Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama/Dems COULD be in better negotiating position in 2 months (51 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Question: with the Bush tax rates being made (0+ / 0-)

    'permanent' besides the above 450K, does that mean upper income tax rates can not be part of an 'avoiding sequester' bargain?

    As in, is closing tax loopholes Obama's only hope now to raise revenue to balance out cuts that will be part of a deal?  

    Or can the 250K+ rate still be part of a grand bargain?

    I like Michelle more than Barack.

    by duha on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:17:24 PM PST

    •  I'd say the rate is pretty much off the table... (12+ / 0-)

      but making sure all the folks who should be paying that rate are paying that rate - ie closing loopholes, havens etc - is definitely on the table.  

      I think it would be politically tough to say "We raised their rates 3%, and now we want to raise them some more now".  But it's an easier argument to say "if you are in the top bracket, you shouldn't be able to exploit specially created loopholes, dodges and deductions in order to pay less than your secretary".  

      First move was to increase the rate.  Second act will be to close the loopholes to see that everybody pays their bracketed rate.  

      President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

      by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:23:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  OK, so do we know how much (0+ / 0-)

        revenue can be raised from that?  if this smaller deal got us half way there to the deficit reduction of 1.3 trillion needed to avoid sequester, how much of the closing loopholes revenue is out there?

        I like Michelle more than Barack.

        by duha on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 10:46:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  In his speech (12+ / 0-)

      tonight when he said all cuts had to be balanced with revenue, President Obama mentioned corporations as well as the wealthy.  My guess is he is planning to go after things like oil subsidies and other tax breaks for those big businesses who are raking in the cash, but not contributing to the country.

      I had not noticed him mentioning corporations before, but it is possible I just missed it.  I think it is a pretty smart move.  How can they justify tax breaks for companies who make millions of dollars per hour, but we can't afford to fund medicare or medicaid?

      •  BINGO! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        put the pressure on this and that is exactly what will happen.

        hey mccain/graham....want to save some defense cuts, have to give up corporate welfare. you cannot have both.

        mittens=edsel. no matter how much money is spent to promote it, if the product sucks, no one will buy it.

        by wewantthetruth on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:18:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Deductions (0+ / 0-)

      The whole game for revenues now is "reforming the tax code". Basically Boehener's initial proposal he said you could rise 800 billion WITHOUT raising taxes. Let's see some of that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (180)
  • Community (80)
  • Baltimore (76)
  • Bernie Sanders (57)
  • Civil Rights (44)
  • Freddie Gray (43)
  • Elections (35)
  • Hillary Clinton (32)
  • Culture (30)
  • Law (27)
  • Labor (26)
  • Racism (26)
  • 2016 (24)
  • Economy (23)
  • Media (23)
  • Education (23)
  • Politics (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Texas (20)
  • Barack Obama (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site