Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (41655)	3/5/2010 1:41:44 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

It USED to be that EARNED income was thought more highly of than income that was just ACCRUED, but the "Tea Partiers" have been convinced that if Warren Buffet and Paris Hilton get their tax raised it will be a direct SLAP at "them". No, it will be a direct slap at the people who you decide you don't like, so you will just steal money from. And only an indirect slap at much poorer people as the tax increases damage the economy. But almost no on is talking about just raising taxes on the Warren Buffet's of the world. Despite their very high income doing so won't raise a lot of revenue, they are just to few. Instead you get things like proposed increase on the top 1%, or 2%, or 5%, or 10%, or even "let the Bush tax cuts expire", which would be a tax increase for almost every income tax payer (and some current non-payers)

To: RMF who wrote (41655)	3/6/2010 4:53:52 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

C.B.O. analysis argues that nearly 100% of the projected increase in the accumulated federal debt over the next decade will be because of two things: 1) Tax cuts projected for the Middle Class by President Obama. (Extension of AMT 'fix' when it expires, extension of Bush's tax cuts that apply to Middle Class, new Obama Middle Class tax reductions....) 2) And INTEREST on the federal debt. -------------------------------------------------------- ... Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. As part of his campaign pledge to protect families making less than $250,000 a year from new taxes, the president is proposing to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to ensnare millions of additional taxpayers. He also wants to make permanent a series of tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. "Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. Obama is convening a special commission to bring deficits down to 3 percent of the economy, but the CBO report shows that Obama could accomplish that goal simply by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and paying for changes to the alternative minimum tax. Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher.... National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says By Lori Montgomery Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, March 6, 2010 washingtonpost.com