Republicans' Tax Dilemma
Have the Republicans in Congress painted themselves into a corner on taxes? They seem to be in the position of choosing between a number of courses of action, most of which would normally be seen as going against their principles. They may have dealt themselves a losing hand, to put it another way.
Metaphors aside, though, it's hard to see how Republicans are going to escape this dilemma. First, the history: President Barack Obama got a "tax holiday" declared, which cut everyone's payroll (Social Security) taxes by hundreds of dollars. The White House says this amounts to a $1,500 tax cut for an average family, while others use the metric of saving $1,000 for an average worker making $50,000 per year. By any measure, all year long all workers have been getting more money in their paychecks. This tax holiday is about to expire, at the end of this year.
What this means is that, if Congress does not act, taxes are going up substantially for "the 99 percent," starting with the first paycheck everyone gets in January. Republicans -- supposedly the party which never saw a tax cut it didn't love -- have the power to block this action.
Here's where their three losing choices come into play. The Democrats are going to move first, most likely in the Senate. Democrats are going to introduce an extension of the payroll tax holiday for next year, and pay for it with a small surcharge on people making over a million dollars a year. Taxes stay down for everyone not making a cool million, but millionaires will have to pay a tiny bit more, to put it another way.
Republicans can vote this down, if they wish. They will do so by decrying "raising taxes" on "job creators," but Democrats will be out there asking Republicans why they are in favor of a big tax hike on 99.9 percent of American workers, to keep millionaires' taxes low. The dichotomy will be stark: you're either for lower taxes on just about everybody, or you're for lower taxes on the richest of the rich. "Republicans are raising taxes on the middle class by over a thousand bucks a year!" will be the rallying cry for the Democrats. This is bad choice number one for Republicans.
Of course, the Republicans could go along with the Democrats. If enough frightened Republicans cross the aisle, the Democratic plan could pass both the Senate and the House by the Christmas break. The tax cut would be saved, and everyone could go home happy. Except, of course, for all the Republicans who just voted to raise taxes and therefore will be in Grover Norquist's doghouse forevermore. The Tea Party has already shown it is a force to be reckoned with in Republican primaries, and there will still be enough time (in most states) for a primary challenger to take on any apostate Republican senator or representative who "just voted to raise taxes." Bad choice number two for Republicans.
The third bad choice Republicans would have would be to introduce their own legislation which continued the payroll tax holiday, but didn't pay for it. Now, in normal times, this wouldn't be all that contentious. Running a short-term deficit for long-term benefits used to be voted through Congress all the time, even when Republicans were running the place. But these are not normal times, and so if Republicans take this route, then they leave themselves open to attacks from both Democrats and the Tea Party that they are for "increasing the deficit" or "deficit spending."
The only way around this conundrum for Republicans would be to introduce their own bill which extends the payroll tax cut but pays for it by cutting spending elsewhere. But this is going to be pretty tough for them to put together in the next week or so, because they'd have to make up over $100 billion in spending cuts over the next year -- not off in some ten-year distance. Finding that much to cut is going to hurt, to be blunt. It is impossible to cut that much from one year's federal budget without some serious pain. Democrats will likely point this out, and refuse to go along with this plan.
Which brings up a final choice, which is even worse for Republicans -- not doing anything. The effects of this will be immediate. Not only will everyone's taxes go up in January, but unemployment payments will also run out for 2 million people in that month alone (the secondary part of the bill). Democrats will not be shy about letting America know why their taxes are going up, either. It will be such delicious irony for Democrats to hammer Republicans with "Republicans just raised your taxes!" and "Republicans are trying to cause another recession for political reasons!" Which is why this option isn't even in the "bad" category for Republicans, it's truly in the "unthinkable" category.
Republicans have a tough decision to make. They can either fight for millionaires to have low taxes, and by doing so raise taxes on everyone else; fight to raise millionaires' taxes to redistribute this wealth downward; fight to raise the deficit and indulge in deficit spending; fight to slash funding by $100 billion next year for programs Americans like; or do nothing and be blamed for raising taxes.
Democrats, meanwhile, just have to make their case to the American people. Of course, being Democrats, they may fail at attempting to do so. But heading into this legislative tug-of-war, it certainly seems like Democrats have been dealt a much better hand than Republicans. If they do manage to get out there and explain what is going on to the American people in clear and forceful terms, Democrats will have a good shot at making some excellent political hay over the issue, and by doing so, force the Republican Party to splinter enough to get a bill passed by Christmas. Whatever happens, December is going to be an interesting month in Washington, that's for sure.
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at Business Insider
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
The only way around this conundrum for Republicans would be to introduce their own bill which extends the payroll tax cut but pays for it by cutting spending elsewhere. But this is going to be pretty tough for them to put together in the next week or so,
No it isn't.
because they'd have to make up over $100 billion in spending cuts over the next year -- not off in some ten-year distance. Finding that much to cut is going to hurt, to be blunt. It is impossible to cut that much from one year's federal budget without some serious pain.
Only in reality. A bill that's just proposed for show has no need for any connection to reality.
The Republicans are going to introduce their bill to cut the payroll tax, and to pay for it by cutting a hundred billion from DNA tests for grizzly bears, or from sending condoms to North Korea, or from federal matching of the dues of teachers' unions. It doesn't matter what.
The media will treat the Democrats' bill and the Republicans' bill with absolute even-handedness. The public will blame whoever they were planning to blame anyway.
It's an easy win for the Republicans.
If they do manage to get out there and explain what is going on to the American people in clear and forceful terms, Democrats will have a good shot at making some excellent political hay over the issue, and by doing so, force the Republican Party to splinter enough to get a bill passed by Christmas.
What if they explain in clear and forceful terms and the media decides to focus on something else?
Like how Obama is using secret footage of a Mitt Romney lookalike to make Mitt Romney sound as if he's contradicting himself :)
-David
The president actually warned Republicans this would happen. Remember when he said they were painting themselves in a corner? Remember when he said he would call their bluff? All he had to do was let them keep doing what they were already doing. I'm starting to suspect Republicans are actually not very smart people.
What if they explain in clear and forceful terms
Awww, com'on David.. We're talking about DEMOCRATS here....
Democrats never had a message they couldn't mangle and obfuscate beyond recognition. :D
2012 simply can't come soon enough..
Michale....
011
Matt,
I'm starting to suspect Republicans are actually not very smart people.
I do believe you said the same thing, right before the 2010 midterms..
How that work out for ya?? :D
Michale
012
On another note, w/ regards to the CW.COM fundraiser...
As ya'all have noticed, I have started numbering my posts.. Every 50 posts, I will send a PayPal payment to CW.com and annotate same on my post. Those who have pledged to match my donations might want to follow suit. It's easier (at least for me) to send a bunch of $50 payments rather than one big sum..
Also, I propose that we extend the "Holiday" Fund Drive to 1 Jan 2012, which truly marks the end of the holidays. This gives me an extra week to meet my goal of 500 posts... :D
Just a thought...
Michale....
014
Arguably the most powerful Republican in the US today has repeatedly proclaimed that defeating Obama in 2012 is the top priority for the R's. This means no compromise, no good will, no mercy.
Also means no legislation without 60 votes, no judges without 60 votes, no appointments without 60 votes (or significant ass kissing).
And now, they don't want to extend a tax cut because those poor millionaires might have to pay something. Gee, who'd a thunk it?
We're talking about DEMOCRATS here....
Exactly.
I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.
500 posts from Michale?
I think my head is exploding
Arguably the most powerful Republican in the US today has repeatedly proclaimed that defeating Obama in 2012 is the top priority for the R's.
Considering how demonstrably bad Obama has been for the country, such an attitude is logical..
And now, they don't want to extend a tax cut because those poor millionaires might have to pay something. Gee, who'd a thunk it?
The top 20% in income of this country pay over 80% of the taxes in this country..
Gee, who'd a thunk it...
Michale.....
015
The top 20% in income of this country pay over 80% of the taxes in this country.
If this is true (which I don't know one way or another), what it says to me is that the top 20% are the only ones who have gained from our system.
That doesn't seem like a rising tide lifts all ships. It seems like it lifts some ships a lot more than others.
Yet rather than pay back into the system that helped make them successful, many of those at the top are fighting for even more tax breaks. Rather than give back to their country, they want more gifts.
-David
The top 20% in income of this country pay over 80% of the taxes in this country..
Gee, who'd a thunk it...
Uh...anyone who has looked at tax law at any time for the entire history of the country? No, really it has been designed like this from the beginning.
Yet rather than pay back into the system that helped make them successful,
Pay back into a system that is run by a completely inept administration who has proven, AT EVERY TURN, that it has absolutely ZERO fiscal discipline or business smarts???
For the gods' sake, why????
If YOU had billions and billions of dollars and you already met your legal obligations, would YOU want to give more money to a government that has proven it can't manage it??
Of course not. What sane person would??
Regardless, my point was addressing DF's implied criticism that the rich don't pay their fair share....
A myth that has already been refuted by the facts...
It's an emotional argument that, like all emotional arguments, falls apart once the facts are assessed in a calm, rational and objective manner, free from hysterical emotionalism and demonizing...
Michale.....
It's an emotional argument that, like all emotional arguments, falls apart once the facts are assessed in a calm, rational and objective manner, free from hysterical emotionalism and demonizing...
Then what's your excuse? :D
While the middle and lower class shouldn't have their taxes raised I don’t think that extending the temporary payroll tax cut is the greatest way to fix our consumer spending problem.
Many studies have shown that temporary tax cuts don’t alter people’s spending habits because they make financial decisions based on their projected long-term income. http://eng.am/o2tLOH
America needs solutions that focus on the long-term like the Bowles-Simpson plan.
When you make statements of fact you should give the reference check.
"... 20% of the population pays 80% of the taxes ..." http://beta.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2004/08/13/top_20_pay_80_of_taxes
Like everything else Limbaugh has to say, it is not true:
"... the top 20 percent pay 72 percent..."
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes
OK, it is picky to quibble about 7% but then, the same 20% owns 93% of the financial assets (which is what taxes are paid on) which is NOT quibbling. Why shouldn't they be paying 93% of the taxes?
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
Totally off the subject, but Chris?
You DO KNOW that left 'Toon Lane (http://www.lefttoonlane.com/) is a site that sells hydrocodone and vicodine online?
David Engage America -
Just a quick note to welcome you to the site. Your first comment was held for moderation, but now that it has been approved, you should be able to post comments and have them appear instantly.
The only exception to this is if you post (as Der Farm did, sorry for the delay, DF) more than one link per comment. These are automatically held for moderation to avoid "comment spam."
Anyway, welcome to the site!
-CW
DerFarm -
Thanks, I will remove the link later today. They used to be a site for cartoons, and our in-house cartoonist (click on "Cartoons" over on the left-hand side of this page) from a while back had some reprinted there. The site went inactive a few years back, but it looks like someone's cybersquatting on it now.
Thanks for the update, and I will remove the link as soon as I can get to it today, I promise. Good call....
-CW
OK, let's get to the rest of the non-technical issues, shall we?
dsws [1] -
OK, I'll play along. So will either bill pass, or will nothing happen? Or will each house pass one bill, and then hammer something out?
David [2] -
Heh. Heh heh.
Osborne Ink [3] -
Now, now. (heh)
Michale [4] -
See sentence in last paragraph which begins: "Of course, being Democrats..."
:-)
M [5] -
Fundraiser announcement later today... just for everyone's info... sorry I've been late on it... but there will be kittens, I promise.
dsws [8] -
My favorite Will Rogers quote!
:-)
OK, that's enough for now. I have kitten work to do...
-CW
DerFarm -
LTL link should be gone now. You may have to refresh your browser to get it to update.
Thanks for pointing this out. If anyone ever sees such dead links here, PLEASE let me know about it so I can update them. Thanks again, DerFarm!
-CW
DF,
OK, it is picky to quibble about 7%
I agree.... :D
, the same 20% owns 93% of the financial assets (which is what taxes are paid on) which is NOT quibbling.
Again, agreed...
But were those 93% earned???
That's my biggest problem with the whole Oowzers debacle..
In a normal, thriving society, the goal would be to work hard and strive so that you can move from being one of the 99% to being one of the 1%...
With the Oowzer mindset, the goal is to drag the 1% down into the gutter..
Where is the logic in that??
Why shouldn't they be paying 93% of the taxes?
Good question..
Michale.....
Why shouldn't they be paying 93% of the taxes?
because they only own 89% of the stuff. and not all own the same percentage. i think i'm already on record that what you pay should be based on what you own.
and in other news, banks have improperly foreclosed on upwards of 5000 active service members:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/85016e02-19df-11e1-9888-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1f11YK3uD
So will either bill pass, or will nothing happen? Or will each house pass one bill, and then hammer something out?
The Democrats will find something to trade away, and the Republicans will gleefully accept the deal.
I don't know what it will be. Maybe they'll make the Bush/Obama tax cuts permanent. Maybe they'll undo the triggered "sequestration" military spending cuts. Maybe they'll outlaw unions entirely. But probably they'll come up with something else. Just when you think they can't come up with a worse way to capitulate, they surprise you again.
In a normal, thriving society, the goal would be to work hard and strive so that you can move from being one of the 99% to being one of the 1%...
Why does it have to be a 99%-vs-1% division at all? Why shouldn't a larger percentage than 1% be able to benefit from their work?
Real economic competition isn't winner-take-all. In an ideal market, economic competition would mean that everyone gets what their work is worth, not that 1% win and 99% lose and everyone just has to try to claw their way to the top of the heap.
Winner-take-all capitalism is one of the opposites of free markets. There's nothing normal or thriving about it.
Why does it have to be a 99%-vs-1% division at all? Why shouldn't a larger percentage than 1% be able to benefit from their work?
I was simply using the current 99% v 1% standoff as a fer instance.
What I was trying to show was that, in a normal rational thriving society, it should be one's goal to work hard and strive to better one's self and one's place in society..
The Oowzers have it back-asswards. Rather than work hard to better themselves, they are trying to drag those that ARE better than themselves down to their level....
Which perfectly illustrates the complete immaturity of the Oowzers in general...
Michale.....
The Democrats will find something to trade away [snip] Maybe they'll make the Bush/Obama tax cuts permanent. Maybe they'll undo the triggered "sequestration" military spending cuts. Maybe they'll outlaw unions entirely. But probably they'll come up with something else. Just when you think they can't come up with a worse way to capitulate, they surprise you again.
that's presupposing those things aren't what the democratic senators actually want. when someone "gives in" that many times on that many issues, one must consider the possibility that the giving was always intended, while the positions being given away were not held in particularly high regard to begin with.
i.e. perhaps most of the democratic congress-critters want the very same thing as the republican ones, and claims to the contrary have for the most part been pretense. i'm not saying that's definitely the case, but sometimes it sure seems that way.
Rather than work hard to better themselves, they are trying to drag those that ARE better than themselves down to their level....
i'm struggling to divide the objective side of me from the emotional side, which wants to vent steam at the assumption that having more stuff makes someone better. but even objectively, it's a gross generalization about both the protesters and those against whom they're protesting. i'm not saying it's untrue about all of them, but i'm nearly certain it's untrue of the majority. my sister is a doctor of pharmacy and as of this week she's protesting. contrary to the fox spin, for those like my sister it's neither by people who do not work hard to earn their keep, nor against the people who earn their money through legitimate hard work.
what it's against is the use of lobbying to create a system that enables cheaters to become "winners" illegitimately. in many cases, those who happen to have acquired more wealth are not even close to being "better" than those with less.
"The whole history of the world is the story of the struggle between the selfish and the unselfish."
~born yesterday
Thanks for the warm welcome Chris.
i'm struggling to divide the objective side of me from the emotional side, which wants to vent steam at the assumption that having more stuff makes someone better. but even objectively, it's a gross generalization about both the protesters and those against whom they're protesting. i'm not saying it's untrue about all of them, but i'm nearly certain it's untrue of the majority.
I simply point out that the actions of the Oowzers are causing the very problems they claim to be against..
Surely, that is a sign of diminished intelligence, wouldn't you agree???
Michale
021
one's place in society.
Now there's a real zero-sum game. If "place in society" is the goal, pushing others down is just as good a way of getting yourself to the top of the heap as lifting yourself up.
Caring about "place in society" is a natural human impulse, but it's wrong.
If "place in society" is the goal, pushing others down is just as good a way of getting yourself to the top of the heap as lifting yourself up.
But it's the WRONG way to do it...
Think bout it..
If you drag everyone down with you, the only person you "enrich" is yourself...
However, if you pull YOURSELF up to a higher level, you inevitably enrich OTHER people's lives as well..
In this instance, we have two groups. Those who make their own lives better, thereby making OTHER people's lives better.
And those who stay in the same place, but drag others down to their level..
Apparently, the Oowzers are in the second group...
Caring about "place in society" is a natural human impulse, but it's wrong.
The "why" would make it right or wrong..
Michale
022
Looks like the last of the Oozers' shanty towns is gone..
http://news.yahoo.com/police-la-philly-raid-occupy-camps-112358365.html
Maybe they will actually go out and get jobs now, eh??
Michale.....
023
Let me clarify...
When I refer to Oowzers, I am NOT referring to the Tea Party-esque protesters who, after being a productive member of society, go to a protest and shout out against economic inequality.
People like David's friends and Joshua's sister are, by virtue of their actions, NOT Oowzers..
The REAL Oowzers (the Occupiers) do not bathe.. They do not respect authority. They cause property destruction and injuries to LEOs. These Oowzers cause the very problems that they claim to be against.
THOSE are the real Oowzers, the true Oowzers...
Those are the people that I have a beef against...
You may agree with their message. Hell, *I* agree with their message...
But no one can deny that the way they deliver that message is counter-productive..
That is why the Oowzers have gone the way of the Dodo...
"This is great! Dinner AND a show!!"
-Manny The Mammoth, ICE AGE
:D
Michale
026
I just had an epiphany while I was in the shower..
(apologies for the mental picture.. :D)
Anyways, I got it figured out..
Ya'all have been talking about the 99%'ers... People like Josuha's sister and David's friends, THOSE people are the 99%.. They are productive members of society who see a wrong and are attempting to right it.
I respect that..
Now, *I* have been talking about the Oowzers. The Occupiers.. They are the ones who don't bathe, who cause problems, who crap and piss in public, who assault cops and innocent people, who are destructive and don't care about anything but themselves...
THOSE are the Oowzers. The Occupiers...
Anyone disagree with this assessment??
Michale.....
027
Looks like the cracks in the GOP are appearing already:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/susan-collins-tax-the-rich-payroll-tax-cut_n_1121263.html
But, at the same time, Republicans are reportedly going to announce a bill of their own (today, perhaps). So we'll see what they come up with...
-CW
Michale [35] -
Don't have time (I should be writing right now) to answer everyone, but your comment is interesting. This is why, from the very start, I encouraged a "99 Percenter" movement, of which the OWS demonstration would only be a small part.
More later...
-CW
Don't have time (I should be writing right now) to answer everyone, but your comment is interesting. This is why, from the very start, I encouraged a "99 Percenter" movement, of which the OWS demonstration would only be a small part.
Yea, it had just occurred to me..
I found it completely incomprehensible that David, Joshua et al and I couldn't come to an agreement on the Oowzers, despite the overwhelming amount of evidence to support BOTH positions..
That's when it hit me..
We're BOTH right because we are talking about two distinct groups of people.
The 99%'ers are the calm, rational and caring group that David and Joshua are talking about.
The Oowzers are the loud, obnoxious, law-breaking lusers that I am talking about..
Look forward to your new piece...
Michale...
032
(Note: I have noticed some duplicate post numbers, so I am going to jump a few and try to do a better job in keeping track..)
The Oowzers are the loud, obnoxious, law-breaking lusers that I am talking about..
some folks refer to those people as the homeless.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stanley-rogouski/occupy-wall-street-zuccotti-park_b_1121125.html?ref=occupy-wall-street
some folks refer to those people as the homeless.
Those are the people that the Oowzers hired to stand in for them, because they are too lazy to protest themselves..
http://www.google.com/search?q=Indianopolis%20Occupy%20Homeless&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np#hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Y6k&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=np&sa=X&ei=gmPXTv6bJ4fEgAeHv63nDg&ved=0CCEQvwUoAQ&q=Indianapolis+Occupy+Homeless&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=580f8b0e207f5af8&biw=1680&bih=838
It's not the homeless that are intimidating and terrorizing business owners and innocent people, it's not the homeless banging drums at all hours of the night, it's not the homeless crapping and pissing in public...
"I wasn't drunk in public! I was drunk in a bar. The bouncers in the bar THREW me into 'public'.. Arrest them!!"
-Ron White
:D
Sorry, invoking the "homeless" meme doesn't engender feelings of sympathy for the Oowzers. They have caused too much pain, agony, death and destruction to earn any sympathy from me..
Michale.....
036
Sorry, invoking the "homeless" meme doesn't engender feelings of sympathy for the Oowzers. They have caused too much pain, agony, death and destruction to earn any sympathy from me..
30 *TONS* of garbage left over from the Occupy LA slum...
Workers have to clean it up in *HAZMAT* suits.
That speaks volumes as to the credibility of the Oowzers...
You have your 99%ers.. I have acknowledged that they are goodness and light.
But there is simply no defense for the Oowzers.. And you diminish the efforts of the 99%ers by trying to claim that the Oowzers are the same..
Michale
037
However, if you pull YOURSELF up to a higher level
... then it's not about place-in-society. Place-in-society is always advanced more effectively by putting others down. History is replete with examples, ranging from depressing to horrifying.
... then it's not about place-in-society. Place-in-society is always advanced more effectively by putting others down. History is replete with examples, ranging from depressing to horrifying.
OK, we agree.. The Oowzers are employing a depressing to horrifying tactic..
I expect more from people I choose to follow..
Which probably explains why I ain't much of a follower.. :D
Michale....
038