To hear conservatives tell it, you’d think mobs of shiftless welfare moms were marauding through the streets of Greenwich and Palm Springs, lynching bankers and hedge-fund managers, stringing up shopkeepers, and herding lawyers into internment camps. President Obama and his budgeteers, they say, have declared war on the rich.
On Tuesday, Washington Post columnist (and former Bush speechwriter) Michael Gerson argued in an op-ed that “Obama chose a time of recession to propose a massive increase in progressivity—a 10-year, trillion-dollar haul from the rich, already being punished by the stock market collapse and the housing market decline.” The plans are so radical, “there will not be enough wealthy people left to bleed.” CNBC’s Larry Kudlow wrote that “Obama is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.”
[…]
Obama’s proposals don’t mean the government would steal every penny you make above the $250,000 threshold, or that making more than $250,000 would somehow subject all of your income to higher taxes. Rather, you’d pay 36 cents to the government in income taxes on every dollar over the threshold, rather than 33 cents.
[…]
Second, this return to 2001’s tax rates was actually part of the Bush tax plan. […] Third, we know from recent experience that marginal tax rates of 36 percent and 39 percent aren’t wealth killers. […] Fourth, we also know from recent experience that lower marginal rates on income taxes, and lower rates on capital gains and dividends, aren’t necessarily wealth producers.
[…]
What would happen if the marginal rate on the portion of your income above $250,000 were to rise from 33 percent to 36 percent? Under the old regime, you’d pay $16,500 in federal taxes on that amount. Under the new one, you’d pay $18,000. The difference is $1,500 per year, or $4.10 per day. Obviously, the numbers rise as you make more. But is $4.10 a day bleeding the rich, a war on the wealthy, a killer of innovation and enterprise?
# 34 bobbo said, “wasn’t TARP One around $750Billion?”
Correct, TARP 1 was written by Pelosi, signed by Bush & promoted by Sen. Obama.
@ Bobbo
“Course, Obama is too chicken to travel to Florida to sit down and debate Rush.”
What Rush doesn’t realize is that this country has been trading cultural wealth for (temporary) material wealth for 20+ years.
First, we have been depleting the cultural wealth with reduced work ethics, lazy practices (debt = spend today! Don’t earn the right!), bad planning (bye bye manufacturing), foreign consumption (cheap imported goods = good in short term, exceedingly costly in the long term), lax education.
These practices have increased the material wealth greatly (we have a lot more stuff!).
And mortgaged the country (we haven’t paid for it … yet).
Both of the above are fine.
But what we will NOT soon recover from is the damage to our culture. True hard work, innovation, efficiency, discipline = these are all gone.
When manufacturing was here, we were breeding experienced people who had important roles and made important decisions.
Today, most jobs are red tape with low levels of actual responsibility because the service sector only competes with itself.
Re: School Vouchers in D.C.
Perhaps someone can give a more thorough description but from what I skimmed, it appears to be beneficial to the students and the public schools in general.
http://tinyurl.com/bt7o8j
When you have 40% of the population that pays $0 in taxes and gets to vote on what the other 60% pay, you get what Obama and the left (redundant I know) call “fair.” When you tax the most productive things in society and distribute to the less productive in society you get less productivity. It’s pretty simple, Obama accepts this idea with carbon yet rejects this with productivity.
We are in for a very, very long recession, exasperated by Obama’s policies. This will be followed by a short bounce (which will be defined as the Obama economy) because of the amount of money they are printing, then a decline with inflation (defined back as the Bush economy), then unemployment, etc. I know nobody is taught this in school, but when you make your boss and your company poor, nobody ends up with a job.
eat the rich. If we really want to buy into meritocracy we should raise the estate tax since I didn’t do anything to merit a huge inheritance…
contempt, your previous president was an oaf. He stood there slack jawed while Lehman Bros. tanked and all hell broke loose. Of course he was slack jawed during Katrina and 9-11 so what do you expect?
Because things were let go the current guy will have to overcorrect and overspend stupidly. Expect continued turbulence and idiotic partisan decisions. Same nonsense, different stupidity.
But that’s the American way it seems. Swing wildly one way, then swing wildly the other way. Then wonder why there is no stability.
@ Paddy-O
“1) Ask the kids who are going to the schools.”
Am I responsible for others kids? Only my own. That is their parent’s responsibility.
“2) If the public schools continue to loose $ because parents choose a better option for their kids, they’ll either shape up or die. It’s called evolution.”
I don’t believe trying to mold the government in that manner works particularly effectively compared to voting with your feet. Especially not in Washington D.C.
“3) Yes, punish the children because of the parents. Only the children of elitist’s deserve a decent education. ”
It is the responsibility of parents to see that their children get a quality education. They have the option to make sacrifices if they choose.
Last I checked, we have the freedom to live where we choose AND the freedom to work where we choose in the United States.
“Spoken like a true liberal.”
I don’t believe in those kinds of labels because they convey no information.
I believe parents are responsible for their children’s welfare and education (although I’d make exceptions for vaccination/health care).
Using the narrow liberal-conservative system labelling system … doesn’t this make me more conservative than you that I believe parents have the ultimate responsibility for their child’s education?
#36–HMyers==your review is too loosey goosey to establish an actual “position.” All you have identified is that our economy has gone downhill–observable by all.
Lots of studies show Americans to be among the hardest working of all workforces. More productivity. Less sick days, holidays, employee benefits etc compared to everyone else. So, I don’t know what you mean by “the culture of hard work” is gone.
Doesn’t matter how hard you have worked, and are willing to continue to work when your job goes overseas.
Yes, many short term decisions beneficial to only a few have been made. That is no criticism of the remaining majority==most of them/us workers.
# 41 Hmeyers said, “Using the narrow liberal-conservative system labelling system … doesn’t this make me more conservative than you that I believe parents have the ultimate responsibility for their child’s education?”
Only if you also believe that the gov’t doesn’t have the right to forcibly take your earnings…
Otherwise, you are much more liberal than I…
#38, give it a rest. The neo-libs like Bobbo, think that economic groups exist in a vacuum. And that they can raise taxes on the employers, yet it will have no effect at all on the jobs.
Personally, I will not take a pay cut. Sorry bobbo, your attempt to punish me, will not work out like you think. Instead, I know who in the office voted for Obama. Those “change” bumper stickers really make it easy. So when the tax hike comes down, I will simply raise my pay, and get rid of an employee. During my close out interview, if he asks why, I will be honest and say, “the man you voted for, is raising my taxes, I am not going to take a pay cut, it only fair that the person who voted for the man that trying to cut my pay be the first to go.”
In a few years when Obama passes his next government growth bill, I will probably cut another. When I cannot cut any more, I will retire. After all its hard to cut income when you don’t have any.
But don’t worry about it, I am sure those people I will cut, will find good government jobs.
#45 – That’s a great idea. I never thought of looking for the bumper stickers.
#45, Instead of firing them, you could ask them to work for free. Then you could negotiate back up to 50% of their normal salary. That would be like firing one person but getting the work of two. After all, everybody knows when you take money from someone they shouldn’t get upset but continue to produce as normal. It’s a win-win!
Luckily, all my people were Ron Paul supporters (except one but he voted for McSame). Of course, in our industry, you have to have a head on your shoulders to succeed. No slackers.
#40 QB
>>that’s the American way it seems
No, just the way of politicians. I’m sure Canada also has it’s share of losers who have gravitated into politics because they are too incompetent to hold down a real job.
#45–Bob==if you weren’t hallucinating you would fire one or two employees RIGHT NOW and make more money while the sun is shining. Whats wrong with you?
Fantasies and BS aside, I read the Obama tax plan will raise taxes on 3.5% of “small businesses” however it was defined.
You brave capitalists and LIEBERTARIANS are just self centered little f&cktards who should have been killed in your sleep to clean out the gene pool.
“I got mine, all by myself, with no help from anyone else===so screw all you all!!!”
Very noble and insightful.
# 49 bobbo said, “Fantasies and BS aside, I read the Obama tax plan will raise taxes on 3.5% of “small businesses” however it was defined.”
Actually, with the new energy taxes it will raise what everyone in the US pays. Even if you currently pay no income tax…
#35, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, Leading Troll Extraordinare, and Asstrologist
# 34 bobbo said, “wasn’t TARP One around $750Billion?”
Correct, TARP 1 was written by Pelosi, signed by Bush & promoted by Sen. Obama.
Wrong.
The TARP was written so Paulson had $375 billion to use to aid faltering banks and had to ask Congress for the second half of the money. He was to report to a Congressional Committee on the progress and details. You do remember who the Secretary of the Treasury was. HINT: his boss goes by the name GEORGE W. BUSH. The same boss that would never tell Congress anything
Paulson refused to tell Congress who was receiving the money and under what circumstances or conditions. As it turns out, the money was just GIVEN to large banks with no strings. And those banks just pocketed the money. Some banks didn’t even need the money but apparently were told they had to take it.
When Paulson came back before Congress in early January, again he refused to tell Congress any details of the bailout. While this was going on, several banks were seen to pay huge bonuses to their CEOs. Congress did not give the second $375 B until after Obama was sworn in.
In fairness to Bobbo, who has carried on a very intelligent discussion, he framed it as a question. You didn’t. But then intelligence has never been your strong suit. Nor has answering questions.
# 51 Mr. Fusion said, “The TARP was written so Paulson”
Nope. ALL spending bills ORIGINATE in the House.
Back to school for you.
Thanks for playing, there is a box of Rice-a-Roni for you and a copy of the UCMJ…
#50–Paddy-Zero==since you are about 80% incapable of answering a direct question, I will assume you are referring to carbon cap and trade policy being formulated or some other program with similar effect?
In such case, it is completely DISHONEST of you to confuse and conflate entirely different issues.
Income Tax is different from any other tax or revenue producing activity. Each little provision affects different people differently and one cannot be called the other without looking like a tool.
You know what a tool is don’t you Paddy? T – O – O – L. aka Political Retards.
If Obama cuts my income tax, imposes a carbon tax on coal, and I don’t use coal AT ALL:
1. How have my income taxes gone up?
2. How has my net income gone down at all?
When you make such basic mistakes, everything you say thereafter is suspect. Some day you may recognize that and “instantly” gain credibility.
Or not.
# 53 bobbo said, “Income Tax is different from any other tax or revenue producing activity.”
Correct. I said everyone will be paying more as a result of O’Mama’s tax policies. That is true.
Call it what you want, the $ still come out of your wallet…
Omamabots are sure stupid.
#54–zero==”call it what you want.”
I’m actually kinda stunned.
I love this blog. I would never meet anyone like you in the real world. Might swerve my car to run over you, but never actually meet you.
I need a new hobby.
#38, smitty,
When you have 40% of the population that pays $0 in taxes and gets to vote on what the other 60% pay, you get what Obama and the left (redundant I know) call “fair.”
Who and where are these 40% of the population?
When we were in a store yesterday, my nine yr/o paid tax on a candy bar she bought with her allowance. But, even though she paid a tax, she isn’t even allowed to vote. Now can she run for Congress and have a voice in how her taxes are spent. But, apparently you do.
@ Bobbo
“Lots of studies show Americans to be among the hardest working of all workforces. More productivity. Less sick days, holidays, employee benefits etc compared to everyone else.”
Yes … and due to the loss of manufacturing they are mastering fluff jobs that don’t produce products.
Not unlike 12th century China where they established a monsterous bureaucracy.
There is certainly a difference between mastering engineering or leading a production team versus being a spreadsheet jockey or a call center drone reading from a script and the manager that grades the workers from a spreadsheet of stats.
@ Paddy-O
“Only if you also believe that the gov’t doesn’t have the right to forcibly take your earnings…
Otherwise, you are much more liberal than I…”
The brand of thinking that the Republican party produces has noble goals but methods incompatible with reality as it stands today.
Take “free trade” … this was supposed to be a panacea. And we’ve lost lots of jobs overseas and with outsourcing. And offshoring.
Oh! And the patent system invented to protect USA “intellectual property” .. these drug companies and tech companies still benefit even when relocating overseas.
And the “free market” … this is the concept of very, very limited government oversight. Well, that didn’t work in 1950s when General Motors made cars that killed people and it doesn’t work now with, say, the banking industry.
The Republican goals are noble. Some of that platform of ideas is right. But the economic ones are mostly wrong.
Take “free trade”. Now, in theory, this should force our government to be more competitive tax-wise and regulation-wise versus other governments. Right? Well … did it work? No.
And the reason it failed is because the federal government is far to inefficient to respond to change. Something Republicans say all the time.
The Republican platform has failed not because the goals aren’t noble but because the actions/positions advocated don’t actually achieve said goals.
(And taxes … in a country with tons of fat people driving gas guzzlers and everyone has an expensive cell phone … I’m just not sold on the “tax burden is too high” issue. Obama is proposing some very mild stuff.)
RE: #56,
Oopps, I screwed the pooch again.
The second last sentance should read:
Nor can she run for Congress and have a voice in how her taxes are spent.
contempt said, “I’m sure Canada also has it’s share of losers who have gravitated into politics because they are too incompetent to hold down a real job.”
Oh absolutely, but we have a completely different system (with pluses and minuses) so we don’t get the wild fluctuations that you poor devils go through. For example, we can call an election, have it, and completely swap the government in less than a month – all with no prior notice. You guys had the election months ago and you’re still trying to vet out your senior government officials who will then have to learn their jobs. Cabinet ministers in our government will regularly switch jobs with very little actual hiccups.
I’m not saying we don’t have problems, it’s that we have a different attitude towards government and how it works. For example we regulate our banks far differently and actively seek peer review on our policies from other countries – a process which Americans would not tolerate.
It’s almost like we’re another country. 😉
# 57 Hmeyers said, “Take “free trade”. Now, in theory, this should force our government to be more competitive tax-wise and regulation-wise versus other governments. Right? Well … did it work? No.”
Correct. It was a stupid idea. We should go back to import duties and get rid of income tax.
4, So if presidents have THAT much control over an economy, why would any of them want to be credited for creating a recession? http://tinyurl.com/aswxm6
18, Frankly I like working for rich people. They can afford me. If Obama or any politician for that matter wanted true transparency, they’d start off with a flat / fair tax. But no, we’re not going to get it… makes it hard to push pork in spending bills like the stimulus package.
22. Bush tax cuts like the ones Kennedy and Reagan did all increased revenues. It was government spending that was out of whack. Also, Bush inherited a recession. His tax cuts got us out of the recession that Clinton handed over to him.
38. Obama’s definition of “rich” (start watching at 4:24): http://tinyurl.com/awv33j
40. Bush was president for less than a year when 9-11 happened. The “current” intel at the time was from the previous administration which crippled the intel community through Gorelick who sat on the 9-11 commission play a little game of CYA. Katrina is so overblown. That was more the fault of the local and state governments… but you know what? 60k+ people without electricity was a big deal when Bush was President… but when we just had over 1 million people without it under Obama that wasn’t very newsworthy now was it?
42. Well for starters, perhaps we should cut corporate taxes in half like China is doing? The United States has the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It’s quite possible that cutting corporate taxes would have an influx of international businesses and more jobs for Americans.
44. Won’t / Can’t happen under this administration. Fair / Flat taxes make it hard to hide pork because things are too transparent.
45, 46. Ditto.
49. I think capitalists and libertarians just simply disagree with you that their money is yours to spend by having government be used as an instrument of force to collect our money for your liberal agenda. You are more than welcome to be as noble as you wish to be with your money, but frankly I’ve earned what I make and I intend to minimize how much government will take from me.
#61–guyver==don’t be a goof. Labeling economic developments by the President/Congress in Office at the Time is only a very rough label. But still==one does expect “differences” between President A who cuts taxes and starts two wars with President B who restores taxes and ends two wars, and hopefully prevents a third war by writing a letter (aka diplomacy?). The direct answer to your question though is that most likely the Presidents who do “cause” a recession think they are absolutely innocent and the downturn is somebody elses fault. You know==the bank robbers stole the money, all I did was remove the guards type of mind set. Like yours.
#56
Well sadly like most on the left you don’t understand the tax code so of course raising taxes is not a problem for you. What your daughter paid was a sales tax implemented by the state.
And honestly if I paid no federal tax I wouldn’t care too much about the federal tax codes either and I would probably also justify paying my “share” by saying I paid sales tax, or gas tax, etc. Replace the private sector with the public sector and you get poverty across the board. But I know that’s ok for those on the left, as long as everyone is equally poor, then you’re happy, it’s the disparity of wealth that bothers you.
#56
Well sadly like most on the left you don’t understand the tax code so of course raising taxes is not a problem for you. What your daughter paid was a sales tax implemented by the state, were she in Oregon she wouldn’t have paid it. .
And honestly if I paid no federal tax I wouldn’t care too much about the federal tax codes either and I would probably also justify paying my “share” by saying I paid sales tax, or gas tax, etc. Replace the private sector with the public sector and you get poverty across the board. But I know that’s ok for those on the left, as long as everyone is equally poor, then you’re happy, it’s the disparity of wealth that bothers you.
I guess we really missed having rich people in this country from the years of 1936 through 1981 inclusive, a time during which the top tax bracket never dropped below 70%.
How quickly the neocons forget.
http://tinyurl.com/572qsx