Do you know who is getting a tax cut?
|
|
|||||
|
3 votes
|
|
23% | |||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | |||
|
6 votes
|
|
46% | |||
|
4 votes
|
|
31% | |||
- New York Times: Obama is "calling for a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for people making less than $250,000."
- Wall Street Journal:
"President Barack Obama will propose a one-year extension of the
Bush-era tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000 today."
- Washington Post:
"President Obama on Monday proposed a one-year extension of the George
W. Bush-era tax cuts for people making less than $250,000 a year."
- CNN:
"President Barack Obama called Monday for Congress to pass a one-year
extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for people earning less than $250,000
a year."
You get the idea. So why are we quoting this very straightforward sentence over and over again? Because it's flat-out wrong.
Obama is not proposing that families making up to
$250,000 a year keep their tax cuts while families making more than that
don't. He's proposing that every family keep their tax cuts on their first $250,000 of taxable income (which is not the same as "income" or "earnings," by the way).
That includes families with taxable income of $260,000, $1
million, $5 billion, $3 trillion, or whatever Jay-Z and Beyonce make in a
year. Everyone would continue to pay a lower tax rate on their
first $250,000 of taxable income under Obama's plan. To report that
Obama only wants to maintain tax cuts for families making less than
$250,000 is simply false.
If you're wondering how literally the entire media could get this
story wrong, look no further than Obama himself, who is framing his own
tax proposal inaccurately. "I’m calling on Congress to extend the tax
cuts for the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $250,000 for
another year," he said in an East Room speech earlier this afternoon.
to cut taxes for everyone in the country. But Obama actually has an
incentive this time to downplay the number of Americans who would
benefit from his tax plan. His proposal is, at its heart, a political
maneuver meant to force Mitt Romney to defend tax cuts for the wealthy.
It's more effective, then, for it to be seen as a cut solely for the middle class. The reality is that Obama's proposal would also keep Warren Buffett's taxes lower, if only a little bit.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As Obama's double speak goes, this is a minor misdirection. But when a person couches a really good thing in lesser terms than it really is, that person should never, ever be trusted again. He's misrepresenting it solely because some of his constituents may resent that even the wealthy may be treated fairly.
Read More: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/07/obama-tax-cut...

















You don't hang ME disparaging the poor. I qualify as poor today, I grew up poor. My parents were poor. My parents worked like dogs. They had NO "treats" EVER. They would have died of starvation before they would have taken what was once called charity. They never had anything and they never cost anyone else a single dime. They never committed a crime, never did drugs, never drank, never went to a shelter - but they worked harder than anyone you ever met in the projects because they felt they HAD to. I have tremendous respect for them and I have tremendous contempt for D...
You don't hang ME disparaging the poor. I qualify as poor today, I grew up poor. My parents were poor. My parents worked like dogs. They had NO "treats" EVER. They would have died of starvation before they would have taken what was once called charity. They never had anything and they never cost anyone else a single dime. They never committed a crime, never did drugs, never drank, never went to a shelter - but they worked harder than anyone you ever met in the projects because they felt they HAD to. I have tremendous respect for them and I have tremendous contempt for DEADBEATS. Deadbeats are not the people with temporary needs who deserve some help. Deadbeats prevent the honest poor from having MORE. THAT'S the conservative take on welfare and its values.
You don't preach to me like you are some saint and I am a horrible person, without getting an earful. If you want to continue this defense of deadbeats, go right ahead. You are the type who enables deadbeats because you cannot see any person on welfare as a deadbeat, and you internalize facts rather than see them as facts and you get defensive when there should be no need to. Democrats do not have the capability of using logic and separating the wheat from the chaffe. NOT EVERYONE ON WELFARE IS POOR BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. Nor is everyone on welfare poor because of circumstances beyond his control. MANY, MANY are on welfare because they do not make wise choices, because of their chosen lifestyles, because of never thinking of unintended consequences. I'm tired of their living quite well BECAUSE of those things. They need to develop those skills so they don't need welfare. That's another conservative piece of philosophy.
You tapped the wrong person lady, I am a Reagan Democrat and see both sides but have no pity for those that have no pity or kindness. Its a shame Europe is being punished so badly, because they are fair to the masses and not greedy like America is to its people. I love this country and would die for it but not for the reasons you may think. Nixon was a great president because him and Reagan were the only Republican Presidents that gave a dam about the poor.
I believe in the 10 year plan for unwed moms and the five year plan for single men. Give them housing as much money as they needs and most important education vouchers and most will progress off welfare. If they don't go to school they don't get money. As for striker below, statistically speaking, most rich in this country inherited their money and never worked a hard day in their lives. All citizens rich or poor should have to join or be drafted into the Military to serve for 2 years but also to be among all so they understand each other and must participate in hard labor so they do not ever look down on those that must work hard for their money and also must serve our country.
I despise the class warfare the left rolls around in. It is hateful, mean, hurtful, totally without merit, and I would defend any wealthy person against the left because of the left's hatred for them - for NO reason but jealousy and greed of the left.
Alternative: learn to revel in your own accomplishments, no matter how small. That's how you pull yourself out of your poverty-plight, one step after another.
If his crappy idea flies, 53% of all small business will get a tax hike as well as all people who earn 250K and above.
In reality I have no doubt all of us will be paying more than ever before, and if he remains in office we'll probably all be bankrupt before 2014.
I love the fallacy of this argument, in any other genre, we would be talking about the current tax rates, but since this vapid suit has nothing beside blaming Bush to run on they are still considered "Bush tax cuts". They are established policy for over 10 years, hardly a Bush policy anymore they are Obama's tax rates.
I know my taxes are going UP .. I have the projections in hand for my next years tax bills already .. and there's nothing being 'cut' to those bills (they are increases .. )
this despite the fact that my personal earnings are less than that $250K threshold .. )