does making money from capital (which is usually inherited) get taxed less when someone that actually works for a living is taxed more? This is wrong. The Republicans want to keep the gravy train running, and want the wealthy to pay even less as evidenced by the Paul Ryan budget that was PASSED by the Republican majority in the House. You may be independent, you may not agree with with Democrats, but I can’t see how a voter of average means can vote for a party that is so obviously out for the wealthy (aka themselves). You are supporting policies that are not in your best interest.

Feb 11, 2012 2:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

Sniper is wrong that Obama is like Caligula. Who were Augustus and Tiberius then?

All the major candidates have really been in the mold of Didius Julianus. For the last 30 years, he who can buy the vote with promised tax reductions is usually the winner. The Candidate that has the largest campaign chest can sometimes even buy some street votes as well. The most immediate and organized power in ancient Rome was the military and that’s who they tried to buy. Today – the list of appetites that must be assuaged is a lot longer and interests overlap.

Bush started the sacking of the treasury with tax rebates.

Maybe Clinton was Tiberius? He left office with a surplus. That would make Bush Jr. Caligula. He attempted to expand the empire with a province or two and left empty handed. That makes Obama like Claudius who did a lot of infrastructure spending.

The Roman writers were idiots about economics and hardly understood or paid any attention to the subject. And we are more civilized than the Romans who didn’t like retired emperors living on as pensioners. I can’t help wondering what campaign finance spending would look like if all the candidates thought this job would be their last?

To carry this joke to its conclusion – that would make Reagan Augustus and that almost works as a simile. But Nixon was the first to be accused of starting the Imperial Presidency.

I personally think they are all gigolos and will say anything to get our business.

Feb 11, 2012 2:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sensibility wrote:

There he goes again, trying to fix the problem he created by doing the same thing that caused the problem in the first place. Obama had a couple good days in a row, I guess it’s time for him to return to form. What a dope.

Feb 11, 2012 2:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Eideard wrote:

Republican True Believers are hilarious. You believe all this conspiracy crap. Your egos are so bankrupt you want to believe everyone really wants to be a White-bread Wonder Hero.

Saddest, though, is your belief in Mellon/Hoover economics polished up by incompetents like David Stockman and Ron Paul.

Truly, you have come to stand for exactly the sort of losers that have brought the United States to the precipice of failure. And you are ready to jump over the edge like the obedient little lemmings you are.

Ciao, baby!

Feb 11, 2012 3:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:

Candidate Obama said that President Obama is irresponsible and unpatriotic. Don’t take my word for it, take his.

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child,” Obama said on July 3, 2008, at a campaign event in Fargo, N.D.

“That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic,” said candidate Obama.

Feb 11, 2012 7:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:

@jennifer1982

What do you expect will happen to all programs when we go bankrupt? Either cut a few now or find ways to make them self sufficient or we lose everything in the future. Look at California, they have ran out of everyone else’s money. Cuts aren’t fun, but it is the responsible thing to do. Cutting the tax breaks out is responsible as well. The country is going bankrupt, that is a reality and there will be millions of sad stories like yours. The problem is you expect the government to fix everything, fix it yourself, help others in need, and we will get along just fine.

Feb 11, 2012 7:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:

@4ngery4merican

“Seriously? Haven’t heard this lie in a while. I guess Republicans figure they haven’t used it in a while so maybe people have forgotten by now that it’s complete bullsh1t.

The average small business owner in America makes $31,000 a year. Tax increases on those who make $250k a year or more will have no impact whatsoever on small business or our economy. Zero. Zilch. Nada.”

What biased site did you get that nonsense from? $31,000 is below the lowest pay reported by the SBA. They aren’t typically millionaires when you take out the dotors/lawyers, but they are not the $31,000 you list.

Average Income by Experience
According to compensation survey administrator PayScale in 2010, the average income of small business owners varies widely depending upon their level of experience. For example, small business owners with less than one year of experience in running an organization earn an annual salary ranging from $34,392 to $75,076. Those with more than 10 years experience, on the other hand, earn upwards of $105,757 per year.

Average Income by Region
The region in which a small business is located also affects the average income of its owners. A report issued by PayScale indicated that entrepreneurs employed on the coasts earn more than their counterparts in the South and Midwest. Entrepreneurs in New York, for example, earned a median yearly salary upwards of $125,185, while those in Georgia top out at $75,500.

Feb 11, 2012 7:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ProfMagyar wrote:

I. Although conversation around taxes/government policy engender powerful emotions from both sides of the isle, it’s important to remember that nothing will get accomplished when each side continues to preach to their own party base rather than debate solutions.
II. The policies in place when Obama took office are largely the reason for our massive deficit which isn’t really spending but rather obligations to pay on past promises. Some of these past promises included massive tax cuts. If tax cuts are paid for with debt, isn’t that the same thing as spending? In addition, everyone knows that if a country decides to fight a war (or two), those wars are going to create massive spending obligations. Throughout history we have instituted taxes to cover this spending. In fact, taxes grew out of the Revolutionary War.
III. What the discussion needs to center on is the way the overall tax system is structured. Of course it’s immoral to allow billionaires to pay much lower tax rates than those making $100k. If the US were to hugely simplify the tax system (both corporate and personal), then there could actually be a way to both lower marginal rates and collect more in revenue.
IV. Cutting loopholes in the tax system, taxing carried interest and short term capital gains at income tax levels, and making government hugely more efficient – it’s possible to fix our situation.
V. However we do decide to fix the debt dilemma, we do need to get moving forward. There are many countries around the world that are just waiting to eat our lunch. In fact, as our leaders bicker in D.C. the US is getting robbed blind every day by state sponsored cyber war centers. What you read in papers on this, is only just the very tip of what is happening to OUR hard earned intellectual gains in R&D. If people want to get angry, this is where that anger should be directed at.
Or we could argue about birth control;)

Feb 11, 2012 8:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Missourimule wrote:

With Obama, it’s always about a battle – the concept of working with Congress is foreign to him.

Feb 11, 2012 10:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ProfMagyar wrote:

Missourimule?

Feb 12, 2012 2:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

UnPartisan – Lets just say for the sake of argument that your numbers are more accurate than mine. You still prove my point, as even your 10 year veterans are making less than half of the $250k per year they would need to be raking in to be at all affected by Obama’s “job killing tax increases”.

Small business owners are not the 1%. The 1% are not small business owners. Raising taxes on those making over $250k per year will not hurt small business. It will not affect small business in the slightest. This is a repeatedly proven fact.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/nov/17/michele-bachmann/michele-bachmann-250000-gross-sales-tax-increase/

Feb 12, 2012 3:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

P.S.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/07/mccains-small-business-bunk/

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/03/half-of-the-wealthy-own-small-businesses/

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/boehners-big-stretch-on-small-business/

Amazing how you righties (unpartisan my left eye) will find anything to argue about, even when your own argument still proves my point.

Feb 12, 2012 12:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
4ngry4merican wrote:

ProfMaygar – Excellent post.

Missourimule – Obama isn’t the one who started the battle. Reference your Senator McConnell who has repeatedly stated in no uncertain terms that the Republicans single most important goal is making Obama a one-term president. If you have any ideas about how to “work with” that, you’re a better man than I.

Feb 12, 2012 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.