Quantcast

Comments about ‘White House: President Obama will veto any bill extending tax cuts for those making more than $250K’

Return to article »

Republicans seek lower rates, new revenue through eliminating some tax breaks

Published: Friday, Nov. 9 2012 12:54 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Kyle loves BYU/Jazz
Provo, UT

No we don't Mr. President. Your approach is don't bother to create a budget and when you want to increase spending say "the rich Americans don't pay their fair share".

Obama's approach to the deficit is ignore it and act like he didn't say in 2008 that running such large deficits is immoral to pass on to our grandchildren.

David King
Layton, UT

Sadly, I think the President is right. The majority of us seem to believe that the deficit can be solved simply by making someone else feel the pain. Many in the middle class will insist on keeping their tax cuts. Others will insist that not one penny can be cut out of the entitlements. Republicans will insist that not one person will have to see their taxes go up. That's why I'm losing faith that we'll ever solve this problem. We all seem to believe that the problem of our deficit can be solved soley by taxing another group or only cutting somebody else's government program.

Madden
Herriman, UT

I don't think Obama has been a very good President, and I didn't vote for him. However, the Republicans of Congress had better figure out that political negotiating requires that two parties be willing to compromise in order to achieve a better solution for the country as a whole. It seems clear that the GOP has no interest in that, which is inexcusable. Sometimes you have to give a little to get a little, and instead this group of GOP leaders seems more interested in driving off a cliff to prove a point (and a dumb one at that - I'm all for lower taxes if we have lower spending, but a progressive tax system makes plenty of sense given our current tax structure).

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Kyle loves BYU/Jazz
Uh... we're talking about a debt reduction bill, not a bill that increases spending. And he hasn't ignored it, our annual deficit has gone down each of the past three years. The 2012 deifict is 200k less than the 2011 deficit.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

You'll never make a dent in the deficit unless you increase tax revenues.

The top 1% of income earners in this country have seen their net worth grow dramatically in the past 20 years, and they did great when their taxes were much higher than they are now. Letting the Bush tax cut expire, as they were intended, is necessary.

Returning our tax rates to what they were at the end of the Reagan presidency would be a smart, effective approach to deficit reduction.

If you told me that my taxes would return to the rates of the 1990's, but that in return we'd start to see serious debt reduction, I'd sign on with that plan in a heartbeat.

Rebe
Herriman, UT

For an average family making $70,000 a year, if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire, that family will see their tax burden increase approx. $3500 a year. That's almost $300 a month. How many of you can afford that? Gas prices are much higher than they were when Bush was president and how many of you have seen your grocery bill greatly increase this past year? That would make it even harder on the average family. Something has got to be done before the end of the year or you will start seeing the housing market tank again, and foreclosures and short sales on the rise. The economy will fall into a recession once again. Our leaders have got to come together and must compromise!!!

goodDr.
sandy, UT

alt134
kool aid, get your kool aid here. The deficit is 200k less than 2011. WOW!!! That only leaves 1.99999999998 trillion for this years deficit. Let's see quickly 17.5% property tax increase (thank you Corroon), 2.5% medical supply tax increase (passed directly on to you the patient) and a 4.5% income tax increase in all of 4 days. Yep, sounds like lots of decreasing in spending going on in DC. Well, they did spend 200k less than last year and will be raising billions more (all the while the stock market drops 5% and business owners are already laying people off). Enjoy America.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@goodDr.
"kool aid, get your kool aid here. The deficit is 200k less than 2011. WOW!!! That only leaves 1.99999999998 trillion for this years deficit."

The deficit was ~1.3 trillion in the previous fiscal year and ~1.1 trillion for this fiscal year. I'm sorry that you don't have a real response to the fact we've seen the deficit drop about 15% relative to the previous year.

"Yep, sounds like lots of decreasing in spending going on in DC."

The fiscal cliff includes the sequestration spending cuts, remember that trillion dollars Romney said Obama wanted to cut from defense? This is where it is. Of course, Republicans want to avoid those cuts. Shows how serious they are about the deficit...

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Yes!

A Reagan Democrat if there ever was one!

Go-Bama!

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

apparently class warfare is a winning political tact
but it is still class warfare (and despicable)

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Madden,
how is drawing a line in the sand as BO has done "negotiating"? harry reid said there would be no line in the sand - I guess BO is not going along with it.

I think BO and the dems WANT us to fall off the financial cliff and spiral back into recession. They and the lamestream media will blame it all on the repubs and the dems see that as their path to regaining the house. Who cares what it does to the rest of us as long as the dems solidify their power?

Blue,
increasing rates does not necessarily increase revenues. Reagan increased revenues by decreasing rates, as Kennedy did in the 1960s. I guess BO's not smart enoiugh to learn from history

Atl134,
the deficit decreased when the repubs regained control of the house - BO wanted to spend MORE than they were willing to spend. to give BO credit for reducing the deficit is the worst of political spin.

luv2organize
Gainesville, VA

Yes, lets punish those that have worked hard and make more money then us! If I can't win nobody can! Such the Robin Hood mentality. Statistically even by upping the taxes on the so called rich it will not make a dent in the problem.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@lost in DC
"the deficit decreased when the repubs regained control of the house - BO wanted to spend MORE than they were willing to spend. to give BO credit for reducing the deficit is the worst of political spin."

That is a fair point, if it were true. However, I left out that the 2009 deficit was around 1.6 trillion, the 2010 and 2011 deficits were around 1.3 trillion and the 2012 deficit was the 1.1 trillion. So the trend started in Obama's second year, when Democrats were still in control.

Besides, if Obama had his way we'd have passed that 4 trillion dollar debt reduction deal he was working on with Boehner til Boehner bailed on it and we'd have increased taxes on the rich in 2010. It's not just Democrats preventing deficit reduction.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

The tea party caused the shift of power in the Senate that gave the President the mandate. Yell at them for a while.

mohokat
Ogden, UT

Just like before he is willing to work across the aisle as long as it is his way. His way has been so successful!!

Emajor
Ogden, UT

luv2organize:

This is just returning the tax rates to what they were before Bush implemented that tax cut. If you are rich, you will still be rich. What is so hard to understand about that?

"Statistically even by upping the taxes on the so called rich it will not make a dent in the problem."

You apparently don't know much about statistics. It will make a heck of a lot bigger dent than cutting funding for NPR will.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

What has his first term taught Obama? He couldn't get a single vote in the Senate to support his budget, but now he's demanding that Congress, a co-equal branch of government, do exactly as he tells them.

The American people told him differently. They told him that they liked the ideas that the REPUBLICAN House had and that they agreed with the principles that the Republican House stood for. They told Obama that If they agreed with his tax and spend policies that they would have elected Democrats to the House.

If anyone cares to look, the House, that body of government that initiates all budgetary bills, is still controlled by Republicans because the PEOPLE. chose to elect Republicans as those who have the authority to tax them.

Obama had better re-read the election results. No king was elected. There are still three branches of government. The Presidency is only one branch. His job is to enforce the laws passed by congress.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@mike richards
the people also told him that they did not want him or the democrat senate to buckle under to the congress Mike you seem to forget the GOP lost sets in the senate and the presidential election. The GOP controlled congress is going yo have to learn to compromise.

David
Centerville, UT

Boehner and congressional Republicans are correct: small business owners will be hurt again by Obama if his tax increase plan (increasing taxes on those making over $250,000/year) is adopted. Many small business owners show earnings of $250K, but in reality much of their "profit" is principle debt payments, which cannot be written off.

To run a business, financing expensive equipment purchases allows for important expansion of business, and/or better services. To penalize such reinvestment into a business will definitely lead to another recession as business owners slow reinvestment in order to pay the increased tax liability. Also, when a business owner is faced with a failing business or laying off employees, they must lay off the employee in order to remain servicable to the customers.

I predict if a tax increase is adopted that our economy will slow, and unemployment will increase. Why would Democrats want this?

Republicans have the right idea: expand the tax base by eliminating deductions, lower the tax rates to maintain federal revenues, and do more to help small business owners. This will general more federal revenue and decrease unemployment.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Yes! let's make it difficult for successful folks to hire. This will create a more dependent country.

After all, they build that.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments