Obama: U.S. must extend tax cuts for middle class, can't do same for wealthy

[ProSense]

Source: MSNBC/Reuters

KOKOMO, Ind. — U.S. President Barack Obama said Tuesday the United States must extend tax cuts for the middle class but could not afford to do so for the wealthy, laying out his position ahead of next week's meeting on the issue with Republicans.

Obama, who also told hard-hit Americans the U.S. economy was on the mend, said extending the middle-class tax cuts was critical to keeping the economic recovery on track.

"If we allow these taxes to go up, the result would be that a lot of people most likely would spend less. That means that the economy will grow less," he said during a visit to an auto plant that benefited from his government-rescue of the U.S. car industry.

Obama welcomed news that the U.S. economy had grown at a faster than initially thought 2.5 percent annual pace in the third quarter. He warned it still had a way to go before it was completely out of the woods and government could not afford to take money from families that were likely to spend it.




Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40341457/ns/politics-more_politics/

[polichick]

1. Where's that word, "veto"???

[saigon68]

19. Nope he'll give in to Boner and the Blue Dogs

Another Cowardly surrender coming up

Book mark me on this

[KansDem]

2. Yeah, Mr. President. Just tell the wealthy it's " frustrating but necessary"

:thumbsup:

[Newest Reality]

3. You mean impoverish welfare recipients? Rediculous!!!

How can we justify leaving any billionaire behind? Are we yet not convinced that the only people in this country that actually exist and matter are its owners in the Ownership Society? When that becomes clear, then we "nothings" and those in the expansive underclass matter naught except where we can extend an appreciative system of handouts and welfare to those who might suffer any loss at the top.

Property is as property does and we need to see our place as statistical objects in the game we are not fit to play.

[Angry Dragon]

4. If you get snarky with your masters they will be angry

[billlll]

6. "edible GOLD" (flakes)- Google that. As 10 000/month die from hmiessnss's hunger heat cold ratbites

Ten thousand a month. 3 times the normal rate. According to scholarly articles ( see some old DU Poverty Forum posts for article links).

With people dying in the streets there can be NO thought of tax cuts for the rich.

Bush's Great Recession following his tax cut for the rich proves the Laffer Curve, Reaganomics, Supply Side, Friedman, are all false.

[Lorien]

5. I really hope that this isn't just more empty rhetoric

I'll wait for the actions before banking on words.

[gratuitous]

7. I'll take the words today

But yeah, there'd better be some action tomorrow (or more appropriately next week). I can't help but wonder why these sentiments were so difficult to voice prior to November 2 that none of our faultless Democratic elected leaders could bring themselves to say it. I think more than a few seats might have been saved in the House if a few Democrats had stood up and said, "You're damn right I'm raising taxes on the wealthy; they've had a free ride long enough. If an extra three cents on the dollar for everything over a quarter million is too high a price to pay for living in the United States, let 'em go somewhere else. These money-grubbers won't be missed."

[sendero]

18. If Obama's history is any guide..

... you can't take comfort in his words. He always SAYS the right thing then DOES something else. I have no reasonable expectation this time will be any different, it will all conveniently be the fault of the other party.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. $20 says temporary extension of all tax cuts

is where we end up.

Any takers?

[Poboy]

16. I don't think even the brainwashed worshipers on this board will take you up on that.

They know, they just will not admit.
Too busy with the propaganda catapult.

We will see, and I hope to be wrong.

[MannyGoldstein]

17. I've been trying for months, no takers yet. nt

[PSPS]

9. As I recall, this "speechifying" usually precedes the reliable cave in.

If Obama were smart (he isn't,) he'd let all the tax cuts expire. Even in my meager income level, far from that of the "haves and have mores," it would amount to only a few hundred dollars. I'd gladly sacrifice that if I knew the "haves and have mores" would pay their measly extra 3%.

[Poboy]

15. Something about a 'robust public option' comes to mind.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[maritzasolito]

11. President Obama says no tax cuts for the wealthy...

"U.S. President Barack Obama said Tuesday the United States must extend tax cuts for the middle class but could not afford to do so for the wealthy, laying out his position ahead of next week's meeting on the issue with Republicans."

AND you are still bitching about it? Now, I see why the repukes won the house; too many do not know how to read!!!

[Nihil]

12. Actions speak louder than words.

To date, he hasn't acted on this subject.

To be specific, his words are only as good for column fillers in this
week's newspapers as they are worth absolutely nothing - even by his
own admission - until after his "meeting":

> laying out his position ahead of next week's meeting on the issue with Republicans."


> AND you are still bitching about it?

There is a difference between "cynicism" and "bitching".

The only "bitching" that is justified at this point is that he hasn't
already taken action.

The "cynicism" is fully justified by his past record.


> Now, I see why the repukes won the house; too many do not know how to read!!!

Nope, you don't see at all. You might think that *you* know how to read
but you are demonstrating that you don't know how to learn from past events.

:shrug:

[Blandocyte]

13. Damn straight!

The wealthy need to chip in for their wars. The poor have been contributing their kids, the top 2% need to kick in some dollars if they insist on more land grabs via our armed forces.

[Zorra]

14. Senate Dems could have taken this to reconciliation before the election.

Why didn't they(?) is the trillion dollar question.

Dems would still control the House if they did this prior to the election.

Something is very rotten in the Senate. It reeks of corruption.