Geithner won't rule out new taxes for middle class

[barryr]

What was that "250,000 or less won't have taxes raised" mantra that was repeated by Obama and Biden, among others? Just talk, read my lips again?

George's Bottom Line
Reporting and analysis from ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent and "This Week" Host George Stephanopoulos

Geithner Won’t Rule Out New Taxes for Middle Class
August 02, 2009 8:02 AM

To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, "We’re going to have to do what’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically,” Geithner told me. “And that’s going to require some very hard choices.”

“We will not get this economy back on track, recovery will be not strong and sustained, unless we convince the American people that we are going to have the will to bring these deficits down once recovery is firmly established,” he said.

While Geithner told me, “There are signs the recession is easing,” he warned that, “We have a ways to go.”

“I want to emphasize the basic reality that unemployment is very high in this country,” the secretary said. But, he underlined that the administration is “going to do what is necessary to bring growth back on track.”

Turning to the bank bailout, he told me it is “quite unlikely” that the U.S. Treasury will go back to Congress to ask for more funding for the financial rescue package.

"We do not plan to ask for more money and I think it’s quite unlikely that we do," Geithner said in his most blunt language to date on TARP funding. The secretary said that today the TARP has roughly $130 billion, in part due to more than $70 billion that has already come back into the government.

Geithner also strongly endorsed legislation currently pending in the House that would increase the power of the SEC and give shareholders more rights to vote on executive compensation. He insisted that Republican criticism that the government is overly involved in the financial system is unfounded.

"Everybody understands that we cannot have our financial system go back to the practices that brought this economy to the brink of collapse," he told me. "It is going to take fundamental reform."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/08/geithner-wont-rule-out-new-taxes-for-middle-class.html

[Spider]

time to wet the bed

[footstepsfrom#27]

So because George Stephanopoulos can't get the treasury secretary to speak for Obama, that obviously deserves a headline on this? Not only is he not entitled to speak for Obama, but Stephanopoulos knows this, and so he's simply looking to stir the pot.

BTW...bolding text only helps if you use it sparingly. I see no reason to bold nearly the entire story...just my .02.

[Spider]

So because George Stephanopoulos can't get the treasury secretary to speak for Obama, that obviously deserves a headline on this? Not only is he not entitled to speak for Obama, but Stephanopoulos knows this, and so he's simply looking to stir the pot.

BTW...bolding text only helps if you use it sparingly. I see no reason to bold nearly the entire story...just my .02.

;D consider the source ........... Drama and bedwetting is a way of life for some

[cutthemdown]

Yeah you won't see Obama talking about this much until he actually has to do it.

Really though where else can they get money to pay for health care? There just isn't enough rich people to tax to get it done.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Yeah you won't see Obama talking about this much until he actually has to do it.

Really though where else can they get money to pay for health care? There just isn't enough rich people to tax to get it done.
This is not a trick question. In the stimulus bill, do you know how much of the $780+ billion was based on tax revenue?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What was that "250,000 or less won't have taxes raised" mantra that was repeated by Obama and Biden, among others? Just talk, read my lips again?

When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.
What a bunch of BS! First, you don't understand what you read and second, just where in this parroting crap you posted does it say Obama is going to raise taxes on the middle class?

[cutthemdown]

This is not a trick question. In the stimulus bill, do you know how much of the $780+ billion was based on tax revenue?

No i don't really. I do know Obama made some rosy prediction on revenue that probably won't hold up. That means not enough money for the budget he just passed.

I would think though most of the money not tax money. They haven't been getting enough probably because economy down, so taxes down.

I would say they just printed more money, sold more bonds, stick head between legs and pray for no inflation.

I wouldn't be surprised though if you know a lot more specifics then I do.

But something like paying for healthcare different then a one time stimulus. You have to come up with a tax revenue that is consistently high enough to keep the system solvent.

Am I totally way off your thinking here? I don't feel I am being radical, just looking at it logically.

[cutthemdown]

What a bunch of BS! First, you don't understand what you read and second, just where in this parroting crap you posted does it say Obama is going to raise taxes on the middle class?

His point is they are discussing a VAT. That is a tax on goods prior to being sold. Different then a sales tax in many ways, sneakier for sure.

It will raise the price of every single product in the country unless that product is exempt. I would think some things would be exempted to lessen it on the poor.

The thing is a VAT is a regressive tax in that it hits poor people harder then rich people.

Any tax experts here that can really explain to us what a value added tax would mean to our economy, to inflation, and to our wallets?

Not sure but maybe like 2-3% more for everything you buy in a yr? I don't know is that low? would it be more?

[rastaman]

What was that "250,000 or less won't have taxes raised" mantra that was repeated by Obama and Biden, among others? Just talk, read my lips again?

George's Bottom Line
Reporting and analysis from ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent and "This Week" Host George Stephanopoulos

Geithner Won’t Rule Out New Taxes for Middle Class
August 02, 2009 8:02 AM

To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, "We’re going to have to do what’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically,” Geithner told me. “And that’s going to require some very hard choices.”

“We will not get this economy back on track, recovery will be not strong and sustained, unless we convince the American people that we are going to have the will to bring these deficits down once recovery is firmly established,” he said.

While Geithner told me, “There are signs the recession is easing,” he warned that, “We have a ways to go.”

“I want to emphasize the basic reality that unemployment is very high in this country,” the secretary said. But, he underlined that the administration is “going to do what is necessary to bring growth back on track.”

Turning to the bank bailout, he told me it is “quite unlikely” that the U.S. Treasury will go back to Congress to ask for more funding for the financial rescue package.

"We do not plan to ask for more money and I think it’s quite unlikely that we do," Geithner said in his most blunt language to date on TARP funding. The secretary said that today the TARP has roughly $130 billion, in part due to more than $70 billion that has already come back into the government.

Geithner also strongly endorsed legislation currently pending in the House that would increase the power of the SEC and give shareholders more rights to vote on executive compensation. He insisted that Republican criticism that the government is overly involved in the financial system is unfounded.

"Everybody understands that we cannot have our financial system go back to the practices that brought this economy to the brink of collapse," he told me. "It is going to take fundamental reform."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/08/geithner-wont-rule-out-new-taxes-for-middle-class.html

The taxes need to be repealed back to where they were in 1978!!!!! I wouldn't mind one bit.

[rastaman]

Yeah you won't see Obama talking about this much until he actually has to do it.

Really though where else can they get money to pay for health care? There just isn't enough rich people to tax to get it done.

You get the money by rolling back the Reagan tax cuts back to where they were in 1979 and you close the tax loop holes and you shut down illegal offshore accounts. Imagine how much tax revenue suddenly becomes available over just a 5 year period....let alone 10 years. We are talking trillions of dollars over a 5 or 10 year period.

Need more revenue and if you want to recoup the trillions stolen from Wall Street and its bailout.....charge Wall Street a 1% tax on all trades generated and transacted and speculation over a 10 year period, we are now talking $3.5 trillion over 10 years or $350 billion annually. Make this 1% tax PERMENENT!!!

Lastly, cut back on defense spending and out dated and unecessary military industrilize complex weapons system and vastly cut back on Empire building, all of which will free up $100's of billions annually. Its estimated our nation spends btwn $600 to $800 billion (that we know of). Why not for starters we cut military spending down to 50% percent......thats $300-$400 billion saved annually that could be put to better use to rebuild America's infrastructure.

So now do you see where all the money can come from!!!

[TailgateNut]

You get the money by roll backing the Reagan tax cuts back to where they were in 1979 and you close the tax loop holes and you shut down illegal offshore accounts. Imagine how much tax revenue suddenly become available over just a 5 year period....let alone 10 years.


Why would we want to bother those who are profiteering by using any and all methods to not contribute while using the system to inflate their bottom line.

The OUTRAGE of expecting THEM to step up to the plate.:rofl:

[Meck77]

Why would we want to bother those who are profiteering by using any and all methods to not contribute while using the system to inflate their bottom line.

The OUTRAGE of expecting THEM to step up to the plate.:rofl:

Ironically enough this is one of the headlines in today's Denver Post that I was just going to start a topic on but it fits right here.

Fraud claims for Colorado welfare benefits climb steeply.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_12980453

Fraud claims for Colorado welfare benefits climb steeply
Metro investigators get more reports of people lying to get assistance as the need for aid rises.
By Allison Sherry
The Denver Post
Posted: 08/03/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
Updated: 08/03/2009 08:16:03 AM MDT

As the number of people needing government help surges in the metro area, so too does the number of complaints from neighbors, relatives, caseworkers and co-workers alleging fraud by recipients.

Fraud investigators in two of the largest counties in the metro area say their small teams are swamped with complaints that food stamp, welfare and Medicaid recipients are lying to get state and federal benefits.

In Jefferson County, investigators are dealing weekly with people who use correction fluid on Xcel utility bills and apartment leases so county intake workers don't know how many people are living in a particular house. Investigators in Denver County start at 6:30 a.m., knocking on apartment doors, trying to verify who sleeps where and whether people are truthful about incomes and living arrangements.

For counties, fraud investigations and recovery can be lucrative: Denver estimates that in 2008, investigations prevented $308,599 of ineligible payments and identified $663,504 that is owed the county.

Jefferson County officials estimate they are owed more than $1 million in back pay for food stamp, welfare and Medicaid fraud.

The motivations for committing fraud can vary. Some women are upset that the fathers of their children aren't helping to support the family.

"Sometimes they're angry and that's why they're doing it. They don't feel like they're getting help from fathers," said Janet Sullivan, Jefferson County's investigations quality assurance supervisor. "In some cases, they're living with the fathers, but they're not helpful."

Advocates and lawyers for people in these situations say fraud investigators often step over the line, that they use police tactics to interrogate neighbors and landlords, that they draw false conclusions just because of someone's living situation, and that they take advantage of people struggling in tough times.

"I practically have to advise clients to not have anything to do with a man, not even a roommate," said Peter Komlos-Hrobsky, a lawyer and supervisor at Colorado Legal Services. "It's ridiculous."

A few mornings a week, Denver investigator Doug Golden leaves the city's human services building before 7 a.m. He wears a suit and a tie and has the authority to carry a gun, but says he doesn't.

His first stop on a recent Wednesday was to a Montbello apartment building. A Denver caseworker suspects a woman living there is lying about her income to receive help in the Child Care Assistance Program.

For Golden, these stops are designed to gather information. He gets in secure buildings by ringing the apartment manager first, and talks to whomever answers the door. He usually makes the rounds with neighbors or the landlord.

"I have a pretty good success rate," he said, in getting information that will stop fraud and save agencies tens of thousands of dollars in bogus claims.

In 2008, Denver handled 269 fraud complaints for the entire year. Already in 2009, almost 200 complaints have been filed.

Caseloads of people on government-assistance rolls in Denver County also are up. Last June, 137,124 people were receiving welfare, food stamps, Medicaid or help from other programs. This year, that number is almost 160,000.

Most complaints start with a suspicious caseworker. In some places, county workers are given training to keep an eye out for odd behavior. Other tips come from employers, landlords or neighbors.

In Jefferson County, complaints have almost doubled this year from last. Sullivan says most complaints are about what she calls "household composition."

Komlos-Hrobsky at Legal Aid has another name that goes back to practically when welfare began: the "man of the house" investigations.

Counties try to make sure that if someone is collecting some sort of social assistance they are honest about who lives with them.

Komlos-Hrobsky said his team often challenges these types of cases.

"Lots of people who are not related, not romantically involved, may live together. We see that more and more for economic reasons," he said. "The counties seem to jump on that as an assumption that this person is supporting the woman."

Star Roy got a knock on the door when she was taking a nap one afternoon after being up all night with a teething baby.

The 33-year-old then-Adams County resident said the woman identified herself as a sheriff and went through her kitchen cabinets and bathroom looking for male toiletries to prove the resident was living with her children's father.

Roy received child support from him but was paying her own rent. She was receiving food stamps at the time. The county tried to garnish money from her tax return, saying she received $10,000 too much for food help. She won her case in an administrative hearing, and Adams County had to pay her back. The county didn't return calls for comment.

Roy works at Wal-Mart now and lives in Jefferson County. Even though she won her case, she won't go back on federal assistance because, she said, the humiliation isn't worth it.

"It's easier to live on beans and potatoes and rice then do this again," she said. "It's just not worth it."

[TailgateNut]

Granted there is widespread abuse of the system, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to loss of tax revenue due to loopholes. I believe both need to be addressed immediately. Any and all loopholes need to be CLOSED. Get rid of any and all illeglas currently in this country, negate any incentives for American companies who outsource work, investigate any and all fraud and waste and hand out fine and jail sentences. No more no bid goverment contracts (The Halliburtons of the world need to be brought back down to earth) Get tough and things will get better.

[rastaman]

Corporate welfare fraud is soaring as well. Wall street and AIG, citi bank have already allocated $100's of billions in empolyee bonuses generated from tax payer bailout money.

The federal government spent $92 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to businesses and private- sector corporate entities — expenditures commonly referred to as "corporate welfare" — in fiscal year 2006. The definition of business subsidies used in this report is broader than that used by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis, which recently put the costs of direct business subsidies at $57 billion in 2005. For the purposes of this study, "corporate welfare" is defined as any federal spending program that provides payments or unique benefits and advantages to specific companies or industries.
Supporters of corporate welfare programs often justify them as remedying some sort of market failure. Often the market failures on which the programs are predicated are either overblown or don't exist. Yet the federal government continues to subsidize some of the biggest companies in America. Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, General Electric, and others have received millions in taxpayer-funded benefits through programs like the Advanced Technology Program and the Export-Import Bank. In addition, the federal crop subsidy programs continue to fund the wealthiest farmers.
Because the corporate welfare state transcends any specific agency — and therefore any specific congressional committee — one way to reform or terminate those programs would be through a corporate welfare reform commission (CWRC). That commission could function like the successful military base closure commission. The CWRC would compose a list of corporate welfare programs to eliminate and then present that list to Congress, which would be required to hold an up-or-down vote on the commission's proposal.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=8230

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What was that "250,000 or less won't have taxes raised" mantra that was repeated by Obama and Biden, among others? Just talk, read my lips again?
As I said, you are nothing more than an ignorant, easily led right wing parrot as is the Mad Yak....

==================================================
Obama will not raise middle class taxes: White House (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090803/pl_nm/us_obama_taxes_3)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama maintains his "clear commitment" to not raise taxes on middle class families, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said on Monday.

After Obama's advisers appeared to leave the door open to a middle class tax hike over the weekend, Gibbs told reporters he was reiterating the president's promise not to raise taxes on those that make less than $250,000 a year.