The Pesident is calling for reducing the deficit by adding 1.5 trillion in revenue. I call BS. Tax revenue: $1.5 trillion. Of the total revenue raised by tax changes, $800 billion would be realized by letting some of the Bush-era tax cuts expire for high-income households -- something Obama has called for repeatedly. http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/19/news/economy/obama_debt_plan/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1 BS alert! That $800 billion is already off the books as gone after this year. All projections are based upon current legislation and that legislation says they are gone. So the net is now 700 billion because the 800 billion doesn't count as additional savings since it is gone if nothing at all is done. But, wait, the $3 trillion for the rest of the Tax Cuts that he wants to extend is also already off the books after this year so he is actually adding that 3 trillion dollars back into the deficit by reversing current legislation. What he has done is count something that is already legislated as a new $800 billion dollar savings and ignored his addition of 3 trillion dollars that results from reversing current legislation. So the real net effect from his revenue plan is to increase the deficit by $2.3 trillion dollars over current projections not reduce it by $1.5 trillion. Awesome.
Naw, just a politician who knows his marks won't realize what really happened to the pea that is supposed to be under that shell. Similar to the Buffet Tax.
Why even bother listening to Obama? In the end he'll just kowtow to whatever Boehner and Cantor want him to do. /edit... funny how the spell correct wants to change Boehner to "Boner", shouldn't that be Weiner's word?
Aren't you assuming that Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire? And where is the historical evidence of that ever happening? I'd be more inclined to believe that the Republicans, in their infinite pandering to their wealthy donors, will cut a deal to make the tax cuts permanent if the Republicans promises to fund the school lunch program for another 6 months but only if the cost of funding that 6 months is off-set by reducing FEMA benefits for disaster victims and subsidized heat for poor elderly people is cut off on Christmas through Easter and then only if three of the biggest unions are declared illegal and planned parenthood is forbidden from offering any services to actual female patients. I think I got both sides about right.
There is no assumption. Obama has no choice in 'letting them expire'. It is current law that they expire. Anything else is new legislation he would be proposing that should obviously be counted as such in any math used, if one is to be honest. Current law is what the CBO uses in their budget projections too. So, if you are going to propose new legislation to extend the tax cuts, the honest thing to do is to count them in your budget projections as what they really are...additions to the current deficit projections. They are not zero's or reductions in the ledger. That is a lie. If the Republicans lie like the President just did with their plan, I will call them out too.
Stu, Stu, Stu, Stu,.....(Sorry, those three keys stuck....in that order.....and the comma key.....and the shift key......but only during the "S" key sticking....I can't explain the multiple periods at the end) However, at the same time the Right-wingers will say that Obama raised taxes not that he let the Bush tax breaks expire. Why is it in his best interest to frame this proposal any other way? It's all semantics for political advantage. So what else is new?
If you propose new legislation, there is no justification for not adding the cost of that legislation into the budget other than intentional deception. I fully know why they do it but I also fully believe that it is ridiculous for anyone but them to defend that kind of intentional deception.
