Obama submits his proposal to avoid the "Fiscal Cliff".[W:204]

[Imnukingfutz]

Obama's proposal calls for $1.6 trillion in new taxes, including higher tax rates on families making more than $250,000.

Obama also wants to close loopholes, limit deductions, raise the estate tax rate to 2009 levels and increase taxes on capital gains and dividend taxes.

The proposal also calls for additional spending, including a new $50 billion stimulus package, a home mortgage refinancing plan, and an extension of unemployment insurance benefits. It would also extend the payroll tax cut passed early in Obama's administration to give taxpayers more money to spend.

In return, multiple sources told CNN that Obama is offering $400 billion in new cuts to Medicare and other entitlement programs. Specifics would be decided next year, the sources said.

"The president will be clear that the House needs to follow the Senate's lead and act so that 98 percent of Americans don't see their taxes go up at the end of the year," the official told CNN. "And he will call on congressional Republicans to stop holding the middle class tax cuts hostage simply because they refuse to let tax rates go up for the wealthiest Americans."



Obama takes fiscal cliff case to Pennsylvania - CNN.com

Remember, the $1.6 Trillion proposed in new taxation is in addition to the new taxes implemented by Obamacare. The CBO estimates that Obamacare will raise taxes by $1T a year....so in effect, this administration wants to raise the tax burden by $2.6T a year. (estimate)

Thats almost doubling the tax burden we have as of right now.

 

[jonny5]

Remember, the $1.6 Trillion proposed in new taxation is in addition to the new taxes implemented by Obamacare. The CBO estimates that Obamacare will raise taxes by $1T a year....so in effect, this administration wants to raise the tax burden by $2.6T a year. (estimate)

Thats almost doubling the tax burden we have as of right now.

The 1.6 trillion is over 10 years.

 

[blaxshep]

The 1.6 trillion is over 10 years.

That is why it is a failure, it is 12% of the deficit that will be spent over the same 10 years.

 

[Imnukingfutz]

The 1.6 trillion is over 10 years.

The article I read didnt clarify that. Sorry if I used bad information.

W.H. proposal - Obama’s ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Proposal: $1.6 Trillion in Tax Increases
Republican proposal - House Republicans Propose $2.2 Trillion Fiscal-Cliff Plan - Bloomberg


Neither plan amounts to a hill of beans....both plans contain NO, NONE, NADDA, ZERO spending cuts....just cuts in expected growth. More spending is more spending regardless of how they phrase it.

The best bet is to just go over the "fiscal cliff". We need to rein in this out of control government....from BOTH parties.

The W.H. is proposing to grow the government at X rate while the Republicans are wanting to grow it at a Y rate.....both want to grow the size and scope of the government....at the cost of the people and our economy.


We might just start calling them Republocrats.


ADDED: $1.6 trillion over 10 years.....thats almost what our government is OVERSPENDING per year.
WTF good is that going to do?

Even the Republican plan of $2.2 trillion over 10 years isnt going to amount to a hill of friggin beans when we will overspend $13 T over the next 10 years ($1.3 trillion deficit each of the last 4 years continuing for 10 years is $13 T)

Both plans suck without REAL spending cuts and neither side is willing to stop their spending.

 

[Catawba]

Im ok with that too, and with the other half of automatic cuts to medicare and discretionary spending.

I'm OK with $11 billion in Medicare cuts in payments to doctors and providers in order to get the $500 billion in military cuts and tax increases for the wealthy.

 

[Born Free]

I'm OK with $11 billion in Medicare cuts in payments to doctors and providers in order to get the $500 billion in military cuts and tax increases for the wealthy.

Of course you would, but then the doctors and providers leave Medicare.

 

[jonny5]

I'm OK with $11 billion in Medicare cuts in payments to doctors and providers in order to get the $500 billion in military cuts and tax increases for the wealthy.

But we're talking about the sequester.

 

[Diogenes]

Obama doesn't seem to be interested in raising revenue or reducing spending, he only seems to be insistent on raising the rates on the upper middle class. It sounds like a purely ideological argument rather than a practical approach to solving our fiscal problems.

 

[jonny5]

Obama doesn't seem to be interested in raising revenue or reducing spending, he only seems to be insistent on raising the rates on the upper middle class. It sounds like a purely ideological argument rather than a practical approach to solving our fiscal problems.

I dont think hes interested in either. Or rather, hes interested in whatever gives him a wedge against republicans, whether thats women, seniors, the rich, or hispanics. His goal is power.

 

[Fenton]

Obama doesn't seem to be interested in raising revenue or reducing spending, he only seems to be insistent on raising the rates on the upper middle class. It sounds like a purely ideological argument rather than a practical approach to solving our fiscal problems.

Thats the size of it, its purely ideological and if anything lowers revenues.

 

[Catawba]

But we're talking about the sequester.

Yes, exactly.

 

[Diogenes]

I dont think hes interested in either. Or rather, hes interested in whatever gives him a wedge against republicans, whether thats women, seniors, the rich, or hispanics. His goal is power.

I think you're on to something there.

 

[blaxshep]

Obama doesn't seem to be interested in raising revenue or reducing spending, he only seems to be insistent on raising the rates on the upper middle class. It sounds like a purely ideological argument rather than a practical approach to solving our fiscal problems.

Symbolism over substance, it is the liberal way.

 

[jonny5]

Yes, exactly.

The sequestor would not raise taxes on the wealthy.

 

[Catawba]

The sequestor would not raise taxes on the wealthy.

No the tax cuts expire automatically at the end of the year. You were talking before about the automatic $11 billion dollar cut to Medicare under sequestration, and I said was willing to give that up for the $500 billion in cuts to the military, also required under sequestration.

 

[jonny5]

No the tax cuts expire automatically at the end of the year. You were talking before about the automatic $11 billion dollar cut to Medicare under sequestration, and I said was willing to give that up for the $500 billion in cuts to the military, also required under sequestration.

Youre talking about different time frames. The 11bn is one year, the 500bn is 10 years. The other 500bn is to be split among medicare and other depts over ten years. But hey, we agree! Cut spending across the board!