TC4 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Interesting article about Obama's domestic agenda and taxes from the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561551065378405.html?mod=djemEditorialPage President Obama has laid out the most ambitious and expensive domestic agenda since LBJ, and now all he has to do is figure out how to pay for it. On Tuesday, he left the impression that we need merely end "tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans," and he promised that households earning less than $250,000 won't see their taxes increased by "one single dime." This is going to be some trick. Even the most basic inspection of the IRS income tax statistics shows that raising taxes on the salaries, dividends and capital gains of those making more than $250,000 can't possibly raise enough revenue to fund Mr. Obama's new spending ambitions. ****Click the link above for full article**** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Tax hikes on the top 2% isn't the sole source of funding. He also proposes to cut funding for various other programs (e.g., farm subsidies for farms making over $500K per year). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Tax hikes on the top 2% isn't the sole source of funding. He also proposes to cut funding for various other programs (e.g., farm subsidies for farms making over $500K per year). If the President is able to make serious farm subsidy reforms, he will be the greatest POTUS in American history The 2 trillion over a decade he identified averages to 200 billion a year. Each dime of that has some supporter in Congress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I think it's premature to judge "where he's getting the money" before we see the budget that he submits in the next few weeks. The fact of the matter is that there is a TON of wasteful spending on programs that both don't work and are unnecessary. Let's see what he cuts before we automatically assume that it's all coming from increased taxes on the upper 2%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I think it's premature to judge "where he's getting the money" before we see the budget that he submits in the next few weeks.The fact of the matter is that there is a TON of wasteful spending on programs that both don't work and are unnecessary. Let's see what he cuts before we automatically assume that it's all coming from increased taxes on the upper 2%. I am not the most optimistic on this front. Every President since probably Teddy R has said they want to "cut wasteful spending" Yet government spending always rises If you want to give something eternal life, make it a federal program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peeping Wizard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 His crack finance team cannot seem to handle basic accounting. The tax hikes won't pay for it. Furthermore he is commiting himself to Afghanistan which many Defense experts believe will cost far more than Obama is anticipating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peeping Wizard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 The fact of the matter is that there is a TON of wasteful spending on programs that both don't work and are unnecessary. Ummm...have you seen the new spending bill that passed. I'm afraid the days of wasteful spending are FAR from over. It's business as usual. When Obama touted "Change" on the campaign trail what he meant was change to 1977. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Ummm...have you seen the new spending bill that passed. I'm afraid the days of wasteful spending are FAR from over. It's business as usual. When Obama touted "Change" on the campaign trail what he meant was change to 1977. /rimshot. Seriously folks, he'll be here all week. Make sure to tip your waitresses and bartenders. Thankfully, most of the American public isn't quite so ready to call the President a "dope" and a "snob" (Seriously, the snob part kills me. As compared to a silver spoons country club son of a millionaire that didn't have a real job until he was governor of Texas, Obama looks like the kids in Slumdog Millionaire... lol) when he's a little over a month into the job. It's going to take a little longer than 5 weeks to dig us out of the hole left by the last administration. Not that it will stop some people from falling victim to their preconceived notions and burying the President before he even starts shoveling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 EersSkins bringing the truth. The folks who are ready to condemn this administration after 5 weeks are just showing that they were never ready to give it a chance in the first place. To those people: thanks for the heads-up that your opinion can be safely ignored from here on out. Your self-marginalization is a favor to the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Free Ride from criticism of adopted policies? How long?....and do we deduct that grace period from his(and his officials) salary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peeping Wizard Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 this administration after 5 weeks are just showing that they were never ready to give it a chance in the first place. . When your spending gets into the TRILLIONS in the first five weeks, no more needs to be said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 When your spending gets into the TRILLIONS in the first five weeks, no more needs to be said. So, um, you were surprised that the stimulus bill passed? You would have been supportive at this point and kept an open mind, one whopping month into Obama's administration, but then you suddenly discovered that you were wrong to assume he'd just abandon one of his two biggest campaign promises? Or did you assume ahead of time that the stimulus bill would pass, therefore writing off the Obama administration before his first day in office? Neither looks good. I'm curious as to which one describes your experience, though. Did the stimulus bill take you by surprise, or didn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 taxing marijuana will save the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 taxing marijuana will save the economy. I am just curious, how much money could be raised from taxing bud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I am just curious, how much money could be raised from taxing bud? seriously speaking, i think the number reported was something like 2 billion a year. not sure exactly though. edit: remember when 2 billion dollars sounded like a lot of money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 seriously speaking, i think the number reported was something like 2 billion a year.not sure exactly though. I have often wondered. Because if it is something like 1 trillion, it should have been done yesterday 2 billion, while a drop in the bucket, always helps to reduce this deficit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 seems like the net effects would be great -- small business started, lowered prison costs, lowered war on drugs costs... i don't really smoke marijuana. i also see no reason to waste money stopping people from doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 seems like the net effects would be great -- small business started, lowered prison costs, lowered war on drugs costs...i don't really smoke marijuana. i also see no reason to waste money stopping people from doing so. I am in the same boat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoRUSupposed2Be Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 So, um, you were surprised that the stimulus bill passed? You would have been supportive at this point and kept an open mind, one whopping month into Obama's administration, but then you suddenly discovered that you were wrong to assume he'd just abandon one of his two biggest campaign promises?Or did you assume ahead of time that the stimulus bill would pass, therefore writing off the Obama administration before his first day in office? Neither looks good. I'm curious as to which one describes your experience, though. Did the stimulus bill take you by surprise, or didn't it? I'm curious as to what his agenda is also MJah because to have dope attached to the colors of America is not very constitutional . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 seems like the net effects would be great -- small business started, lowered prison costs, lowered war on drugs costs...i don't really smoke marijuana. i also see no reason to waste money stopping people from doing so. Aside from prison costs,would we really gain much? I would expect a large portion would still go to oversight and bureaucracy. I don't oppose legalizing it but like gambling the profits are overstated. On the other hand it might make more incomes taxable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Aside from prison costs,would we really gain much?I would expect a large portion would still go to oversight and bureaucracy. I don't oppose legalizing it but like gambling the profits are overstated. On the other hand it might make more incomes taxable. didn't you say marijuana sales supported terrorists, or Mexican drug lords... legalize marijuana to help with illegal immigration? Or maybe it would increase immigration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 seriously speaking, i think the number reported was something like 2 billion a year.not sure exactly though. edit: remember when 2 billion dollars sounded like a lot of money? That's just for CA.In 2005 economists predicted around 15-20 billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 didn't you say marijuana sales supported terrorists, or Mexican drug lords...legalize marijuana to help with illegal immigration? Or maybe it would increase immigration Indeed it does,and they will still be selling if legalized as well ...NAFTA;) I would expect increased immigration since everyone claims they are indispensable to farming/harvesting and sorting. Legalize that too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 It's going to take a little longer than 5 weeks to dig us out of the hole left by the last administration. Not that it will stop some people from falling victim to their preconceived notions and burying the President before he even starts shoveling.And this is where you fire your rimshot. To claim the mess we are in is due to the last administration is insane. Every administration of the last 50 years is responsible. And Congress is the most guilty party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 And this is where you fire your rimshot. To claim the mess we are in is due to the last administration is insane. Every administration of the last 50 years is responsible. And Congress is the most guilty party. To claim that the mess we are in is ONLY due to the last administration is insane. To claim that the last administration is FAR MORE to blame than any other for the mess we are in is very rational. And make no mistake about it: Bush and friends made this mess worse than it would have been. FAR worse. Pretending that's not the case? Yeah, THAT would be insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.