Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
just heard Gibbs on the news state that Obama was "opposed to the government borrowing 700 billion" to pay for the extension of the Bush tax cuts for upper wage earners....
It's about $700 billion over 10 years. That's for the top 2 percent; of earners I believe...(what's wrong with the percent sign?). Obama can spend that in one trip overseas...
but what about the other 98 percent ?
the total cost of $3.8 trillion over 10 years is how much the government will have to "borrow"...according to Obama's logic, if we renew all of the Bush tax rates....so we can either pay it now or pay it later(or our children) with interest....
I think the 98 percent are greedy...they can live without a muffler...PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE
don't renew the Bush tax rates...I don't want Obama borrowing any more money!!!!
sorry Jimmy
|
As usual, your logic is impeccable (notice I say as usual, not always--wouldn't want PaulS to attack my syntax--though he might object to usual as well--uh, oh, getting long winded and probably boring here--but he most likely won't read this since he doesn't read most of my posts).
But . . . the Obama administration, I think, believes that allowing the middle class portion of Bush's tax cut to continue will stimulate the economy because they will spend the money, thus producing a $3.8 trillion ($380 billion/yr) influx into the economy, and that the same cannot be said for the "rich" since they won't spend it, since they don't need it. The administration says that the rich have had the tax break for 6? or 7? years and it is not producing jobs (although they're bragging that jobs are being produced, just not as fast as . . . well . . . as fast as they were under Bush before the "crash.") It would be nit-picking, I guess, to say that the middle class cuts were also in effect as well all that time and we're still not producing those jobs.
But let us leave aside the obvious and digress into theory. If the middle class will spend their tax cut, wouldn't it be even better to not only maintain their current rate, but to cut it even more--maybe get as close to zero, if not actually zero, as possible? Thus creating even more stimulative spending and creating an economic boom that could help to not only eliminate the deficit, but decrease and eventually eliminate the debt. And if that stimulation would not be quite enough, we could just tax the rich even more than just letting their current rates expire. We could go back to taxing them progressively at higher and higher levels after incremental amounts as high as 99 percent after X million in income. After all, they have too much, they don't need it, they horde it, such wealth is obscene, and, more importantly, we outnumber them and there is nothing they can do about it.
The minor problem that congress has this benevolent need to give money away rather than reducing debt--is minor.