Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Obama pivots, eyes Medicare changes, tax increases

Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:08 AM EDT
business, politics, us, obama, white-house, barack-obama, budget
Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press

FILE - In this April 8, 2011 photo, President Obama poses for photographers in the Blue Room at the White House in Washington after he spoke regarding the budget and averted government shutdown after a deal was made between Republican and Democrat lawmakers. The Treasury Department reports on the federal budget deficit for March. In February, the government ran the largest-ever budget gap for a single month. The shortfall kept this year's annual deficit on pace to end as the biggest in U.S. history, $1.5 trillion. And that's not likely to change much, even after President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans struck a deal last week to cut $38.5 billion from this year's budget. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, risking liberal anger and Republican scorn, is turning his attention to the nation's crushing debt with an anti-deficit framework that tackles politically sensitive health care programs while also increasing taxes.

The president on Wednesday plans to deliver a speech outlining his approach to reducing the deficit by lowering spending in Medicare and Medicaid, raising taxes on the wealthy and cutting defense costs. Obama's address will draw contrasts with a Republican plan that cuts $5 trillion in spending over the next decade and which the White House says unfairly singles out middle-class taxpayers, older adults and the poor.

This new clash, just a week after the president announced he would seek re-election, ensures that the nation's fiscal health will be at the center of the 2012 presidential campaign. For the past two months, Obama has been arguing to protect his core spending priorities, including education and innovation. His turn to deficit reduction reflects the pressures he faces in a divided Congress and with a public increasingly anxious about the nation's debt, now exceeding $14 trillion.

The president is wading into a potential political thicket. Liberals fear he will propose cuts in prized Democratic programs like Medicare and Medicaid, the health care programs for older adults, the disabled and the poor, and in Social Security. Moderates worry that his plan could unravel bipartisan deficit-cutting negotiations. And Republicans already are poised to reject any proposal that includes tax increases.

The White House wouldn't offer details of the president's approach ahead of the speech. But an official commenting on the condition of anonymity said the plan borrows from the December recommendations of Obama's bipartisan fiscal commission, which proposed $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years.

In a preview, the White House said the speech aims to achieve "balanced" deficit reduction by keeping domestic spending low, reducing the defense budget, cutting excess health care spending in the nation's biggest benefit programs, and eliminating loopholes and breaks in the tax system.

Obama was briefing Congress' bipartisan leadership on the contents of his speech Wednesday morning in the Cabinet Room of the White House. Photographers captured the image of Obama, flanked by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., before the meeting got under way.

White House officials have repeatedly described the speech as Obama's "vision" of deficit reduction, a term that suggests the plan could contain broad proposals but few specific measures.

Republicans already were taking a dismissive tone. "If he were serious, he'd be talking about a detailed roadmap for action, not just grabbing headlines by announcing another speech," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said on Wednesday.

For the White House, the speech at George Washington University comes as Obama pushes Congress to raise the limit on the national debt, which will permit the government to borrow more and thus meet its financial obligations. The country will reach its debt limit of $14.3 trillion by May 16. The Treasury Department has warned that failure to raise it by midsummer would drive up the cost of borrowing and destroy the economic recovery.

His speech comes just before Congress votes on a $38 billion package of spending cuts that averted a government shutdown last week. Despite widespread antipathy toward the deal in both parties, House Republicans and the White House predicted the plan, which covers spending for the next six months, would pass.

As for the bigger, long-term deficit proposal, the White House was keeping a tight lid on details. But spokesman Jay Carney made clear the president would call for changes in Medicare and Medicaid. Obama also was expected to resurrect the tax increases on wealthy Americans that he put off in December as part of a tax deal with Congress. White House officials have also said the president intends to call for a reduction "tax expenditures," the tax breaks and loopholes that lower tax revenue.

"He believes that there has to be a balanced approach" to reducing long-term deficits, Carney said.

The president's proposal is meant to be in sharp contrast with the plan offered by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan., R-Wis. That budget proposal, embraced by the House Republican leadership, would reduce spending by more than $5 trillion over 10 years with structural overhauls to Medicare and Medicaid while also making permanent all Bush-era tax cuts.

Obama could face resistance from Democrats. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Tuesday reiterated his opposition to changes in Social Security.

.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Jim Kuhnhenn's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: United States , Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (53)
CertifiedSpecialist

We will believe when we hear it. We will believe when we see it.

  • 4 votes
Reply#1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:28 AM EDT
Dr Psychotic

As with all politicians, you'll hear it long before you see it. That's if you see it happen at all.

  • 2 votes
#1.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:39 AM EDT
DUDE-875416

Great, now the American people need to bail out our own Federal Government through higher taxation. The Federal Government has grown by over 10% since Obama took office but yet we can't seem to find more then 38 billion worth in spending cuts (most of which are bogus cuts by returning money that wasn't spent on various programs).

If Obama doesn't start performing regarding meaningful spending cuts, then he can kiss his second term good-bye. I think he is already toast. We are reaching a critical point that requires fiscally responsible decisions to be made to greatly reduce the Federal Government size. We can no longer afford the services our Federal Government provides. The bureaucracy is too expensive.

  • 4 votes
#1.2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:12 AM EDT
Ebeneezer Goode

Soak the Rich - they've been bleeding us dry for long enough.

  • 3 votes
#1.3 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:32 AM EDT
paxildog

No one should be getting "soaked".

Just cut the government and programs down to meet what money they have, cut out tax loopholes and apply a percentage minimum tax for everyone that is minimum no mater if you make a dollar or a billion (percentage).

I have been watching the rich few I know, pack up and leave the country and now pay nothing but somehow are still getting different incomes from the states.

This idea of revenge on the rich is far too old and ridiculous to keep entertaining. Let's get real and start revamping the tax code and cut imports.

  • 4 votes
#1.4 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:05 AM EDT
Ebeneezer Goode

No - we should Soak the Rich.

  • 1 vote
#1.5 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:12 AM EDT
paxildog

Wow. Sorry that you're that closed minded about it. Wish for many years and watch it never happen. Good luck EG.

  • 4 votes
#1.6 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:41 PM EDT
DUDE-875416

Ebeneezer Goode

No - we should Soak the Rich.

Priceless... I could wager ALL of my holdings that you are NOT rich and in turn creating great personal wealth if I knew in advance we would have this conversation... tease..! LOL

    #1.7 - Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:56 AM EDT
    Reply
    SquawCraw

    Any serious solution will have to include BOTH spending cuts and tax increases. To say that we can fix our fiscal problems by doing just one of those things is just plain crazy.

    Remember how the President and Congress just (barely) agreed to $38.5 Billion in spending cuts to the 2011 budget, the "largest in history"? Remember how much drama and and brinksmanship that involved? Did you know that the government would have taken in $37B more in taxes this year if the Bush era cuts to JUST A) the "death"/estate tax and B) the capital gains taxes for household making more than $250k/year had been allowed to expire last fall? And that is without raising INCOME tax rates on ANY American taxpayer, rich, middle class or poor. (Numbers from US Treasury Department Data and the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center)

    • 7 votes
    Reply#2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:38 AM EDT
    SquawCraw

    After all the compromising that Obama has engaged in since last fall's election, I hope he comes out today in his speech and makes it clear that we must proceed to a up or down vote on raising the debt ceiling with no riders (i.e. as a "clean bill). We get it, Republicans are serious about cutting spending! But I don't think the Republicans yet accept the fact that Obama is serious about cutting spending as well. The fact that he also wants to increase revenue/raise taxes a little does not negate the fact that he is also serious about cutting spending. At least, that's what I hope and believe. Anything less is really not enough, in my opinion.

    • 4 votes
    Reply#3 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:51 AM EDT
    sablegsd

    Still falling for that hopey-changey BS? zero is NOT serious about cutting spending.

    • 7 votes
    #3.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:44 AM EDT
    Borncorn

    Still falling for that hopey-changey BS?

    Yes, everytime I look at how good my retirement accounts are doing. I take it you must be a Bush lover .

    • 3 votes
    #3.2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:21 AM EDT
    Bubba-939441

    Yes, everytime I look at how good my retirement accounts are doing.

    How many of those firms in your portfolio will see a tax increase? Do you know what increased tax expense does to the bottom line? Just when things are recovering they're hammered with increasing oil prices and taxes. It will effect your portfolio as well.

    • 2 votes
    #3.3 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:56 AM EDT
    slippytoad

    zero is NOT serious about cutting spending.

    Actually, he has already agreed to spending cuts. Which you would know if you followed the news.

    The GOP is absolutley not serious about deficit reduction. They've got a track record 30 years long proving it. Every Republican President starting with Nixon has increased the debt, usually by double-digit percentages.

    How come you're still falling for that "fiscal conservative" bs?

    How many of those firms in your portfolio will see a tax increase?

    And that will be an excuse to screw their customers? I want to see that one: "GE claims it must raise prices and reduce dividends to meet tax obligations that it hasn't bothered to pay in several years. CEO pay remains absurdly high, and the board of directors is still fat and sassy."

    The truth, fact, and reality is that low corporate taxes are a cancer on our nation. They have enabled irresponsible children to loot our nation's wealth. Tax-dodging corporations and trust-fund crybabies are freeloaders and suckflies, no better than a running mob of rioters smashing in storefronts. As judgment day gets closer for these overprivileged tots, they cry louder and louder that it's just not fair.

    Too bad.

    • 1 vote
    #3.4 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:11 AM EDT
    Bubba-939441

    And that will be an excuse to screw their customers?

    Yes, if raising prices is screwing customers. An excuse, or necessity for a small business to survive? They must raise prices to offset increased tax expenses AND increased fuel prices. Now, who do you think will pay the price of Obama tax increase on the "wealthy"? That's an easy answer. Rising prices also means rising inflation and rising interest rates right before an election. I think Mr Obama could have done better by cutting expenses instead of raising taxes on small business and corporations. He's lost the vote of small business owners in 2012.

    • 3 votes
    #3.5 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:30 AM EDT
    Borncorn

    How many of those firms in your portfolio will see a tax increase?

    Maybe they could increase taxes back up to what they were under Clinton. My retirement accounts really did well during that time. They really took a dive after Bush lowered taxes. Go figure.

      #3.6 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:01 PM EDT
      tyler

      4 deleted, chloe1023 spamming a herpes dating website. This is not the place.

      Self-promotion, seeding links to your own site(s), and advertising are not allowed.

      • 2 votes
      #3.7 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:37 PM EDT
      Reply
      chloe1023Expand Comment Comment collapsed by the community

      Genital herpes is a common STD, and most people with genital herpes infection do not know they have it. I myself have had genital herpes for several years. Way back when, I remember what the doctors told me. It didn't make sense. I wish there had been more resources available. I felt like I had to navigate the waters all by myself.
      I personally have found peace and happiness. If you haven't, you will. Ignorance and denial is not the solution. Be informed… learn the truth… here at HerpesLove.net. which have more than 600000 memebers according some news and it have provided many services such as chatting,blogs,test center,forum etc.

      • 1 vote
      Reply#4 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:09 AM EDT
      68GreyFox

      I hate to say it but it looks like they don't know what they are doing. That goes for the Pres, and the Congress, both chambers, And both partys. Obama keeps on caving in and Congress keeps on making outrageous demands. Obama needs to draw a line in the sand, and bring in the best minds available to come up with reasonable solutions and follow upon them.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#5 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:23 AM EDT
      Wolf Wolfman

      The deficit was $189 billion in March. That's over $6 billion for each of the 31 days in March. To put it another way; it's 6,000 million each day.

      There was the commission formed by Obama. Their recommendations were ignored by Obama.

      There is a group of six bipartisan senators, who are going to try for deficit reduction. Six out of a hundred is not a very good track record.

      • 1 vote
      #5.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:20 PM EDT
      Reply
      Candide and Me

      $432 Billion just on interest payments for 2011. And if interest rates rise (and they will) this number goes sharply higher.

      Compared to $671 Billion in defense (Obama proposal).

      Washington has spent all money ever put into social security. Now they have to draw it out of our general fund (regular tax money) to pay it back. Yep, WE put it in and will now be taxed so they can put it back. a double hit, thanks alot.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#6 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:51 AM EDT
      jdl-28

      Obama hasn't really did anything to help pay our debt down, he just seem to keep spending like the 58 million we are spending a week on the Libya war that we are not in.

      Now the other party isn't really doing anything either to bring our debt down, they are still trying to help corporation from paying more taxes. Take medicare away but what about pulling our troops back home / stop all AID to the other countries along with cutting the size of our government down. Now that would be a good start to reduce this country debt.

      It appear to me both parties are shooting themselves in the foot for why would you want to re-elect people who isn't helping you citizens at all.

      • 1 vote
      Reply#7 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:20 AM EDT
      Naughtia

      one party is spending to bankrupt the gov as part of starve the beast.
      which is why you get things like cost plus contracts which encourages the destruction of a truck for a flat tire.

      and things like medicare plan D cant negotiate lower drug prices.

      this is stupid spending designed to break the federal government.

      The left are spending on infrastructure and help for the poor and are not adding clauses to make it expensive because they want it to be effective. Believe it or not progressives want progressivism to be self sustaining.

      AND PS iraq/afghan war costs 3 billion a week

      • 5 votes
      #7.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:30 AM EDT
      Reply
      River-239955

      They all need to focus on Wall Street reform and overhauling the taxation process. Everything else would fall nicely into place if they'd just tend to these two issues in a mature, responsible manner.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#8 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:08 AM EDT
      Beckyal

      Focus needs to be on cutting spending. Welfare has doubled since Obama went into office. Foreign aid is off the charts, if you look at what is in each appropriation and not just what is in state department. Obamacare was suppose to be health care reform and reduce the cost of health care. Instead it has increased cost of insurance, increased medicaid costs, etc.

      Any increase in taxes would only go to increase spending instead of paying down the debt. Most of us taxpayers know that our taxes will increase but want the increase to go to paying down the debt and not to increase spending in defense, welfare, foreign aid, etc. America cannot afford to pay for the world. Why are we borrowing to give away? So stupid.

      • 2 votes
      #8.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:35 AM EDT
      River-239955

      Focus does not need to be on cutting spending. Focus needs to be on responsible spending. Don't expect to start with me about the political wars of idiots vs pinheads. I'm an American, plain and simple. I stand by this president just the very same as I stood by the last one, always looking for ways to be supportive and to rise above simple-minded judgemental ignorance.

      I don't care, I don't care, I DO NOT CARE about raises for congress, or their pensions, or their healthcare. I do not care about obscene payrolls of governmental operations that are not meeting the needs of America. I do not care about grants, subsidies, special interest deductions, and I do not give a rat's ass about corporate tax loopholes that enable them to bypass reality and roll naked in their cushy little stockpiles. I do not care about the lobbyists who waste Washington's time with their special interests.

      I care about the country's infrastructure. I care about the country's security. I care about the education of the children. I also care whether or not those same children have food to eat and a roof over their heads, regardless of their parents' actions. I care about my elderly who have paid into a program every single week of their working life, only to be charged all over again for it when they reach retirement age. I care about integrity, respect, intelligence, responsibility, and dignity, and I want to see that restored to America not only for herself, but for the world. America is the home of dreams. We can't do much dreaming in today's conditions and today's attitudes.

      America cannot afford to pay for the world. Why are we borrowing to give away? So stupid.

      It's all about attitude. America can afford to pay for the world. It is America's economy that has started all this, driven it, built it, imagined it, created it...... We are not -borrowing- to give away. It's all imaginary to begin with !!!!!!!! The actual core value of $1 is worth only what you put it into. The actual retail value of $1 is $1. As American integrity and values disintegrate, the $1 loses face value not because it can't be circulated, but because the people behind it aren't worth investing in anymore.

      America is going to change her attitude, or take an attitude adjustment from the rest of the world. The sooner she steps down from her pedestal and starts to grow up a little bit, the better off she'll be in the long run.

      • 2 votes
      #8.2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:51 AM EDT
      Reply
      Naughtia

      Cant ask the wealthy to share the sacrifice, dont you know they will all move to somolia or some crap like that(and lets ignore that the US has an exit tax)

      • 4 votes
      Reply#9 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:31 AM EDT
      doppich

      So we are to expect another preemptive capitulation from Obama, which then becomes a new baseline for the Republicans to demand even more cuts.

      The way to reduce the deficit is to put people back to work and paying taxes. I do believe jobs was the focus of both parties during the recent campaign. Just a few months later and they are too busy working on the agenda of their corporate masters to be concerned with jobs for the rest of America.

        Reply#10 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:38 AM EDT
        Dr Psychotic

        Maybe Obama can tell Immelt to get GE to pay their "fair share" of taxes.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#11 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:46 AM EDT
        mssuzieq

        I am still trying to understand why the hell the average citizen has to give until it hurts.. yet our illustrious politicians and big corporations are making obscene profits and you can see that they are not having to "cut back" one damn bit...

        Tax increases on the citizens and tax breaks for large corporations... bail outs for large corporations that post obscene profits and bonuses...

        Smells bad to me, does it to you too?

        • 1 vote
        Reply#12 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:01 AM EDT
        Bubba-939441

        Joe the plumber was worried that Mr Obama would raise his taxes. Maybe Joe was right. Does Obama lose Joe's vote in 2012? Does he lose the vote of every "wealthy" small businessman out there?

          Reply#13 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:02 AM EDT
          Brian-497171

          Joe the Plant wasn't even a plumber. Next topic, Bubba.

          • 2 votes
          #13.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:41 AM EDT
          Bubba-939441

          Joe the Plant wasn't even a plumber. Next topic, Bubba.

          Maybe not, but Obama just raised the taxes on a bunch of plumbers and small businesses. He'll lose their vote in 2012.

            #13.2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:16 AM EDT
            Brian-497171

            Maybe not, but Obama just raised the taxes on a bunch of plumbers and small businesses. He'll lose their vote in 2012.

            The majority of small businesses do not report and income of over 250K. Most of the small percentage who do, do not rely on that small business as a primary source of income.

            You can put your GOP talking points to bed now, Bubba.

            • 1 vote
            #13.3 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:26 AM EDT
            Bubba-939441

            The majority of small businesses do not report and income of over 250K

            OK, so Obama will lose the vote of every business person that makes over 250K. We don't need many if we throw in the independents who have buyer's remorse.

              #13.4 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:34 AM EDT
              Brian-497171

              Those Independents couldn't give a sh*t less about social/religious conservatism. Fortunately for Dems the GOP 2012 hopefuls seem to be falling over each other to define themselves as the most radical warrior for those outdated causes.

              • 2 votes
              #13.5 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:59 AM EDT
              Reply
              dorothy c banks

              "The president on Wednesday was to deliver..."

              Did I miss the president's speech? I thought he was to deliver it tonight. The writer said the president was to deliver...

                Reply#14 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:14 AM EDT
                RTD-2911558

                I suggest we start a recall petition on the next politician to utter the word "Nonstarter".

                • 2 votes
                Reply#15 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:19 AM EDT
                jbird

                All he has to do is limit the cuts to true budget concerns(in keeping the GOP from pulling the wool over his eyes), and keep the GOP vampire teeth out of our nondiscretionary funding stream(as well as healthcare). What doesn't he get about that?!

                  Reply#16 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:38 AM EDT
                  john hahn

                  I suggest that the Congress and the President do not get paid plus they do not get the extra benefits .The problem comes from these elected officials by the people supposedly are to answer to us not what they feel is necessary so they can get elected every year its a social club that only the rich can afford to join that is why they have no idea what the normal American needs or wants.

                  • 1 vote
                  Reply#17 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:43 AM EDT
                  Brian-497171

                  Hi rich people. I know you're busy planning Galas and furnishing your many homes, but you see the rest of the country (99% of us) have been struggling in a recession. We've seen stagnant or even negative wage growth over the past 30 years - while you all have seen incomes explode into stratospheric levels during that same time frame.

                  Soooooooooo, we're gonna need you to give back the egregious tax cut that Mr. Bush handed to you back when we had the fake good economy. Oh, and we're also gonna have to say no to the even further reduction in tax obligations proposed by Mr. Ryan last week.

                  Whaddya say?

                  • 3 votes
                  Reply#18 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:45 AM EDT
                  Scott-461700

                  Sure. As soon as you start paying your "fair share" of the goodies that the Liberal Dems have been handing you for 60 years. Also, if you are a Union member, you need to pay us back for the crappy products and the many, many hours of coffee breaks and time wasted.

                  Also, we would like our cities back to the way they were before Liberals took over. San Francisco, Detroit, Cleveland, etc.

                  • 2 votes
                  #18.1 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:07 AM EDT
                  Bubba-939441

                  Whaddya say?

                  I say everyone that buys a loaf of bread will be paying for Obama's tax increase on the "wealthy".

                  • 1 vote
                  #18.2 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:19 AM EDT
                  mssuzieq

                  You know Brian there are lots of "rich" people in this country.. Rich is a relative term and who exactly gets to determine where that line is drawn? A few years ago, anyone making more than 100k per year was considered "rich"...

                  Lots of those "rich" people are the employers of those that are middle class and I can assure you that economics is a downhill trickle.. If you start to overtax the "rich" then it WILL roll downhill and affect those of us downstream.. I for one would just like to see some common sense used rather than picking apart certain groups of taxpayers...

                  Think about it like this: If I lose my job in 4 years (as a president and most cabinet members do), the best I can hope for is unemployment for a short period of time. I sure as hell don't get paid for the rest of my life, complete with benefits.. Why should they?

                  If I have to pay into Social Security and hope for the best when it comes time to retire, why don't the politicians that represent me?

                  If I have to watch the value of my home and life decrease annually based on imaginary and made up economics, by the powers that be.. why is it that their wealth increases exponentially as mine decreases? Do you suppose that there is a correlation? /sarc

                  The fact is that those that represent us are not a true representation of the average American. And until they are, there will never be any "fair" way to work this out....

                  • 1 vote
                  #18.3 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:24 AM EDT
                  Bubba-939441

                  there will never be any "fair" way to work this out....

                  Flat tax?

                  • 1 vote
                  #18.4 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:29 AM EDT
                  Brian-497171

                  Lots of those "rich" people are the employers of those that are middle class and I can assure you that economics is a downhill trickle.. If you start to overtax the "rich" then it WILL roll downhill and affect those of us downstream..

                  Oh isn't that convenient, Suzie? Let's see, if we give the rich tax breaks there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE of that action leading to job creation. But if we take those tax breaks away, we have to fear job cutbacks? Sounds like a scheme invented by rich people, eh?

                  Oh and thanks for using the term "trickle". I mean trickle-down economics really lived up to it's name, didn't it? In the past 30+years we have seen the average CEO go from earning 40x what their average worker earned to 400x in 2007. Executive pay has skyrocketed along the rising GDP arc in that same time frame - yet average worker pay has stagnated or shown negative growth. What exactly was it that trickled-down, Suz?

                  • 2 votes
                  #18.5 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:33 AM EDT
                  Bubba-939441

                  Brian, if you think Obama's tax increase won't result in higher prices for the little guy you're sadly mistaken. A tax increase on the wealthy is a tax increase on everyone. It will break the backs of small business who are already dealing with increased gasoline costs. They can shut their doors or pass the cost on to the consumer. There is no other choice.

                  • 1 vote
                  #18.6 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:59 AM EDT
                  Brian-497171

                  There is no other choice.

                  OMG! I guess we better give the rich everything they ask for, Bubba!

                  Nobody moves, nobody gets hurt, eh?

                  • 2 votes
                  #18.7 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:01 PM EDT
                  mssuzieq

                  Well Brian.. first and foremost, your getting a little overworked about this.. this is simply a discussion.

                  What has trickled down? The fact that a lot of these jobs are still here... they don't have to be, but because of the tax breaks and other perks, some employers have chosen to keep their companies and jobs IN COUNTRY as opposed to outsourcing to "save" money...

                  As a result of that, there are still numerous people employed that might not otherwise be if their jobs were outsourced and done away with... Jobs might not have been CREATED, but they were damn sure saved.

                  I don't begrudge anyone their pay, they earn theirs just like I do mine. I believe that we all deserve to keep what we earn. I also think that overtaxing one class to pay off the debts and whims of our government is not only unjustified, but unfair. I shouldn't have to pay my neighbors debts just because they are irresponsible...

                  What I do resent is, companies that take TARP money, paying bonuses to anyone.. not just the head guys.. I do resent the fact that they "qualify" for TARP by being lousy bookkeepers and yet they are given MORE money to spend... OUR money.. but they are not held accountable for the use of that money, as long as they pay it back in a timely manner.

                  IMHO, if you take TARP, you should lose your tax breaks, your bonuses, and your secrecy. Your books should be open for scrutiny and oversight until your finances are back in control... Yet we have a government that isn't willing to do the same..

                  • 2 votes
                  #18.8 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:04 PM EDT
                  Reply
                  Lucy54

                  Yes, the rich needs to pay more. And as for this President expending more and having the country in a bigger deficit, NOT TRUE, I guess you have forgatten pass Presidents like Clinton and others.

                  • 1 vote
                  Reply#19 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:10 AM EDT
                  DoctorNorm

                  But the sad part of it is that the popularity of an idea seems to have little to do with the implementation of that idea.

                  The vast majority of Americans realize that all data clearly shows that the trickle-down economics of Reagan and GWBush just simply does not work and yet, in the face of that, Obama and the Democrats were unable or unwilling to counteract that by ending the disastrous Bush tax cuts.

                  Just how popular does a progressive idea have to be before the Democrats in office actually make a concerted effort to implement it.

                  I worry greatly about the insanity Obama might spew in his speech. Hey let's hack into Social Security even though it doesn't add one penny to the deficit. Let's butcher Medicare and Medicaid.

                  The problem is spending? Pray tell me, deficit "hawks," what are we spending too much on?

                  • 1 vote
                  Reply#20 - Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:52 PM EDT
                  mssuzieq

                  It isn't just one particular thing that is being paid for... The wars (plural), self entitling riders on bills for bridges to nowhere (so to speak), exorbitant pay for politicians and lobbyist, perks and benefits that the average American would never pay for if they knew about it.. and so on..

                  Until a group of REAL average Americans represent us, this will not change... Power corrupts absolutely and human nature is selfish. You can put the most honest, hard working person in government and they won't stay that way for long... There are a few but they are exceptions, not the rule...

                    #20.1 - Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:00 AM EDT
                    Reply
                    Wolf Wolfman

                    Raising taxes on the rich does not necessarily increase revenue to the Federal government. The taxes on the rich could be raised, and the revenue might go down.

                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#21 - Sun May 29, 2011 6:26 AM EDT
                    Leave a Comment:
                    You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                    You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                    (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                    Newsvine Privacy Statement
                    As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                    FUN STUFF:
                    • Leaderboard |
                    • E-Mail Alerts |
                    • Top of the Vine |
                    • Newsvine Live |
                    • Newsvine Archives |
                    • The Greenhouse
                    COMPANY STUFF:
                    • Code of Honor |
                    • Company Info |
                    • Contact Us |
                    • Jobs |
                    • User Agreement |
                    • Privacy Policy |
                    • About our ads
                    LEGAL STUFF:
                    • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                    • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                    • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com