Posted on 01/18/2015 6:33:02 AM PST by Citizen Zed
President Obama will use his State of the Union address to call on Congress to raise taxes and fees on the wealthiest taxpayers and the largest financial firms to finance an array of tax cuts for the middle class, pressing to reshape the tax code to help working families, administration officials said on Saturday.
The proposal faces long odds in the Republican-controlled Congress, led by lawmakers who have long opposed raising taxes and who argue that doing so would hamper economic growth at a time the country cannot afford it. And it was quickly dismissed by leading Republicans as a nonstarter.
But the decision to present the plan during Tuesday's speech marks the start of a debate over taxes and the economy that will shape both Mr. Obama's legacy and the 2016 presidential campaign.
It is also the latest indication that the president, untethered from political constraints after Democratic losses in the midterm elections, is moving aggressively to set the terms of that discussion, even as he pushes audacious moves in other areas, like immigration and relations with Cuba.
(Excerpt) Read more at mob.cnbc.com ...
It's the top .025 percent that never get touched.
The top one percent number is much lower than you'd guess (340K) and those are the people who get absolutely crushed by these communist a-holes.
The economic genius was ignorant in 2013 of the correct term “seed corn” when he described “eating your corn seed”. The Moron-in-Chief now proposes eating corn seed.
Because he, and his donors don't really want to do this. They want to say they tried to do this, so the dumb angry idiots believe that the Democratic Party will throw them bags of money off the treasury truck. It's all kabuki for the simple minded.
It's all about the next presidential election. The next two years will see dozens of goofball liberal ideas floated. Basically, everything you could read on Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders Facebook page.
Obama is in the last half of his dead duck presidency. He is pretty bold to think that he is going to be able get a majority to agree with him.
If you are actively receiving subsidies from the government in the form of food stamps or other similar non-retirement related aid, you are not part of the "middle class", you are the dependent, poverty class.
Over 50% of Americans are now on some sort of government subsidy/aid program.
Where is this "middle class" they speak of? It would seem you have the poor on government assistance and those who just barely missed poverty and won't get aid.
I meant the people worth many millions to billions of dollars, which I guess is close to what you mentioned as the top 0.25 percent.
He’s targeting himself and all of congress?! ;-)
From another article about the "great" success: "President Obama on Saturday hyped next week’s State of the Union address and said he’ll use the once-a-year speech to tout America’s economic progress over the last six years while also putting pressure on Republicans to end their 'political games.'"
I'd like to play that game and offer this in response to his State of You'n Us speech. It attempts to bring together numerous federal gov't sources. The only "rebound" of Obama's is on the court.
The hyperlinks do not work here. Use this FR thread for the sources to keep this reply from being even bigger. here.
The data are annualized except when noted otherwise. All are monthly or quarterly. I use the last month / quarter of the year.
Much of the size of this is taken up by instructions on how to get the sources of the data and much, much more data!
I tire of "sources" like "government figures show", "Gallop poll numbers..", "the Washington Post.."; and I tire of clicking on a link to find it's only the home page of the site.. so I did some research in preparation for Obama State of You'n Us Speech. Not all of this is meant to compare to Reagan, however. The data I copied and formatted for display here date back to the '40s in some cases. The percentages have the extra decimals to make the computation more accurate.
Taking into account the year preceding the administrations, compare the first six years of Reagan and Obama. Examples: using these spread sheet formulas:
(1986 value - 1980 value) / 1980 value and
(2014 value - 2008 value) / 2008 value
I get
If you take into account the 2007 number of Employed full time 121621 [thousands] Obama's number would be negative. About all that happened is despite Obama most of the jobs lost in the first few years of his admnistration were recovered by the end of 2014.
Gee. How come Obama had such big decreases in (Col 9.) Unemployed and (Col 10) Unemployed looking for full-time work? Guess.
Col 11 and Col 12 are the Unemployment rate and Unemployment rate of the full-time labor force, respectively. The rest of the columns are:
| Year |
|---|
| 1980 |
| 1981 |
| 1982 |
| 1983 |
| 1984 |
| 1985 |
| 1986 |
| 1987 |
| 1988 |
| 2007 |
| 2008 |
| 2009 |
| 2010 |
| 2011 |
| 2012 |
| 2013 |
| 2014 |
| Year |
| 2. |
|---|
| 168693 |
| 170990 |
| 173046 |
| 174950 |
| 177133 |
| 178941 |
| 181365 |
| 183467 |
| 185253 |
| 232937 |
| 234825 |
| 236739 |
| 238712 |
| 240431 |
| 244169 |
| 246564 |
| 248843 |
| 2. |
| 3. |
|---|
| 107442 |
| 109057 |
| 110959 |
| 112160 |
| 114257 |
| 116211 |
| 118587 |
| 120593 |
| 122488 |
| 153645 |
| 154723 |
| 153591 |
| 153803 |
| 153995 |
| 155450 |
| 154989 |
| 156258 |
| 3. |
| 4. |
|---|
| 63.7 |
| 63.8 |
| 64.1 |
| 64.1 |
| 64.5 |
| 64.9 |
| 65.4 |
| 65.7 |
| 66.1 |
| 66.0 |
| 65.9 |
| 64.9 |
| 64.4 |
| 64.0 |
| 63.7 |
| 62.9 |
| 62.8 |
| 4. |
| 5. |
|---|
| 99499 |
| 100077 |
| 99120 |
| 102588 |
| 105944 |
| 108023 |
| 110492 |
| 113527 |
| 115947 |
| 146272 |
| 144091 |
| 138368 |
| 139155 |
| 140669 |
| 143303 |
| 144205 |
| 147344 |
| 5. |
| 6. |
|---|
| 59.0 |
| 58.5 |
| 57.3 |
| 58.6 |
| 59.8 |
| 60.4 |
| 60.9 |
| 61.9 |
| 62.6 |
| 62.8 |
| 61.4 |
| 58.4 |
| 58.3 |
| 58.5 |
| 58.7 |
| 58.5 |
| 59.2 |
| 6. |
| 7. |
|---|
| 82648 |
| 82799 |
| 80606 |
| 83997 |
| 87458 |
| 89259 |
| 91297 |
| 93914 |
| 95927 |
| 121621 |
| 118281 |
| 110906 |
| 111655 |
| 113269 |
| 115610 |
| 116826 |
| 119707 |
| 7. |
| 8. |
|---|
| 16843 |
| 17262 |
| 18409 |
| 18556 |
| 18487 |
| 18778 |
| 19194 |
| 19660 |
| 20053 |
| 24727 |
| 25836 |
| 27423 |
| 27444 |
| 27355 |
| 27684 |
| 27378 |
| 27657 |
| 8. |
| 9. |
|---|
| 7943 |
| 8981 |
| 11839 |
| 9572 |
| 8312 |
| 8188 |
| 8095 |
| 7066 |
| 6541 |
| 7374 |
| 10633 |
| 15223 |
| 14649 |
| 13326 |
| 12146 |
| 10784 |
| 8914 |
| 9. |
| 10. |
|---|
| 6612 |
| 7491 |
| 10111 |
| 8017 |
| 6891 |
| 6697 |
| 6586 |
| 5635 |
| 5236 |
| 6009 |
| 9009 |
| 13444 |
| 12867 |
| 11521 |
| 10338 |
| 9171 |
| 7478 |
| 10. |
| 11. |
|---|
| 7.4 |
| 8.2 |
| 10.7 |
| 8.5 |
| 7.3 |
| 7.0 |
| 6.8 |
| 5.9 |
| 5.3 |
| 4.8 |
| 6.9 |
| 9.9 |
| 9.5 |
| 8.7 |
| 7.8 |
| 7.0 |
| 5.7 |
| 11. |
| 12. |
|---|
| 7.4 |
| 8.3 |
| 11.1 |
| 8.7 |
| 7.3 |
| 7.0 |
| 6.7 |
| 5.7 |
| 5.2 |
| 4.7 |
| 7.1 |
| 10.8 |
| 10.3 |
| 9.2 |
| 8.2 |
| 7.3 |
| 5.9 |
| 12. |
| 13. |
|---|
| 61252 |
| 61933 |
| 62087 |
| 62790 |
| 62876 |
| 62730 |
| 62778 |
| 62874 |
| 62765 |
| 79291 |
| 80102 |
| 83148 |
| 84908 |
| 86436 |
| 88719 |
| 91575 |
| 92584 |
| 13. |
| pop. |
|---|
| 227220 |
| 229470 |
| 231660 |
| 233790 |
| 235820 |
| 237920 |
| 240130 |
| 242290 |
| 244500 |
| 301230 |
| 304090 |
| 306770 |
| 309330 |
| 311590 |
| 313910 |
| 316160 |
| 319470 |
| pop. |
| labor1 | labor1 | |
|---|---|---|
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| N | N | |
| 123524 | 22810 | |
| 121211 | 22138 | |
| 116663 | 21290 | |
| 117006 | 22153 | |
| 118033 | 22647 | |
| 119844 | 23216 | |
| 120636 | 23787 | |
| 122558 | 24890 | |
| labor1 | labor1 | |
| force | force | |
| domestic | foreign | |
| born | born | |
| [1000s] | [1000s] |
| PR2 |
|---|
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| 68.2 |
| 67.9 |
| 67.2 |
| 67.8 |
| 67.4 |
| 66.4 |
| 66.1 |
| 65.9 |
| PR2 |
| UR2 |
|---|
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| 4.7 |
| 7.6 |
| 11.0 |
| 10.6 |
| 8.8 |
| 8.0 |
| 6.5 |
| 5.3 |
| UR2 |
| income3 |
|---|
| 47,668 |
| 46,877 |
| 46,751 |
| 46,425 |
| 47,866 |
| 48,761 |
| 50,488 |
| 51,121 |
| 51,514 |
| 56,436 |
| 54,423 |
| 54,059 |
| 52,646 |
| 51,842 |
| 51,759 |
| 51,939 |
| N |
| income3 |
| median income |
| Recession |
|---|
| Jan to Jul '80 |
| Jul 1981 to |
| Nov 1982 |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| Dec 2007 |
| to |
| Jun 2009 |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| - |
| Year |
|---|
| 1980 |
| 1981 |
| 1982 |
| 1983 |
| 1984 |
| 1985 |
| 1986 |
| 1987 |
| 1988 |
| 2007 |
| 2008 |
| 2009 |
| 2010 |
| 2011 |
| 2012 |
| 2013 |
| 2014 |
| Year |
| GDP |
|---|
| -0.2 |
| 2.6 |
| -1.9 |
| 4.6 |
| 7.3 |
| 4.2 |
| 3.5 |
| 3.5 |
| 4.2 |
| 1.8 |
| -0.3 |
| -2.8 |
| 2.5 |
| 1.6 |
| 2.3 |
| 2.2 |
| 5 |
| GDP |
| % chg |
| PCE |
|---|
| 3.32 |
| -1.8 |
| 4.51 |
| 4.06 |
| 3.29 |
| 0.62 |
| 1.62 |
| 0.57 |
| 2.93 |
| 0.34 |
| -3.16 |
| -0.01 |
| 2.79 |
| 0.94 |
| 1.32 |
| 2.51 |
| 2.21 |
| PCE |
| U-6 |
|---|
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| 8.8 |
| 13.6 |
| 17.1 |
| 16.6 |
| 15.2 |
| 14.4 |
| 13.1 |
| 11.2 |
| U-6 |
| U-2 |
|---|
| 3.9 |
| 4.8 |
| 6.4 |
| 4.5 |
| 3.7 |
| 3.4 |
| 3.3 |
| 2.6 |
| 2.5 |
| 2.5 |
| 4.3 |
| 6.3 |
| 5.7 |
| 4.9 |
| 4.2 |
| 3.5 |
| 2.8 |
| U-2 |
| SSDI |
|---|
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| N |
| 823,106 |
| 895,011 |
| 985,940 |
| 1,052,551 |
| 1,025,003 |
| 979,973 |
| 884,894 |
| 810,973 |
| SSDI |
1labor: If second labor column (foreign born) is not shown hover the labor (domestic numbers) for foreign born numbers.
Source: to find the tables go here Data Retrieval: Labor Force Statistics (CPS)
HOUSEHOLD DATA Table A-7. Employment status of the civilian population by nativity and sex, not seasonally adjusted [Numbers in thousands]
Employment status and nativity. Then
Scroll down to "Retrieve Data"
The data that I include above are from the month of December except for 2014 where November is the last month with data available.
2 PR Civilian labor force participation rate, foreign born and UR unemployment rate, foreign born. See 1 for source.
3income: For the Census Bureau income data go here. Choose "Consumer Income Reports (P60)" then choose "P60-249 Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013" (pdf file).
No, the 1% will do enough to lower their existing ‘income’ that no other person can readily accomplish.
But my (dream) question will still not be asked nor answered. I can hear the hemming and hawing from the political class already...
And, IMHO, it should be asked whenever tax questions come up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.