Think about this, 50 million Americans will pay higher taxes under the Obama deal

[MadHound]

Fifty million of the poorest Americans will be paying more taxes so that the rich can enjoy their billions in tax cuts.

There is something fundamentally wrong about that concept, and if the President doesn't understand that, then he needs to be informed. Better yet, his deal needs to be killed. Do as I and many others around here have done, get on the phone, write an email, write a letter to your representative, Senator, the White House, and every other Congressperson that you can think of. Insist that this deal gets killed because we can do better than forcing the poor to endure a tax hike while the rich get another obscene tax break. It is unjust, immoral, and this country simply can't afford it.

[ProfessorPlum]

1. Who is having their taxes raised under his deal?

[xchrom]

2. individuals making

[Lasher]

4. $20,000 or less

[xchrom]

7. lol! i didn't finish my sentence! -- oy. nt

[Lasher]

25. Heh heh. It's a team effort.

Just here to help, pardner.

[MadHound]

5. Singles who make $20,000 or less, couples who make $40,000 or less

Along with other low income people due to a change in tax credits.
<http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/taxes/working-poor-pay-more-obama-gop-tax-compromise/19752400/>

[Bluenorthwest]

27. And when you say 'couples' of course you mean only some

couples. You mean the Rick Warren Approved Sanctified Brand couples. You say couples, but you mean straight married people only. Words do in fact mean things.

[MadHound]

28. Sorry, my bad.

Yes, only married couples making $40,000/yr or less.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. I was not trying to snark at you at all

Just this is a sticking point in tax discussions. Down thread, same thing. Couples, singles. Filing jointly. All without a nod to the fact that religionists deny the right to jointly file to millions of households like mine, who wind up paying far more than our straight peers.

[Scruffy1]

45. Great reminder

[Le Taz Hot]

3. The one, the ONE fucking thing I have going for me

tax-wise is my home mortgage deduction. I don't have kids so I don't get those deductions. I am more pissed now that I've ever been at him and I've been livid with him.

[dkf]

29. Is there something on the mortgage deduction? I Hadn't heard that. .

Even in the deficit commission proposal, I believe it was to limit the deduction to $500,000 mortgages. Do you have more than that? If not you should be okay.

[Hello_Kitty]

35. Thank you.

It makes me livid too. The administration has created the (false, actually) perception that this only affects single people without kids. And who cares about them, amirite?

[Donyellathon]

6. As long as Unemployment Benefits are exteneded

for another year or two, I will hold my nose and support the bill

[madokie]

9. So will I

There is no jobs so it is either we let a bunch of people suffer due to no fault of their own or we try to get them some help at whatever cost. Right now.
With proper leadership and honest government with our manufacturing base back here on shore we can pay the national debt off pretty damn quick.

[MadHound]

11. But it doesn't have to be that way, see my post #10 below. n/t

[MoonRiver]

16. Lol, exactly how do you propose pulling this off:

"With proper leadership and honest government with our manufacturing base back here on shore we can pay the national debt off pretty damn quick."

[madokie]

19. Getting in the streets in mass

No one can do it for us. We've been left out to dry during a rain storm.
I'm an old hippie so I know for a fact taking to the streets in mass makes a difference. The people who were in the streets saved my ass years ago. Stopped a war that I very well could have lost my life in.

Thats how

[MadHound]

10. Funny thing, Obama could extend UI benefits right now, without this deal

He could take Mitch McConnell up on McConnell's previous suggestion last summer and pay for the UI extension out of surplus stimulus funds. By doing so he would take that gun out of the 'Pugs hands and make it a straight up contest between tax cuts for the rich and tax cuts for the middle class. But he is not doing that, instead he is deliberately putting the UI extension in the position of being held hostage for no good reason, other than it will help get his deal passed.

Let me be the first to say HI THERE, and welcome to DU:hi:

[Donyellathon]

12. I wish he would

I am going to be homeless in the next couple of months if something is not done. And thanks for the welcome. :)

[MadHound]

14. Sorry to hear about your problems

Never fun being homeless, I was in that situation myself for nearly two year, back in the early eighties. Good luck, and let me know if I can do anything.

[lildreamer316]

20. Are you serious? I had no idea.

I did not know this was an option. Color me even more irritated than I already was.

[MadHound]

22. Yeah, Mitch McConnell proposed that Obama do just this last summer

Obama could do it now as a gesture of "bipartisanship" and take that gun of UI extension right out of the 'Pugs hands.

[Scruffy1]

46. Hmmm, never thought of that

[Hello_Kitty]

36. How about calling your members of Congress to ask them to address this unfairness?

I did the other day. If they heard from a lot of people about it they could correct this easily fixed problem that is an injustice to the poor and portends of becoming a PR disaster for Democrats and the President.

[dflprincess]

47. And the long term damage to Social Security

you're okay with that?

[madokie]

8. I think he understands that full well

I also think that he alone can't change the way Washington works. Its us who can make the changes and at the moment it is not at the ballot box, rather at the street corners of America, us in large numbers demanding change. We've got the smartest one on our side he just needs us to get his back rather than continue to look for ways to smear him as many on this board are doing and some have been at it since day one of the Obama Administration.

No one ever looks at it from his perspective. No one is getting his back like he thought we all would, well some of us are but the majority are not.
Its through us that change comes not through the government that is not representative of us any more and hasn't been for quite some time.

un rec'

[MadHound]

13. It is hard to take somebody's back when they refuse to take yours

I'm a teacher, and under this president I have found myself under unwarranted attack, to the point where I lost out on a job and am unemployed due to Obama's messing with the education stimulus funds. Furthermore it is obvious from early in this administration's tenure that Obama wasn't going to fight for us, so why should we fight for him?

We can get a better deal, and if Obama wants to obstruct that, then he can expect to suffer the consequences.

[demwing]

37. We DID demand change. We voted for (OVERWHELMINGLY) in 2008

and what did we get for that effort? A reminder that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

And by the way, fuck yes I want my pony. Obama rode that pony into the Whitehouse, and offered to share it with everyone. A pony Obama named "Hope."

[walldude]

41. Well when you alienate gays, teachers, unions

poor people and actual liberals, as a Democrat that doesn't leave you too many people to have your back.

This meme that everyone should have Obama's back no matter what policies he passes reminds me of the other side. Sorry, I can't support a President who doesn't support me.

[inna]

15. Obscene, sickening, disgusting, monstrous. WTF is wrong with these people???

They want it all and they want it now???? Seriously, I'm starting to think they have something very ugly in store for us; they don't even bother to put up any pretenses any more; it's just open class warfare, and they're not afraid of us peasants.

[One_Life_To_Give]

17. Half Truth

The marginal rate on the first $8500 ($17,000 if filing jointly) drops from 15% to 10%. And the making work pay credit was temporary so if nothing was approved it would have been gone anyway.

The total deal will still help low income people. (Except maybe single, no dependents between $6500 and $8000 AGI)
One specific compromise in the package reportedly swapped the SSI 2% reduction for the Making work pay credit. Is a bad deal for low income.

[MadHound]

23. So let's see, Bernie Sanders, KO, Maddow and others who make it their business to know

Don't know what they're talking about now hmmm?

The total deal still screws the poor, and the rest of us, for a number of reasons.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. I love how y'all use words like 'single' and 'filing jointly'

without so much as thinking about the millions of people who are considered 'single' and denied the right to file jointly, even 20+ years into being a family. It is so cavalier the way you guys do that. You say except single, but you mean 'except singles and those treated as singles unjustly under discriminatory laws'.
Thanks.

[Hello_Kitty]

39. Shhh. The people who matter are being helped by this.

Stop being so petty and selfish!

:sarcasm:

[Hello_Kitty]

34. Oh come on!

I'm tired of these semantical games where people try to convince us that things that are merely being extended are gains. The marginal rate isn't dropping on this deal. It's staying at 10%. The fact is that every person making less than $20K is going to pay more taxes next year than they are this year. And all the tax cuts expiring is not going to happen. They are going to be extended, either by this compromise or by the GOP next year. So it's a strawman argument.

[myrna minx]

18. Outrageous.

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

21. And after the last two years...

.. of this weak, feckless "progressive" Presidency, we expected anything different?

[demwing]

24. That can't be true - you didn't mention ponies

I've been at DU for a long while, and I've read over and over again that the only thing that the people who show opposition to the President really want is a pony.

Don't you care about ponies?

:sarcasm:

[onenote]

26. Would they pay more or less if there was no deal and all the cuts expired?

[badtoworse]

42. I believe they would be really screwed if there is no deal

Somewhere on DU, I saw a comparison of the deal vs no deal taxes for the lowest income levels. I don't remember the details, but their marginal rate goes from 10% to 15% and they lose certain tax credits. They would be be much better off with Obama's deal

Comparing the Obama deal to the current tax laws is meaningless because one way or another, the current tax laws are going away after this year. The real choice is between pay a little more or pay a lot more.

[Karmadillo]

32. Just think what Our President will be able to accomplish in two or six

more years.

[maryf]

40. that is a terrifying thought

the ground the people will further will put us off a cliff...and the rich will be richer still.

[blindpig]

33. I think you are laboring under a delusion.

That being that this administration is doing or getting anything but what it wants.

It is not weakness, naivety or incompetence, it is the neo-liberal program. The 'progressive' community has bought a pig in the poke. You will continue to founder and be confused until you accept that reality.

Look at it all, ain't no run of bad luck, ain't no stupidity, can't be that much coincidence, this is the program.

[glitch]

43. Agreed. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

38. Since the deal's probably not going to be killed, why not get them to deal with this issue?

People should call their members of Congress, D or R, and press them to amend the bill. This is an easily fixed problem. They could reinstate a partial Making Work Pay credit or expand EITC to make up the disparity.

[Faryn Balyncd]

44. K&R . . . . Thanks.

[BzaDem]

48. With the deal, a family of 4 at the poverty line will be paying about 3500/year more than no deal.

Without the deal (compared to with the deal), they lose the full child tax credit (since it would no longer be refundable), which is 2k. They lose about $1,050 for the earned income tax credit extension expiration. They also lose the payroll tax cut of 2%, or another 440.

With the deal, they get/keep all of that (around 3500).

Under BOTH situations, they lose the making work pay tax credit of 800.

So if the deal passes, they will be paying about 360 more in income taxes next year. But if the deal dies as you propose, they will be paying 3500 MORE than that (so 3860 more than last year).

Doesn't it make sense to compare the two options (deal or no deal)?

[Hello_Kitty]

49. How about calling your members of Congress to ask them to address this unfairness?

Instead of making excuses for it on DU?