I'm no longer falling for the election-year fooleys the way I once did.
"Obama to seek minimum tax rate for millionaires; GOP is expected to oppose plan named for Buffett" by Jackie Calmes, New York Times / September 18, 2011
WASHINGTON - President Obama tomorrow will call for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle-income taxpayers, according to administration officials....
The fabulously rich pay a lower rate?
The proposal adds a new and populist feature to Obama’s effort to raise the political pressure on Republicans to agree to higher revenues from the wealthy in return for Democrats’ support of future savings from Medicare and Medicaid.
Obama, in a bit of political salesmanship, will call his proposal the Buffett Rule, in a reference to Warren E. Buffett, the billionaire investor who has complained repeatedly that the richest Americans generally pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than do middle-income workers, because investment gains are taxed at a lower rate than wages.
I'm sitting here thinking Democrats had two whole years of a super-majority to do this and they didn't even rescind the Bush tax cuts they promised to rescind.
Obama will not specify a rate or other details, and it is unclear how much revenue his plan would raise. But his idea of a millionaires’ minimum tax will be prominent in the broad plan for long-term deficit reduction that he will outline at the White House tomorrow....
It's a New York Times pitch.
The Obama proposal has little chance of becoming law unless Republican lawmakers bend.
Yeah, we have seen how flexible those guys are.
But by focusing on the wealthiest Americans, the president is sharpening the contrast between Republicans and Democrats with a theme he can carry into his bid for reelection in 2012.
They just tried this last time with the Bush cuts but Obama caved again.
It could also reassure Democrats who have feared that Obama would agree to changes in programs like Medicare without forcing Republicans to compromise on taxes.
But he is STILL CUTTING MEDICARE, right?
When are the WARS going to TAKE A CUT, huh?
What is reassuring about lip service?
The administration wants such a tax to replace the alternative minimum tax, which was created decades ago to make sure the richest taxpayers with plentiful deductions and credits did not avoid income taxes, but which now hits millions of Americans who are considered upper middle class. Obama has said that many average Americans could see a tax cut if the system is overhauled, since ending many tax breaks would allow for lower rates while raising more revenues from the wealthiest.
The millionaires’ tax is among several changes Obama will propose in urging Congress to overhaul the federal income tax code next year, both to raise revenues for reducing deficits and to make the tax system simpler and fairer, said the administration officials, who agreed to speak in advance of the president’s announcement on condition of anonymity.
The millionaires’ rate would affect only 0.3 percent of taxpayers, they said. That would be fewer than 450,000; 144 million returns were filed for 2010.
Obama’s proposal comes a month after Buffett began reviving his longstanding objection that he and “my megarich friends’’ pay a significantly lower percentage of their income in federal taxes - income and payroll taxes - than everyone else, thanks to the tax code’s favoritism toward the rich, and especially toward investors like him.
That so defies everything I've been taught and told about America -- but it's true.
“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice,’’ he wrote in an opinion article in The New York Times, a complaint he has repeated in talks and interviews since.
Obama has been citing Buffett as he promotes his $447 billion jobs plan....
His proposed Buffett Rule puts a new spin on that pitch....
Do you know how TIRED I AM of being PITCHED TO?
--more--"
And that "jobs" bill?
"President again urges voters to press for $447b jobs bill " September 18, 2011
WASHINGTON - In his weekly radio and Internet address yesterday, he focused on a message that has become central to a presidency struggling to address stubbornly high unemployment numbers and dipping approval of his handling of the economy.
The president announced his jobs legislation to a joint session of Congress last week and has since gone outside Washington to build a case for its passage. He has been to Virginia, Ohio, and North Carolina.
“The No. 1 issue for the people I meet is how we can get back to a place where we’re creating good, middle-class jobs that pay well and offer some security,’’ he said.
Where you been for three years? He's only worried about the security of his taxpayer-funded job full of perks.
His address came in the face of sobering public opinion ratings for the president.
A New York Times/CBS News poll released Friday found that nearly half those surveyed are worried the economy is headed for another recession and nearly three out of four said they believe the country is on the wrong track.
Most of us never came out of what history will record as the Grand Depression.
Obama’s proposal would reduce payroll taxes on workers, cut them in half for most businesses, and offer incentives for employers to hire.
It would provide tens of billions of dollars for new public works projects, extend unemployment benefits for long-term jobless, and help states and localities avoid layoffs of teachers and emergency workers....
--more--"
It's half a stimuloot!!
So after BORROWING a BILLION DOLLARS to prop up the economy for two years we are RIGHT BACK WHERE WE WERE?
That's FAILURE in my book!
Related: Administration Telling the Truth About Stimuloot
As is the social service slashing on the altar of endless war and empire:
"Obama backs off from deals of summer; $2 trillion in cuts buck GOP ideas" by Jim Kuhnhenn Associated Press / September 19, 2011
“Potentially raising the retirement age for Medicare is something that deserves a lot of consideration,’’ said Christina Romer, the former head of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. She said such an increase in the eligibility age is more conceivable with Obama’s health care law because guaranteed private health insurance would be available to middle-class early retirees starting in 2014.
Still, an analysis by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation found that two-thirds of 65- and 66-year-olds would pay more for their new coverage than they would have under Medicare....
But you are going to luuuuuuv his health law, remember?
Senior administration officials say that in pushing for his jobs plan, Obama will highlight the need for long-term deficit reduction, and the need to achieve it through spending cuts and tax revenue. In so doing, they will try to create sharp differences with Republicans that could serve him in the 2012 presidential campaign....
Yeah, THAT is what the POLITICAL FOOLEY is really all about -- and as a thoughtful and aware voter I'm offended.
--more--"
"Even if its prospects are more dubious than other methods of getting rid of last year’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the compact has become a popular way for conservatives to highlight their opposition....
Yeah, the BS FLOWS from THAT SIDE, too!!
--more--"
"Obama urges tax hike, talks of veto; Offers $3 trillion plan to reduce the deficit" by Donovan Slack and Theo Emery, Globe Staff / September 20, 2011
The president’s call for more tax fairness and his shift away from significant entitlement cuts are expected to strengthen his base as he gears up for his reelection bid next year.
How do you shore up a base that feels betrayed?
Didn't he just cave on a cross-country oil pipeline and air regulations?
By vowing to protect the major programs, he also is making a pitch to some moderates who have become wary of GOP attacks on Social Security and pledges to overhaul Medicare, both in Congress and on the campaign stump.
The president is at a critical juncture, political analysts said. With support sagging from party loyalists, his poll numbers at record lows, and the 2012 election season beginning in earnest, the president wants to show strong leadership that will reverberate throughout his party, said James M. Glaser, a dean and professor of political science at Tufts University.
That the sagging base he's trying to strengthen and reassure?
If he wants to show leadership he can vote in favor of a Palestinian state, end a couple wars, and start telling the truth about who really did 9/11.
“So coming out and shaking his fist at the other side a little bit - that’s not a bad thing for him to be doing right now,’’ Glaser said.
Paul Watanabe, an associate professor in the University of Massachusetts-Boston’s department of political science, said that the president has been perceived as coddling Congress, and he’s now taking a more confrontational stance toward Capitol Hill, much as President Harry Truman did in 1948.
“That’s very much a part of Obama’s playbook.’’
Not fooled.
--more--"
