Tax hike for wealthy won't kill growth: CBO

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Odysseus

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/14/news...d=SF_INV_River

Blankfein: Rich should pay more in taxes
By Emily Jane Fox @CNNMoney November 14, 2012: 1:47 PM ET


Email Print

Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein said politicians and the business community need to come together to remove the risk of another recession.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein wants politicians and business leaders to work together to avoid the "fiscal cliff," even if it means the rich end up paying more in taxes.

"I believe that tax increases, especially for the wealthiest, are appropriate," Blankfein wrote in a Wall Street Journal commentary in Wednesday's edition.

But those taxes must also be met with "serious cuts in discretionary spending and entitlements."

Blankfein argues that marginal tax rates should be kept low, but additional revenue will be generated by expanding the personal income tax base through closing loopholes.

No surprise that Blankfein would talk like this, at least until the statute of limitations on prosecuting him for massive fraud runs out. Then, no doubt, he'll tell Obama to go **** himself.

[Smiling Assassin27]

Anybody take a look at what Mr. Socialism has wrought in France? Growth: 0. Unemployment: 10%. Hollande gave himself 2 years to turn the economy around. Who wants to take that bet? Case study--watch and learn.

[Odysseus]

Originally Posted by Fedaykin

Some glimmer of sanity, yay. But let's not forget, when he says "entitlements" he means Social Security and Medicare. Those are NOT entitlement programs.

Agreed! We paid for those. They belong to us. It's a public trust.

[Odysseus]

Originally Posted by Smiling Assassin27

Anybody take a look at what Mr. Socialism has wrought in France? Growth: 0. Unemployment: 10%. Hollande gave himself 2 years to turn the economy around. Who wants to take that bet? Case study--watch and learn.

If you are not tracking this Europe is now trying to imitate us.

[TonyR]

Reacting to yesterday's Obama press conference...

If my political antenna is working correctly, it sounds to me that, in calling for an immediate extension of current tax rates on the nonwealthy, Obama is signaling to Congress that we can partially go over the fiscal cliff — that is, we can mitigate the most extreme effects of an austerity shock and buy enough time to work out something comprehensive over the course of the next several months. Obama seemed to me to be suggesting that the likelihood of agreeing broadly on reforms to the tax code and the entitlement system between now and Jan. 1 is roughly nil.

http://www.theamericanconservative.c...nt-have-a-deal

[TonyR]

[A] big part of the game is for each side to blame the other for the fiscal cliff. Obama’s play is to rule out extending the Bush tax cuts on the rich, and demand an extension of the Bush tax cuts on income under $250,000. Will Republicans agree to do that? Almost certainly not. But a new poll shows Americans are predisposed, by a 53 percent to 29 percent margin, to blame Republicans over Obama for any failure to avert the fiscal cliff. And so, if Obama can’t make Republicans extend the middle-class tax cuts before January, he can at least use his platform to communicate that they and not he are responsible for the standoff.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11...rk+Magazine%29

(bolding mine)

[BroncoBeavis]

Originally Posted by BowlenBall

So... you'd rather pass up a $100 billion a year savings because it's not $1 trillion?

Gotta start somewhere, my man....

Problem is you can't negotiate real solutions between opposing parties by saying "first give me what I want, then we'll discuss your ideas."

Both sides will have to give in somewhat on one imperfect deal.

[Fedaykin]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Problem is you can't negotiate real solutions between opposing parties by saying "first give me what I want, then we'll discuss your ideas."

Both sides will have to give in somewhat on one imperfect deal.

Yep, the right's gotta play ball. They want 100% their way (see: complete refusal to discuss tax increases as part of a debt solution), which just how the world works -- at least not for adults.

[Kid A]

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis

Problem is you can't negotiate real solutions between opposing parties by saying "first give me what I want, then we'll discuss your ideas."

Both sides will have to give in somewhat on one imperfect deal.

Correct, by extending middle class cuts now the GOP would be surrendering any leverage.

But when you hear Obama phrase it the way he does ("We should not hold the middle class hostage while we debate tax cuts for the wealthy.") you realize why this whole debate favors the Democrats. No, the Republicans won't sign away their leverage in the next couple weeks, but they're the ones in line to look really bad if everyone's taxes go up on Jan 1.

Granted, the President won't want his name attached to a failure to get this solved by the deadline either, but he has much better ground from a PR standpoint to stand on. If they don't compromise, the narrative will be that Republicans preferred everyone suffer rather than raise taxes on millionaires.

[cutthemdown]

Why doesn't Obama just let them expire, then present a middle class tax cut for a vote? Force the repubs to vote against it?

[cutthemdown]

So once again obama just positioning himself to blame republicans? Man that is all this guy does. how about some real leadership to get a deal done? he was absent when the commission tried to get something done before, and he will be again.

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Why doesn't Obama just let them expire, then present a middle class tax cut for a vote? Force the repubs to vote against it?

Well for starters the President doesn't create and present bills, congress does that.

[cutthemdown]

Originally Posted by TonyR

Well for starters the President doesn't create and present bills, congress does that.

Presidents have written legislation. They then have one of their own in Congress present the legislation for a vote.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Why doesn't Obama just let them expire, then present a middle class tax cut for a vote? Force the repubs to vote against it?

Probably because he's trying to avoid going over the cliff. If the GOP refuses to compromise I'd imagine that is exactly what he'll do though.

[cutthemdown]

Originally Posted by Drek

Probably because he's trying to avoid going over the cliff. If the GOP refuses to compromise I'd imagine that is exactly what he'll do though.

The term cliff just semantics to make it sound bad. We could go over the cliff, then lower taxes on the middle class, then put forth a military spending bill that both sides can agree on. Problem solved. Of course in the meantime the economy will be ****ed but its going to be anyways because Obama has ruined it. We might as well get the cuts to entitlements that come with the cliff.

[cutthemdown]

Funny what Tony said about presidents not creating legislation. That is true of Obama he just sits back and blames people.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Presidents have written legislation. They then have one of their own in Congress present the legislation for a vote.

Dude seriously, it shouldn't be possible for one to post this much about politics without an elementary level of understanding on basic government.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

The term cliff just semantics to make it sound bad. We could go over the cliff, then lower taxes on the middle class, then put forth a military spending bill that both sides can agree on. Problem solved. Of course in the meantime the economy will be ****ed but its going to be anyways because Obama has ruined it. We might as well get the cuts to entitlements that come with the cliff.

Yep, I'm sure that is exactly how the democratic party (leverage holders post-election) are going to play it. Save the military budget, let all the cuts hit domestic spending, and all just to keep the middle class tax cuts in place, which everyone wants.

Brilliant.

Anyhow, to point out yet another problem with your half assed response, the nation craves stability and some proof that our government can work together. What Obama is offering is an olive branch that will reassure and help everyone right out of the gate that all sides should be able to agree on.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

exit polls mean nothing. 48% of us want taxes low. That means you get some new revenue but not everything. Absolutley kidding yourselves.

you know ..it is now legal to smoke that **** in colo ...

[cutthemdown]

Obama offered give me my tax increase then we will talk about your ideas. How is that working with the other side?

[TheElusiveKyleOrton]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Obama offered give me my tax increase then we will talk about your ideas. How is that working with the other side?

The descent into stupidity picks up steam.

You're legendary around these parts, Cut. Because you're not smart. At all.

Wow.

[pricejj]

Originally Posted by Drek

Probably because he's trying to avoid going over the cliff. If the GOP refuses to compromise I'd imagine that is exactly what he'll do though.

Why would he want to pay for his record-braking deficit spending?

"Going over the cliff" means a massive tax increase on the middle-class...which only partially pays for Obama's unprecedented increase in government spending.

[Drek]

Originally Posted by pricejj

Why would he want to pay for his record-braking deficit spending?

"Going over the cliff" means a massive tax increase on the middle-class...which only partially pays for Obama's unprecedented increase in government spending.

The POTUS doesn't set the budget.

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

Of course in the meantime the economy will be ****ed but its going to be anyways because Obama has ruined it.

Explain this. How did Obama ruin the economy? (this should be good...)

[TonyR]

Originally Posted by TheElusiveKyleOrton

The descent into stupidity picks up steam.

You're legendary around these parts, Cut. Because you're not smart. At all.

Wow.

He's a glaring, blatant example of what the GOP is and why it just got destroyed in the election. And he's completely unaware of the fact. Bewildering to say the least. He's probably worth about $1.25 and yet his biggest concern is the prospect of the rich having to pay more taxes. That and military spending going down.