Posted on 12/13/2012 7:51:15 AM PST by Kaslin
how about the obamacare tax hikes? are they ok?
Watch for a ping from me
Since when does Ubama NOT want to inflict “economic damage?”
The fiscal cliff has risks economic damage.
Damn straight it does,
Doing what Obama wants poses even greater risks.
Go over the cliff.
“The fiscal cliff has risks economic damage.”
We already have economic damage... 100s of new regs and rules every day.
I agree, go over the cliff make everyone feel the pain, and in particular Obama voters on the east and west coast.
If the poor and lower middle class feel more pain maybe they will get jobs. This will help us more in 2016 than anything else. More taxpayers.
Economic damage is what 0bama wants. Cloward/Piven and irreversible debt. So far, it’s worked brilliantly.
Let it burn.
Cloward-Piven is a two way street.
It’s not a 2 way street after the collapse.
The Marxists want to fundamentally change America.
They prefer a collapse so they can rebuild in their image.
The congress critters and Obama are on the same page, despite all the noise. Their plan is in place and will continue to be in place.
There will be a deal, and it won’t help. We will continue down the slow road to hell. They can keep this up for decades, and they will.
White House to 185 signees. Buzz off. Da king don’t need yo advice.
Obama’s tax hike on those making over $200,000 won’t raise enough revenue to cover 14 days of the current level of deficit spending. These tax hikes have nothing to do with economics, but with Marxist ideals of ending capitalism.
If that is the case, won't the expiration of the Bush tax cuts be a good thing?
And that's exactly why going off the "fiscal cliff" is not a disaster for Republican Congress, that most old and tired political retreads commentators on the left and the right (with the convenient "polls" to "prove" it) are trying to tell us and the weak-kneed House Republicans.
The reality is that this is actually an opportunity: the problem will be much bigger for "conservative" Democrats in the House and the Dems in the Senate (e.g., see Democrats urge delay for 'job-killing' Obamacare tax - FR / WE, by Byron York, 2012 December 13).
Dems will have to deal with the screaming constituents who will be hit with real cuts in the programs, increased "Clinton taxes," and real layoffs by the "evil 2 percenters" (which would happen anyway with Obama's tax rate increases, independent of whatever happens with the other tax rates).
Obama may count on being able to offer the so-called "tax cut" (reverting to Bush tax rates for "everybody but top 2%" but the Republicans can offer "comprehensive tax reform" reverting to "Bush tax cut" (which suddenly will become very popular with the "poor" and even the liberal "middle class" set) and also offer to remove Obamacare's taxes on medical devices (see link above) and Obamacare's 3.8% tax on dividends and capital gains (same rationale as "job-killing" taxes on the "middle-class job creators").
In other words, Obama wants "pain" because he thinks he can get advantage from it, the GOP House can use the same pain to attract enough "conservative" Dems in the House and the Senate to push Obama, because they will not survive 2014 elections.
Political jiujitsu, plain and simple. This is a great opportunity - think what Nancy Pelosi would do with Republican President if the roles were reversed. The alternative is forever cowering in fear for the next round of class warfare.
Irrelevant. Obama’s Presidency is about the media controlling the message. “Control the information, control the people.”
Exactly!
What better time is there to break through the media - when people are actually paying attention, not to the media, but to the people who can actually "feel their pain."
Otherwise the "media controls the message" can be (and,, unfortunately, has been) used to give up on anything, forever and ever.
“In other words, Obama wants “pain” because he thinks he can get advantage from it, the GOP House can use the same pain to attract enough “conservative” Dems in the House and the Senate to push Obama, because they will not survive 2014 elections.”
Let me add, that Obama’s power comes from a weak economy. Dems, like other socialists stay in power by keeping the country poor and giving out entitlements. The Reps must make Obama’s voters feel pain - they don’t vote R anyway, and really two years is forever, in voter memory.
This is a game where we weaken Obama - taxes are part of it. If he is weakened the dems will run against him and Republicans can get us moving again. Congress will always get the blame, but really who cares about congress. Most of us like our Congress person - everyone else’s blows.
And the case is so easy to make that the problem is government spending and that the higher "marginal tax rates" are not equal to higher "revenues" - which is simply the euphemism Progressives/liberals/Democrats adopted to de-emphasize and hide the word "taxes" from the taxpayers.
We had essentially the same "Bush tax cut" rates since 2001. These rates during Bush administration (and mostly Republican Congress) produced the government revenues of approximately 19% of GDP while the government spending was about 21% of GDP, leaving the annual deficit of approximately 2% of GDP with the economy growing at 3.5-4+ percent.
Under Obama and mostly Democratic Congress, these exact same "Bush tax rates" produced government revenues of less than 16% of GDP while government spending shot up to over 24% of GDP, producing a deficit of more than 8% of GDP with the economy struggling to barely reach 2% growth.
Same tax rates on the people Obama and democrats call "rich" and all others, and yet dramatically different picture for the "revenues" and the spending.
Should not be difficult to put it on the charts and show it to people Ross Perot-style, it becomes very easy to understand which side of the equation has the credibility problem.
And according to Heritage, based on OMB and CBO estimates, higher taxes on the so-called "rich" alone won't even produce much "revenue" from them even discounting dynamic scoring and behaviour changes which will reduce that revenue even further and discounting the higher government spending to support displaced / laid-off workers.
Tax Shock (jpg) - (Vast majority of taxes will come from incomes below "top 2%" and Alternative Minimum Tax, rollback of 2% cut in payroll tax, eollback of "stimulus" tax cuts and from new ObamaCare taxes.)
“And the case is so easy to make that the problem is government spending...”
After watching the election and listening to the “average” voter I don’t think polls mean “jack”.
If Boehner was smart he’d simply say no and let Obama and the dems scream and holler. I mean really, who cares, the country thinks he sucks anyway, he has all the power to do the “right thing”, with no backlash.
If the Reps are wrong they will pay for it but so will Obama to a larger extent. If they are right the economy will improve and Obama’s dependency state will weaken.
It’s a win-win IF they do the right thing, and reduce the deficit, and get the fiscal house in order. Next start passing laws to rein in government regulators.
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.
