From the New York Times:
WASHINGTON — President Obama will call this week for a broad plan to raise revenues and cut deficits, as the battle over fiscal issues moves past this weekend’s budget deal and into a broader and more consequential debate over the nation’s long-term fiscal health.
In a speech to be delivered at a university here on Wednesday, Mr. Obama will call on Congress to join him in writing a multiyear debt-reduction plan that would depart significantly from the one proposed by House Republicans, administration officials said.
The Republican plan includes an overhaul of Medicare and trillions of dollars in tax cuts, while sparing defense spending. Mr. Obama, by contrast, envisions a comprehensive plan that would include tax increases for the richest taxpayers and military spending cuts as well as savings in Medicare and Medicaid, along with changes to Social Security that the administration says will ensure its solvency for decades — much like his fiscal commission recommended in December.
The Radical Republicans will have their targets still, like Planned Parenthood, PBS, NPR and other government subsidized entities and will go after them with a vengeance. Education will also be targeted. Mental health and substance abuse programs have already been targeted. HCR will also have a nuke aimed at it.
Before the 2012 budget is considered, Congress must raise the debt ceiling. Failure to do so will ruin any chance of recovery and in all probability will limit our ability to borrow at low interest rates. Congressmen who try to play political reindeer games with the debt ceiling will pay for it at election time.
It is not known if the President will assume the same mediator role as he did for 2011 budget. Little is known how the Democrats will respond. What will be that target from either group?
The Paul Ryan plan calls for up front cuts in military spending to the exact tune of the totals currently being recommended by SecDef Gates himself. Gates, in fact, is cited by name in that regard in the Ryan document issued this week. Unless this administration has come unglued at the seams, one would have to assume that the Gates figure was cleared with the Oval Office. It is one thing if the Repubs seek any deeper cuts. It would be quite another if the White House casts aside the considered recomendations of its own SecDef and goes for a bigger number. Should be interesting to see this played out.
If you really were serious about reducing deficits, you would be discussing increasing taxes, not decreasing them. We have been operating under this low tax mantra for the past 10 – 20 years, and look what we have to show for it – unemployment hovering around 10%. The theory has been tested and it has failed.
GE paid not taxes last year, despite record profits. Oil companies receive huge subsidies that need to end.
You would also have to consider cutting not just defense, but entitlements like social security and medicare.
Why the Right-Wing Bullies Will Hold The Nation Hostage Again and Again
The President continues to legitimize the Republican claim that too much government spending caused the economy to tank, and that by cutting back spending we’ll get the economy going again.
Even before the bullies began hammering him, his deficit commission already recommended $3 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increase. Then the President froze non-defense domestic spending and froze federal pay. And he continues to draw the false analogy between a family’s budget and the national budget.
He is losing the war of ideas because he won’t tell the American public the truth: That we need more government spending now — not less — in order to get out of the gravitational pull of the Great Recession.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-the-Right-Wing-Bullies-by-Robert-Reich-110410-427.html
@Wolverine
“Unless this administration has come unglued at the seams,”
Whatever gave you the idea that it was EVER glued?
Starry, really? So….we’ve been in a recession for 10-20 years? How much do you want to tax? You’re so supportive of raising taxes…ok. How much and where? I agree that the tax system needs reform. The idea the GE makes a profit off of the tax system is ludicrous. But whose fault is that?
That would be the fault of politicians who garner more and more power and donations from playing with our corrupt tax code. First we have to fix the politicians, then the tax code. Make it simple with no deductions.
So, how much should a “rich” person or corporation pay? Of course, those corporate taxes WILL be passed on to you…so YOU will be paying those taxes.
@Cargosquid
You have to look beyond the pols. They wouldn’t push this idea of having something for nothing if John and Jane Constituent didn’t think they should have their house/car/boat/flat screen tv/designer shoes/pricey meals/ good roads/cheap airfare/ cheap food/suburban sprawl lifestyle for little personal cost. We’re a nation of debtors, people who want what they want when they want it, regardless of whether they have the cash to pay for it. It’s time to ante up the taxes or cash to pay for our debts. If you’re uncomfortable with paying more, I’d suggest having the top earners go back to what they were paying prior to their big present of a tax cut. It would help a little.
I don’t mind raising taxes if I felt it would help. Please point me to a time when Congress used more tax money to do anything but spend more money and borrow even more? Until I see real spending cuts, I refuse to support tax increases. When the companies playing by rules that the government set up can make a profit on the tax laws, how will raising taxes help? GE paid no taxes and got money in return. How will raising their rates help? They’ll just game the system, Obama will support them, and we lose MORE money. GE’s CEO is on Obama’s advisory board. Goldman Sachs runs the treasury. MORE taxation? How much debt got paid off under the tax rates under Johnson?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29861648/ns/politics-capitol_hill/
Do you want to go back to the 1960? Ok.
In 1979, the top 10 percent of households, as measured by income, paid 40.6 percent of all federal taxes; other ninety percent paid 59.4 percent.
But by 2005, the top 10 percent accounted for nearly 55 percent of all federal tax revenues, while the rest of the population paid about 45 percent.
The top one percent pays about 30% in taxes. 1/3 of income. Heck, God only asks for 10%!
So, ok. Lets raise taxes on high income earners, since large companies either don’t pay taxes and pass them on to you. Then what? How much will pay of a $14 Trillion debt or a $1.5 trillion dollar deficit?
Why doesn’t anyone get it? We can tax everyone 100% and still not pay off anything or balance the budget. They can spend it faster than we make it. Our debt is equal to our GDP.
And again, why is it moral to take more of someone’s money by force just because they are more successful? The idea of a progressive tax rate is, itself, immoral. Either we are equal under the law, or we are not.
By the way, Planned Parenthood and NPR may be safe, but its not over.
They may still kill the mohair subsidy! Save the mohair industry!
http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/10/fine-print-of-the-deal-still-under-negotiation/
A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed the details above Saturday. However, the negotiations on the fine print are now outside of each party’s leader’s offices.
Included in the list of riders for which no public information is available, and thus are likely still under negotiation:
– A rider banning funding on President Obama’s numerous “czars.”
– Riders that would rescind unobligated money from Obama’s economic stimulus (promotional material for the deal indicates this was a Republican “win,” but no concrete details are available).
– The exact structure of the Obamacare consolation prize riders. Promotional material indicated that, for instance, Republicans would get a full “audit” of the waivers given to companies and unions but many details are still forthcoming.
– A rider banning foreign aid to Saudi Arabia.
– A rider ending subsidies to mohair farmers.
Why didn’t all corporations game the system? The fact that anyone can game the system that much screams that something is wrong.
I would start with the millions of dollars put into state and federal elections. That makes me sick. And we wonder why the common man gets duped.
@cargo
There is a notion, rightly or wrongly, that those who have more can afford to give more.
I think that all Americans should have to contribute something, even if it is a dollar. I expect if we lowered the tax rate to 5% for everyone, flat rate, it would probably improve things.
There are other ways to tax other than the income tax. Those ideas need to be explored. Everyone always thinks income tax. Luxury taxes, a % sales tax, etc would work. Legalize marijuana and tax it. Who the hell cares. It might cut down on drug trafficking and border security. There are all sorts of ways to tax abuse Mary Jane and I seriously doubt it would increase usuage at all.
@Cargo, I don’t think for one second PBS and Planned Parenthood are safe. They won’t be safe ever. That is the shame of it.
I don’t think the country is safe. This debt ceiling thing should not be a political pawn. It needs to be passed and items don’t need to be held hostage.
Here’s a tax increase I can get behind from Instapundit, except the Republicans are just as guilty, so to paraphrase, “Some House TEA Partry member should add this to a bill and watch the Dems and the GOP react.
SO OBAMA’S PEOPLE ARE TALKING TAX INCREASES AGAIN. Here’s my proposal: A 50% surtax on anything earned within five years after leaving the federal government, above whatever the federal salary was. Leave a $150K job at the White House, take a $1M job with Goldman, Sachs, pay a $425K surtax. Some House Republican should add this to a bill and watch the Dems react.
UPDATE: Should we also provide that salaries paid to former government officials aren’t deductible for corporations? Or is that going too far? I say: Put it in as a negotiating point!
I am not sure I understand why you would want to put a surtax on people going to private industry. Plum jobs don’t last forever–generally just as longas a certain administration is in office. So you would tax Andy Card, Karl Rove, Arie Flechier Robert Gibbs 50%?
How would you ever get someone like Hank Paulson to serve? He gave up a multimillion dollar salary to SERVE his government.
I am just trying to follow the logic you are using.
@Moon-howler
Why shouldn’t items be held hostage? Is everything in the budget sacrosanct? If budget items are not cut, then why worry about the debt ceiling at all? Just keep printing money and raise the ceiling! In fact, why borrow money at all? We can just print it…oh, wait. That’s what they’re doing now. The Feds bought some of our debt with “monetary easing.”
We have to stop borrowing and spending. If they promise (which they’ll break) to stop borrowing and make real cuts, I’d be happy to have some tax increases to pay down the debt.
We have been borrowing and spending since this country has been in existence.
It will never happen. Learn a different mantra.
Do you understand what will probably happen if the debt ceiling isn’t raised? Who is ‘they’? Cargo, I am beginning you are simply too much of an ideologue to discuss practical solutions with. That might be the problem.
Cargo, perhaps you forgot – but Obama extended the Bush tax cuts a few months back.
Tax cuts have been in place for the last 10 years and what do we have to show for it? 10% unemployment and spiraling debts, that’s what!
The verdict is in. Supply side economics does not work, Cargo. Tax cuts do not create jobs.
Does everyone here think that the budget compromise we had was good? A good deal for the American taxpayer? A good, bi-partisan budget.
I am not aware of the details, marin. Too soon to tell.
Everything doesn’t have to be good for the American taxpayer. Considering that almost half of the American people pay no federal tax….its hard to say.
@Moon-howler
“They” are the politicians that never saw a spending program that they did not like.
We may have been borrowing and spending, but it was a “reasonable” amount. That’s why the previous deficits did not cause this reaction. But now we have increased the deficit by a factor of, at least, four. And the budget does not foresee an end to them. Obama and Pelosi planned on YEARLY budget deficits of over 1 trillion for the next decade. We cannot pay this back. Soon, we won’t be able to borrow money anywhere and the interest on the debt will encompass a majority of the budget.
As for Starry’s repetition that the tax cuts did not cause good economic times, I suggest he wasn’t living in the US. Where were you during the 4% unemployment, Starry? Where were you during the largest and longest boom in our history. Our economy started tanking as soon as Pelosi introduced the first 1.2 trillion dollar deficit budget. THAT’s not supply sided budgeting.
But, again, where is your evidence that YOUR ideas will cause an economic boom, Starry? Go ahead, enlighten us. Or is this just another drive-by squirrelling?
I am in 100% agreement to legalize marijuana and tax the hell out of it. I believe relaxation of marijuana laws and immigration laws could be a huge economic benefit to this country. Think about all the money it takes to fight marijuana and immigrants from coming into the country. Take away the illegal aspect and crime will go down, we won’t need to spend all that money going after the cartels and coyotes…let the government make the money, not the cartels! What a concept. We could tax weed by a ton and it would still be cheaper than what the cartels are getting for it. Why would anyone transport it illegally if it was legal? Same thing with immigrants…let the government collect the money at the border to let immigrants in instead of the immigrants paying a coyote $5K. Why would someone come here illegally if there was a legal way to do it at the same cost or lower than to come legally?
Wrong, Starryflights. The March 2011 report from the Labor Department says that the unemployment rate dropped to 8.8% — a full percentage point below November 2010. Larry Kudlow at CNBC has an interesting take on that. The big stimulus bill had almost zero effect on the unemployment rate and really isn’t much in play anymore. So, why the March drop? Kudlow’s business contacts in companies big and small seem to be reacting to that December 2010 two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts which has made them feel much more comfortable about their future prospects. Kudlow also opined that a continuation of this trend could actually help Obama in 2012 and that Obama has the Republicans to thank for convincing him to sign off on the extension.
Couldn’t agree more. You want polite and civil discourse? Let everyone light up a spliff every once in a while.
@Moon-howler
To close the revolving door of government agents becoming rich because of their political influence. Ie…Goldman Sachs running the Treasury, assorted Democrat and Repbulican lobbyists, etc. Now, if they go into a different field, no tax.
Is it still a cut, if, during the time it took to cut $38 billion, we added $54 billion to the debt?
We are spending it faster than we can cut it. That’s why we can’t “whittle” this away. We have to use a chainsaw.