Obama demands tax rises for rich over fiscal cliff

It seems that it is time to walk the walk. No more talk from Obama about an increase in tax for the wealthy. Obama has called for the wealthy to pay just a little more to help our economy. Finally. Finally. A president who sees-"Wow we can collect a few pennies from these guys, give it to these guys and this may just create balance.

It seems anyone making over $250,000 per year would be affected, and many people are in outrage claiming this would destroy the economy. B.S. liars, this will definitely help out the economy. Has anyone ever tried? No. They theorize on its demise, and claim it would never work. Well like I said let's give it a try for one, since you have never given it a try before. If it doesn't work, then I am sure we can always revert. But welcome to our world now.

This is awesome, Obama said that his voters agree with him-which all of us do-even if you didn't vote for him, as he stated that the 98% would have to pay more taxes! Occupy the White House-Go Obama!

This is by far a selfish act, it is indeed what we have all been waiting for- a little bit of balance. Let the poor not have such a bad day living from day to day off the money you can make quickly. While the rich help their country overcome poverty.

Newly re-elected President Barack Obama has said the wealthy must pay more taxes under any political settlement to avert a looming budget crisis.

He said Congress must act against the so-called fiscal cliff, a package of tax rises and spending cuts due early next year.

But in a duelling news conference, Republican House Speaker John Boehner said tax rises would not be acceptable.

Budget analysts warn the US will tip into recession unless a deal is struck.

Mr Obama has repeatedly called for the affluent to pay more, but such a plan is anathema to Republicans.

The fiscal cliff would see the expiry of George W Bush-era tax cuts at the end of 2012, combined with automatic, across-the-board reductions to military and domestic spending.

'Open to compromise'
In the East Room of the White House on Friday, Mr Obama said: "We can't just cut our way to prosperity. If we're serious about reducing the deficit, we have to combine spending cuts with revenue. And that means asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more in taxes."

Continue reading the main story

Analysis
Mark Mardell
North America editor
President Obama is using the moral authority of his re-election to push his case. There is nothing new in his call for Congress to extend "middle-class tax cuts" at once. He said it repeatedly before the election.

But it's different now. He has a renewed mandate and his demand has a fresh weight behind it. He pointed out even people who didn't vote for him told opinion pollsters that taxes should go up for the richest.

There has to be agreement on a plan to cut the deficit. If not, there will be pretty horrible consequences. If the bomb goes off, it is not just the politicians who will be hurt. It is the US economy that would explode, and it would probably take what's left of the world economy with it.

Read more from Mark
The Democratic president continued: "I want to be clear. I'm not wedded to every detail of my plan. I'm open to compromise. I'm open to new ideas... but I refuse to accept any approach that isn't balanced."

He repeated his oft-stated call for tax rises on earnings over $250,000 (£157,000), while urging Congress to extend existing rates for 98% of taxpayers.

"This was a central question during the election," said Mr Obama. "It was debated over and over again. On Tuesday night, we found out that the majority of Americans agree with my approach."

He also invited Democratic and Republican leaders to the White House next week to discuss how to move forward.

A White House spokesman said afterwards the president would veto any bill extending tax cuts for those making more than $250,000.

But battle lines were drawn earlier on Friday, as Speaker Boehner restated his party's opposition to tax increases.

The most powerful Republican lawmaker told a press briefing that "raising tax rates will slow down our ability to create the jobs that everyone says they want".

Mr Boehner suggested "special-interest loopholes in the tax code, both corporate and personal" could be eliminated, as he advocated "entitlement reform as well as tax reform with lower rates".


Middle class plea for US politicians to heal the country
"Entitlement reform" is Washington-speak for cuts to federal spending on programmes such as healthcare for the poor and elderly and Social Security pensions - cherished among Mr Obama's Democratic allies.

Mr Boehner also cited a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on Thursday which warned the US economy would fall back into recession if no deal were struck on the fiscal cliff.

The analysis projected that the package of tax rises and spending cuts would cut the ballooning US deficit by $503bn (£315bn) through to next September, but also shrink the economy by 0.5% and cost millions of jobs.

Obama cabinet shake-up
The International Monetary Fund has repeatedly warned that failure by US lawmakers to reach a deal would deepen uncertainty over the global economy.

Continue reading the main story
What is the fiscal cliff?

Under a deal reached last year between President Obama and the Republican-controlled Congress, existing stimulus measures - mostly tax cuts - will expire on 1 January 2013
Cuts to defence, education and other government spending will then automatically come into force - the "fiscal cliff" - unless Congress acts
The economy does not have the momentum to absorb the shock from going over the fiscal cliff without going into recession
Q&A: The US fiscal cliff
Video: Fiscal cliff explained
Investor concerns over the issue have been partly blamed for two straight days of losses on financial markets this week.

As Mr Obama turns his attention to shaping a second term in office, his administration is expected to undergo a shake-up in the coming weeks.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defence Secretary Leon Panetta and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are among those expected to leave their posts.

Speculation has been swirling in Washington over possible replacements, with Democratic Senator John Kerry among those tipped as a substitute for Mrs Clinton.

Meanwhile, Republicans are carrying out a post-mortem on their presidential election campaign.

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told CBS News on Friday the party's loss "really necessitates" new thinking.

They had sent "mixed messages" on immigration and women's issues, she added.

While Mr Obama carried the popular vote by only a narrow margin, "clearly we are losing important segments" of the electorate, she said.

Source:
www.bbc.co.uk...

The wealthy of american society today are little more than modern day royalty.

I say,lets bring a little balance.

Now the my money is my money argument begins from those who have more than they need.

I say that the small amount of income I generate should be left alone for me to use,instead of paying into infrastructure for some arrogant showoff in his/her lexus to use.

You don't get rich by paying your way,you get rich by finding ways not to.

Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner
You don't get rich by paying your way,you get rich by finding ways not to.

I always love the quotes and analogies from the people here on ATS.

What was our tax structure like in 42, when the "greatest generation" were out "saving the world?"

What was it like in 62, when the rise of the middle class made America the worlds premiere economy?

In 72, when we were landing men on the moon?

In 92, when the commercial Internet was busting through its infancy and entering a very productive childhood?

I don't think there is any question that the US is capable of startling innovation and great things. Lets move our tax structure back towards that direction and find a point of equilibrium, cos' this ain't it.

Raise taxes on the rich?

Unlike government, rich people can actually control their spending. They can actually make cuts to offset the tax increases.

This will lead to slow growth (Obama even admitted this in his first term).

Will also lead to higher prices on consumer goods (higher taxes are always offset with higher prices).

Higher unemployment. Once again higher taxes lead to cutbacks to make up the difference. Instead of hiring 5-10 more people, why not cut payroll to make up the difference in the tax increase? (This is already happening)

End result? Less revenue to government.

You poor and middle class people making every penny count are in for a rude awakening when you get your first paycheck in 2013. Bush tax cuts are set to expire and it will hurt everyone.

The American economy is always at its GREATEST when the wealthy are paying their far share in taxes. When the taxes for the wealthy are low, the economy is at its WORST. THESE ARE FACTS!!!!!!!!!!! NOTHING TO DEBATE!!!!!!!!!

Conservative economists even say this is what is needed. The super wealthy con-artist conservatives will battle this will lies and nonsense, but in the END, everything points to RAISING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY TO GET THIS ECONOMY BACK.

If they want to be part of AMERICA, and USE our roads, and police, and hospitals, and schools, and colleges, and firefighters, and MILLIONS OF OTHER SERVICES, they need to pay their FAIR SHARE AND STOP WHINING. Unless they are ANTI-AMERICAN... and in that case GET THE HELL OUT as we dont need you PULLING THE COUNTRY DOWN anyways.

Time to pay their fair share. PERIOD!!!! The PARTY is OVER!!

Go on liberals. Take the money.

Raise taxes.

I suppose this will be the only way to show the rest of America that leftist policies won't work. That they are a failure.

I wonder if the left and Obama will claim ownership for the economy then.

Will the leftists finally take responsibility for the economy?

Will the leftists finaly take ownership for their own policies?

Originally posted by YourWIFI
The American economy is always at its GREATEST when the wealthy are paying their far share in taxes. When the taxes for the wealthy are low, the economy is at its WORST. THESE ARE FACTS!!!!!!!!!!! NOTHING TO DEBATE!!!!!!!!!

Conservative economists even say this is what is needed. The super wealthy con-artist conservatives will battle this will lies and nonsense, but in the END, everything points to RAISING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY TO GET THIS ECONOMY BACK.

If they want to be part of AMERICA, and USE our roads, and police, and hospitals, and schools, and colleges, and firefighters, and MILLIONS OF OTHER SERVICES, they need to pay their FAIR SHARE AND STOP WHINING. Unless they are ANTI-AMERICAN... and in that case GET THE HELL OUT as we dont need you PULLING THE COUNTRY DOWN anyways.

Time to pay their fair share. PERIOD!!!! The PARTY is OVER!!

edit on 11-11-2012 by YourWIFI because: (no reason given)

Do you actually think rich people in a free country will not do ANYTHING to offset this increase?

Or will they just sit back and take it?

It's common sense, not fantasy land.

Originally posted by solidguy

Originally posted by YourWIFI
The American economy is always at its GREATEST when the wealthy are paying their far share in taxes. When the taxes for the wealthy are low, the economy is at its WORST. THESE ARE FACTS!!!!!!!!!!! NOTHING TO DEBATE!!!!!!!!!

Conservative economists even say this is what is needed. The super wealthy con-artist conservatives will battle this will lies and nonsense, but in the END, everything points to RAISING TAXES ON THE WEALTHY TO GET THIS ECONOMY BACK.

If they want to be part of AMERICA, and USE our roads, and police, and hospitals, and schools, and colleges, and firefighters, and MILLIONS OF OTHER SERVICES, they need to pay their FAIR SHARE AND STOP WHINING. Unless they are ANTI-AMERICAN... and in that case GET THE HELL OUT as we dont need you PULLING THE COUNTRY DOWN anyways.

Time to pay their fair share. PERIOD!!!! The PARTY is OVER!!

edit on 11-11-2012 by YourWIFI because: (no reason given)

Do you actually think rich people in a free country will not do ANYTHING to offset this increase?

Or will they just sit back and take it?

It's common sense, not fantasy land.

They have had RECORD PROFITS in recent times, while the REST OF US have been pinching pennies already. THEY ARE BLUFFING and nothing will be needed to offset anything as they will just have to live with one less option on their yacht or personal jet that they buy brand new every few years. Them poor babies and their struggle while the rest of us STRUGGLE TO PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE. The super-wealthy are living so well, that they can be taxed at 90% and STILL NOT have a reason to pass it on to consumers. They are BLUFFING 100%.

This is simply propaganda NONSENSE, and folks are starting to see thorough it now. That is why Obama was reelected, and that is why ...

...EVEN CONSERVATIVE ECONOMIST AGREE WITH IT!!!!!!!!

CASE CLOSED, eh??

Contrary to what many of my countrymen believe,from reading posts here and conversing with them on the street,many people who are within the lower income brackets,on public assistance,welfare,homeless are not there because they are lazy.

They are there because the system demands more than is reasonable to make a pitiful small amount of pay compared to the cost of living.

We need to get real here,we all need certain things to survive,and we are here,so why make it so damned hard to earn a living compared to what things cost?.

Some wealthy investors send their money to this guy,in hopes of him expanding it more.I am not going to go into details,but apparently it was money they didn't need,or they wouldn't have risked sending it to the guy running the scheme to possibly lose.

This "Schemester" invests it in companies overseas where there are less environmental concerns,and people are not in a position to enjoy something resembling fair employment laws,or fair pay.More often than not,the workers who produce these products are nearly desperate to get by themselves.

The products are produced for pennies on the dollar compared to what it would cost to make them here,shipped back here to places like Wal-Mart,and other garbage stores,and sold for 100's of percent more than the cost of their manufacture.

Since we here in america are fairly ignorant,we flock to buy our cheap garbage,not realizing that we would be better off to support our local grocers,farmers,manufacturers,and in doing so,drive them out of business.

Now we find ourselve with a plethora of storefronts selling cheap garbage made in faraway lands,and no real production of anything but that which can't be imported.

I say,make the rich bastards pay for their mistakes,they are just as guilty as the ignorant masses who buy their cheap garbage.

Ok,I hear it coming already,....."It's Just Business"

Not AnyMore,it's just wrong now.

reply to post by beezzer


In the 30+ years since Reagan begun what we euphemistically know as "trickle-down" economics, productivity has increased 400%, and the cost of housing, medicine, food and energy has increased almost 500%.

Ergo: Trickle-down is a miserable failure, and dramatically shifts wealth upward, from working and middle class families, into the hands of an ever shrinking pool of economic elites.

Originally posted by YourWIFI
THEY ARE BLUFFING and nothing will be needed to offset anything as they will just have to live with one less option on their yacht or personal jet that they buy brand new every few years.

What about the people who have jobs producing and selling these options? What about the people employed who build these yachts and jets?

How will they be affected?

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by beezzer

 

In the 30+ years since Reagan begun what we euphemistically know as "trickle-down" economics, productivity has increased 400%, and the cost of housing, medicine, food and energy has increased almost 500%.

Ergo: Trickle-down is a miserable failure, and dramatically shifts wealth upward, from working and middle class families, into the hands of an ever shrinking pool of economic elites.

Trickle down IS a TOTAL MISERABLE FAILURE, but they DONT want to SEE it because...

...because it hurts their fat cat wallets. Their greed knows NO BOUNDS and they have ZERO concern for our country as a whole.

That is how our country was nearly RUINED...

I think there is major change on the horizon.

I don't think it will be the type of change anyone expects.

Hint: The Great Depression was cured by World War two.

Nothing like war to distract people from making real progress.

The old standby,the card up the sleeve,the thing at the bottom of the bag of tricks.

Originally posted by beezzer
Go on liberals. Take the money.

Raise taxes.

I suppose this will be the only way to show the rest of America that leftist policies won't work. That they are a failure.

I wonder if the left and Obama will claim ownership for the economy then.

Will the leftists finally take responsibility for the economy?

Will the leftists finaly take ownership for their own policies?

A fail? Have you ever researched tax rates on the wealthy and how well our economy did while they PAID their FAIR SHARE?? And how when they got a tax holiday, how it brought our economy down??

When the super wealthy pay their FAIR share, EVERYONE WINS!!!! The super wealthy are just so DAMN GREEDY that its all about THEM and they couldnt CARE LESS about the country as a whole. That is UN-AMERICAN there buddy.

Facts and charts SHOW THIS. You've seen the charts and facts but you refuse to acknowledge them and hope desperately that they are "SKEWED" or just a "LEFTY CONSPIRACY" and you dont want to BELIEVE IT, but it is THERE for you to see. And it proves you WRONG. Conservative economists PROVE YOU WRONG!!

Case closed!!!!!

And by the way, nice avatar, you were WRONG ABOUT THE ELECTION TOO I see!!!!!

Funny stuff!!

Funny indeed!!!

Trickle down economics is much better than trickle down government.

reply to post by solidguy


It is worth noting that no debate can be "won" (at any level) if your opposition presents a distillation and interpretation of actual facts and statistics, and your answer is a bumper-sticker slogan.

I'm just saying.

Isn't Obama just trying to get back to Clinton's tax rates (for the rich)? If that's true, then it HAS been done before, and if I recall, it didn't send our country over the cliff, and Clinton ended up with a surplus in the deficit.