Coburn: We have to raise taxes in order to pass spending cuts

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/19/coburn-we-have-to-raise-taxes-in-order-to-pass-spending-cuts/ ^

[Minus_The_Bear]

Earlier this week, Tom Coburn quit the Gang of Six negotiations in the Senate, saying that the bipartisan working group on the budget wanted to go in a substantially different direction than Coburn would travel. Given that context, Coburn’s essay in today’s Washington Post prompts a question — just where exactly did the Gang of Six want to go? Coburn argues in his article that conservatives are going to have to swallow some tax hikes to get the spending cuts they want (via OTB):

[Puddleglum]

If 49% of the populace pay no income taxes, they feel no pain when Congress spends out of control. I am for raising taxes on those 49%. What do you think of that?

[Publius6961]

That’s all he’s saying. Either make a deal or wait til 2012, those are our options.

I missed the part where he explicitly states advocacy of the latter.

[Minus_The_Bear]

Making the 49% of people who currently pay 0 taxes begin to pay is not what is being proposed.

Coburn is talking about raising taxes on the few producers we currently have.

He apparently doesn't get that we have a spending problem. You don't either.

Why should %50 of the people pay all of the taxes?

Cut spending.

[SaraJohnson]

Papa Bush learned how effective that “bi-partisan” stragegy is for the international socialist wing of the GOP.

[Puddleglum]

You said:

"Coburn is talking about raising taxes on the few producers we currently have. He apparently doesn't get that we have a spending problem. You don't either."

Coburn said:

"The public rightly prefers spending cuts over revenue increases, but numerous polls indicate the vast majority of Americans would support the only type of plan that would ever make it out of Congress and be signed into law: one that favors spending cuts over revenue increases but includes both [....]

In the coming weeks I’ll be putting forward my own proposal that puts everything on the table and cuts $9 trillion in spending over the next decade[....]

History has not been kind to republics that pretend they can borrow and spend beyond their means indefinitely. "

You didn't read Coburn's editorial, did you? You just read the HotAir thingee.

[FredZarguna]

No, you don't get it. The reason there is a constituency to raise taxes is because half the people in the country believe that the tax is going to be raised on somebody else. As long as that 50% is skating free, they will continue to show up at the polls to rape the rest of us for their jollies.

Start taxing the 50% who pay no taxes. Then we'll see how much appetite there is for "taxing the rich."

[Osage Orange]

"Coburn is right...you can’t get the Dem Senate to agree to anytrhing unless you agree to go along with their tax hikes. That’s all he’s saying. Either make a deal or wait til 2012, those are our options"

Well...you cannot go stating the obvious here!! Damn you!! For doing it!!

[Puddleglum]

PS - source of excerpts in my post 65:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-the-senate-stalling-on-the-debt-debate/2011/05/18/AFpqEm6G_story.html

[Minus_The_Bear]

I saw him on national and local television as well.

I really don't see what is so hard to understand about not raising taxes on the remaining producers.

We are spending too much. We need to cut costs. Coburn is not proposing to make the current non-payers begin to pay... he is wanting the producers to pay more.

If that math is too hard... I don't know how else to explain it.

[Osage Orange]

Who might I ask do you think controls the Senate?

[Minus_The_Bear]

That would be awesome.

But is Coburn proposing that? No.

[Osage Orange]

Baloney!

Your boy Arnold....is a RINO.

Coburn is anything but that....

Fact is...Coburn is probably the best fair and balanced understanding mind in the Senate....

[Minus_The_Bear]

"Who might I ask do you think controls the Senate?"

_________________________________________________

That doesn't mean that Coburn has to advocate for tax increases on producers. The Democrats control the State Dept. does that mean we should endorse Obama's speech about Israel?

[Osage Orange]

Here's what you wrote once again....

We control the House and control spending.

We control the House and control taxes.

The problem is Republicans want to steal more from people who work to fund people who don’t work.

They are already stealing too much. The answer is NO.

The Pubbies DO NOT control the Senate. Plain and simple. You seem to think...that "we" control the House so it's a slam dunk. It isn't.

You can have your last rant.

FWIW-

[Minus_The_Bear]

I never wrote that.

Nice try moron.

[Osage Orange]

Haha!! ....of course you didn't. I was in error.

And frankly...I've been a moron more times than I can count...

That all said...the bulk of my post stands. To you and the other moron.

You know us morons need to unite!

[Minus_The_Bear]

You also don't understand that Coburn shouldn't be advocating for tax increases on producers.

It doesn't freaking matter who controls the Senate. I don't care if Coburn was the only Republican Senator 99 to 1. You don't say that we should raise taxes.

Do Democrats ever say "Oh well, I guess we'll have to cut taxes." No they don't.

We get these people like McCain & Coburn constantly stabbing us in the back.

[Osage Orange]

I'd like to know the context and circumstances that Tom supposedly said this....

I'm not that quick to throw him overboard.

FWIW-

[Let's Roll]

Coming from people who have always raised taxes and then CONTINUED spending, there is NO way we can believe this.

That’s the real reason we don’t want to raise taxes to reduce the deficit ... they never apply those raised taxes to anything but new vote buying.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

You doggone right arnold is a rino.Please explain why coburn was part of the gang of six.He’s tainted as far as I’m concerned.