Skip to main content

View Diary: Taxing the rich -- room for compromise? (31 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  761k for married couples would not be a compromise (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tardis10, yella dawg, Words In Action

    It would be a capitulation, and it will never happen.  

    The President will stand firm on this.  250k it is.  You can't triple that and call it "compromise."   Most people would call it a broken campaign pledge.  

    Look, most Americans know that if you tax the rich at high rates they find ways to shelter some of that income via methods the average person has no access to.  So, even if the Bush tax cuts expire, what is the effective income you get from those sources anyway?    Taxing the 2% at Clinton rates can only be the first step.  Comprehensive tax reform is needed to stop abuse of the system by the wealthy.  Stop tax shelters for investing in overseas companies, stop tax loopholes that make it easy to move money around and never pay taxes on income, at least for earners over a certain amount, change capital gains taxes to be in line with regular income taxes, etc.  

    If you do all that you probably triple the money that comes in from these sources, so your $300 Billion becomes almost a Trillion.  

    •  If I had to make a bet (0+ / 0-)

      I would bet against those levels holding firm when it's all said and done. Pres. Obama has said what he's committed to is a "balanced approach" and raising taxes on the top brackets. He has also said that he's open to compromise.

      According to the website, the rallying cry is to increase taxes on the top 2%. As pointed out in the diary, according to the linked table from the Brookings Institute, the top 2% for married filers is at $477,128 AGI, not $250,000, so these kinds of details are fuzzy. The beauty is that the amount of revenue raised is not that sensitive to the cutoff in the 1%-3% range.

      •  I think the "balanced approach" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        means tax increases PLUS spending cuts. Which is reasonable, so long as it doesn't involve the safety net. There's plenty of defense spending fat, corporate welfare and oil and agricultural subsidies, etc., to cull...

        Purging predominantly minority voters and requiring them to present IDs to vote in the face of VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT VOTER FRAUD is RACISM! I hereby declare all consenting Republicans RACISTS until they stand up and object to these practices!

        by Words In Action on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 06:59:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (150)
  • Community (70)
  • Memorial Day (29)
  • Media (28)
  • Environment (28)
  • Elections (27)
  • Civil Rights (27)
  • Culture (27)
  • Law (25)
  • Science (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Republicans (19)
  • Climate Change (18)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site