He's Learning

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

Obama's 2011 Budget is reported to have the following features:

1. Double the Child and Dependent Care Credit.
2. Put limits on federal student loan repayments (to make them less onerous for recent graduates).
3. Require all employers to make IRA available to their employees.
4. Expand the tax credits for people saving for retirement.
5. Expand federal support for families dealing with elderly parents/relatives

Obama proposes almost doubling child care tax credit

This is the sort of thing that connects with people who work for a living. I don't pay for child care, for example, but I know people who pay a FORTUNE and the current Child and Dependent Care Credit is pretty much "spit in the ocean." And increasing the tax credits for retirement savings helps out both now and later.

This is a good start.

[ShortnFiery]

1. You forgot this ...

:sarcasm:

[MadBadger]

5. SO I emptied my ignore list last night

That was a mistake.

[ShortnFiery]

7. LOL ...

I would SO never ignore you MB. :toast:

[CreekDog]

72. I usually tangle with her

but she's right.

[pinto]

2. All good measures.

Only a start, agreed, yet these are good basic support measures.

[ibegurpard]

70. I think we need something like the WPA

to put people back to work

[Larkspur]

3. People are using their retirement funds now because they are laid off

so increasing the tax deductable amount does squat for the unemployed.

[DJ13]

4. I wish these politicians would stop adding to dependent credits

That leaves out in the cold a wide swath of the populace who are single or couples without children.

Increase the deductions for the taxpayer instead.

[Jennicut]

8. Yes, but it costs more to have children.

Then again, I guess one could say that is a personal choice.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

14. Remember that this credit also applies to a dependent parent (nt)

[DJ13]

15. If the increased credit went to the taxpayer those parents would still get it

[GinaMaria]

28. ummm yeah it's a personal choice

No one should have more kids than they can afford. I'm lookin' at you OctoMom. Everyone needs a break right now. It doesn't help to choose one group over another. Way too many people are hurting right now. It costs more for everyone to just exist right now.

[Dr.Phool]

34. Yeah, but you can always eat them in bad times.

:rofl:

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

43. Oh, you and your literary references

Do forget to save the hides...

[NoSheep]

75. Yes. That IS a personal choice.

[ShortnFiery]

17. Yes, but it never applies to our "Cousin Eddy" who stays with us seemingly forever.

:silly: :evilgrin:

[DJ13]

18. LOL!

:rofl:

[Jennicut]

19. All families have one hanger-on, don't they?

My parents once let my older brother's best friend stay with us for a summer when his parents kicked him out at 18. He had no where to go...but then never bothered to look for a job. So he stayed and stayed until I thought I had another brother.

[ShortnFiery]

22. LOL. Yes we all have at least one ... "gypsy?"

I can still hear my dad say, "Gypsy? Hell no, he's just a bum." :blush:

[Hekate]

45. When you consider the cost of caring for grandma &/or raising kids,the Solitaries are WAY better off

... financially than most of us with family obligations will ever be.

Life has its little surprises for all of us. Get married in good faith, have the kids you planned for, and experience spousal death or divorce. Watch your own mom or dad become too old to work, have an inadequate pension, and become senile or have a stroke.

What do you expect people to do in these circumstances? Proudly declare their independence and walk away?

We do it out of love, as well as a sense of duty. The financial cost is staggering. It's physically and emotionally draining.

YOU, the singles or couples without children who feel all left out in the cold because other people might be getting a teeny helping hand, have options entirely unavailable to the rest of us. Believe it.

Hekate

[JoeyT]

73. Uh huh.

Never mind that our taxes are considerably higher too.
Especially if we're single.
I'm talking about kids here, not caring for an elderly relative.
I actually think there should be a special (incentive? break? deduction? not sure what to call it.) for people in that situation. A big one.

[NoSheep]

79. What about a rebate of the taxes that I pay that do not

go to educate the child I don't have? I have a sister with 4 she couldn't afford. All of them adults now on multiple forms of government assistance. Now the 24 yr old girl is a single mother. Brilliant. She doesn't have a chance in hell. Neither does her child. It's wrong and no one wants to speak up about it.

[AngryAmish]

56. Nannys are really expensive nowadays

Especially if you want a cute one. This is great news.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

64. You haven't priced daycare recently....

I have clients who spend $4,000-$5,000 per child for offsite daycare (i.e., a daycare center). This is a pretty basic rate -- not some gold-plated "Club Med for Kids." Daycare is not much less expensive than paying in-state college tuition.

[DisgustedInMN]

6. Oh goody..

... some more yummy "tax credits"...:sarcasm:


Of which, absolutely none apply to me or my family.

Whoopteee-fuckin'-doooo.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

11. None of these specifically apply to me, either....

But any policy that rewards work and encourges savings is going to benefit everybody in the long run.

[DisgustedInMN]

21. Nothing the ..

... this administration has done has benefited me or mine. I realize that being I actually produce things in my line of work, rather than just move piles of money around and can't afford to drop a cool million or 2 in campaign "donations"...it doesn't cange the fact that...

...I'm beyond tired of standing in line waiting for it to be "my turn" as I watch EVERYTHING I've worked for, for over 4 decades, be stolen from me.

FUCK patience, I want action, NOW.

edit for wrong word

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

23. So what do you want? (nt)

[DisgustedInMN]

29. My immediate want list.

A decent job, with a livable wage.

Access to AFFORDABLE health care, that DOESN'T feed the insatiable corporate greed beast.

A whole bunch less money spend blowing up shit and people thousands of miles away and whole bunch more spend on making life better for AMERICANS right here at home.

War criminals brought to justice and made responsible for their crimes against humanity and punished accordingly.

I want my government to cease and desist spying on We the People without judicial oversite.

But MOST of all:

I WANT MY DEMOCRATIC PARTY BACK!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

31. I don't think we can accomplish that via the tax code..

And I find it curious that the Teabaggers are saying that they "Want My Country Back" and that you're saying that you "Want My Democratic Party Back"

Isn't that interesting....

[DisgustedInMN]

32. Well..

... if it isn't the old implied insult tactic.

Aren't you special.

Have a nice life, I'm out.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

35. Out in the open?

I'd say so. You know, I almost put you on ignore a few days back because your posts seemed to suspiciously parrot certain rightwing phrases.

This is just a little more evidence.

[DisgustedInMN]

51. Hey, you might as well ignore all of us..

... Progressives. That would make just like all of the brilliant DLC strategists in DC.

And we'll be sure to return the favor, come election day.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

55. You're not a Progressive...

Progressive believe in progress. You want "moral victories" that preserve your ideological purity.

And that's assuming you're not just a troll.

[jefferson_dem]

58. Personally, I'm calling bullshit on this poster.

He/she/it is sending me nasty messages my personal mailbox, which has literally never happened before.

My suspicion is...he's/she's/it's not one of us.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

61. Send an alert to the Mods....

Stalking is not cool.

[jefferson_dem]

63. Thanks for the advice.

As I said, in six years, i've never had insulting messages posted to my inbox.

[jefferson_dem]

48. Here.

Maybe this will make you feel better. The puppy's a bonus.

[frazzled]

80. You know, those kids other people have will be changing your Depends ...

and wiping the slobber off your face when you are old and feeble. So stop knocking them.

And stop thinking only about your royal fucking SELF. That is so Republican. Our tax structure in this country is based on more than just numerical formulas: it's meant to promote certain behaviors for the common good. The country needs workers for each generation. It needs people to have children. If you don't want any, that's fine, too. If you can't have any, that is a condition you cannot help.

And while we're at it, let's stop being hypocritical. We're all for enacting, say, gay marriage. And let me tell you, most of those gay couples are adopting kids. And kids cost a fucking fortune. Those those parents should be able to take some deductions for their child care. Because they are sacrificing themselves to raise kids who will contribute to our society and be good citizens and become the doctors and artists and aid workers of the future. End. Stop.

[asdjrocky]

9. Not one of these things will help anyone on my block.

Now, the freeze that they are talking about in domestic programs, that will sure hurt people on my block.

Guess I'm just a bitter whiner who wants my pony right now!

[gkhouston]

10. Some of the people who want ponies need to butcher them for meat.

Where are the jobs?

[asdjrocky]

12. Mmmmmm, pony.

I hear it tastes like chicken.

[SKKY]

20. Pony. The other white meat!

[gkhouston]

37. Well, if it's an Appaloosa, you get your choice of white or dark. :-) n/t

[SKKY]

76. Yummy! I forgot about that.

[gkhouston]

78. You must not be an experienced neigh-sayer. n/t

[Vinca]

13. I hate to be cranky about kids, but sometimes it annoys me that

people are rewarded for having children while those of us who choose not to are ignored. Throw us a crumb just for kicks.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

16. Hey! You get to go all day without wiping up somebody else's snot/puke/drool...

Don't be greedy!

:)

[Fire1]

46. And that same tax credit goes back into that kid, one way or the

other. Did we gain anything? Hell, no.

[Hekate]

47. See my post #48

[Vinca]

52. #48 has valid points, but as an older American without children,

I will be responsible for myself which might, at some point, require hiring outside help for things children often do. If I was rolling in money, it wouldn't bother me at all. But I'm not. Just because a couple ends up without children doesn't mean life's always a picnic. We could use a little help, too.

[Hekate]

62. I know that, and I've always been sympathetic to individual needs. What got me going this time....

... as you can probably tell, was reading that "oh we are so discriminated against" line just once too often. Usually here at DU it is combined with a screed about how no one should ever have children at all unless they are 100% sure they can "afford" them because it's no one else's business what they need. Logically, that means only the wealthy should breed at all, but mostly it's an opportunity to knock those of us that did. Mostly my earlier post was an attempt to counter that and the echoes of all the other times it's come up here.

All the federal "tax relief" that I ever got as a single working mother was so much hot air. Day-care ate up an enormous hunk of my blushingly modest take-home pay, yet at tax time when a friend urged me to take advantage of the fact that I could put those expenses on my tax return, I used up several hours doing the research and calculations for what I recall being about $50 to my credit. And so forth and so on.

The thing is, public policy decisions get made for what is presumed to be the public good. Sort of like "Women and children first into the lifeboat" instead of "Every man for himself." That doesn't mean "every man's" life is not valuable; to me it says we should plan ahead and build more lifeboats. We don't have much of a lifeboat in this country, it sometimes seems, but that's no reason to toss the ones who managed to get half a seat overboard just so everyone can drown in equality.

I've always been of the mind to expand all the social services for everyone; it's why I'm a Democrat. Families with children aren't the only ones in need, and I know it. But it shouldn't be treated like a zero-sum game by any of us.

Sorry if this is disjointed -- I have to run.

Hekate

[Uzybone]

24. Most of the replies are people complaining that it does nothing for them specifically

what ever happened to the left? I thought the GOP were the selfish ones?

[DJ13]

26. If the criticism comes from people complaining its too narrow in its application

whats so liberal about the plan?

Narrowly targeted tax credits have long been the hallmark of conservative politics.

[asdjrocky]

27. I'm talking about the people on my block.

I don't expect anything, and I don't need anything from this Administration. I would like to see them making policies that help POOR people.

[DisgustedInMN]

30. Yessiree..

... I'm one very selfish SOB for wanting to have a job, so I can pay my bills, afford some kind of minimal health care, and see justice served to war criminals for crimes against humanity! Yep, it's ALL about me.


(Just in case you need to be told, the above was :sarcasm:)

[TheKentuckian]

25. What's being learned? The art of the ever shrinking Federal revenue?

We need investment to promote economic growth and opportunity not less revenue.

Give me high speed rail and internet from New York to California, Maine to Texas, and everywhere.

Pick up the entire tab on the power grid rather than allowing the utilities to use it as an excuse to increase to raise rates. We're doing half, go all in as it is a comparatively modest outlay.

Put renewable energy and efficiency on the fast track rather than just putting it on the map again. Let's get grants and incentives churning to get people busy spray foaming every building, lets get people surveying to see where solar, wind, and geothermal can be most effective and then build up both from center out but also from point of use to center which will eventually allow flexibility, redundancy, and a measure of independence for the end user as well as the US economy from foreign oil not to mention reducing the strain on the environment.

At the same time fast track the wind down of production on the internal combustion engine, going electric will allow us to use our vehicles as batteries.

Lift all tides. Make food stamps available on a sliding scale up to 80-90k, at least for the duration of the downturn. This will clear up a significant amount of cash that can be spent elsewhere or saved either of which would dramatically reduce the economic pressures on the poor and working class.

Most of all do SOMETHING and stop relying on the "invisible hand" to fix real problems. If you want to promote action in the private sector then free up the flow of currency while giving it something to grow on because as is ain't gonna cut it. Our economy is too largely fueled by services and the vampire like Financial sector and the services are largely provided by multi-national giants that Mom&Pop cannot reasonably be expected to compete against.
There is little room any entrepreneurial spirit because big box and large at least nationwide operations can ALWAYS under sell and squeeze out competition.

I also can't help but to say that children are over incentized. No questions having kids is expensive but at some point we'll have a game that will unfairly punish people who don't have them, the money has to come from somewhere and since the wealth are sacrosanct it is the working and poor singles and childless that get hammered.

I'm not declaring a war on children or anything like it but there is a point of enough being enough. It also brings a bit of bitter bile into one's mouth to hear about another round of tax cuts when one doesn't have a job and that when one gets a job that they will be expected to handle more of the burden when we haven't been able to come up for air.

There is also the matter of principle, we need INVESTMENT not less tax revenue.

[jgraz]

33. Wow, more tax cuts and more money to Wall Street!

Remind me again: what is Obama learning?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

36. What a profoundly uninformed post....

So my saving for retirement is "More money to Wall Street" eh? And so my savings and investing should be done. How? Put it all under the mattress?

And there are no tax cuts in the proposals, but tax credits directed toward working families. And you have a problem with working families because....

[jgraz]

38. What a profoundly uninformed response

If people want to save for retirement, let them save. After the crash last year wiped out so many 401ks, why are we once again subsidizing investment in the stock market? The reason is that we need more cash to support the giant Ponzi scheme. If people stopped using taxpayer-subsidized investment schemes, the Wall Street barons would lose one of their main sources of bonus-ready capital.

And, once again, tax cut/credits/etc (use whatever weasel-word you want), are some of the *least* effective ways to stimulate the economy. This is the reason that the last stimulus package worked as poorly as it did to restore jobs.

But, since you're so "informed", you already knew all this... right?

[Inuca]

39. Under the mattress then the $s go

Thanks for teh advice!

[jgraz]

41. False choice

If the government wants to encourage people to save, let them offer investment in Treasury Bonds at a favorable rate. Why is the only choice funneling more money to private banks?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

42. Stupid Choice

So the only tax benefit would accrue to people buying government treasuries. That would depress the price of corporate bonds (since they would be less attractive as investment options) which in turn would send their interest rates up in order to attract buyers. Which would cost the private sector trillions in additional costs to finance their operations and that would be passed along to the consumer through higher interest rates and inflation.

Great Plan. Exciting Plan.

I can't for the like of me figure out why Obama didn't ask you to be Treasury Secretary.

[jgraz]

44. If you understood basic economics, you'd understand why this is desirable.

I don't have time to school you on all of the concepts you lack, but I'll just say this:

Q: What is the current major problem that's strangling the economy?
A: The banks aren't lending.

Q: Why aren't the banks lending?
A: Partially, because they don't make enough money at it.

Q: What would increase the financial incentive for lending?
A: Higher returns on the loans.

Now, this change would require other new approaches to managing the economy, most of which involve helping the middle class instead of the rich. Spend some time educating yourself. There are these things called "books" that you might want to look into.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

54. Oh,My.God.

I don't even know where to begin with the wrong (and wrong-headed) statements you're making here. Just for starters, your thesis is that the federal government shouldn't be subsidizing investments on Wall Street, but your theory suggests that the federal government should pursue a policy that would cause interest rates to shoot up for the benefit of...uh...banks. That taxpayers should be underwriting a policy that would allow banks to gouge consumers.

Smart. Very smart indeed.

Thanks for NOT taking the time to "school me" on what I don't know about the economy.

:rofl:

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[jefferson_dem]

49. Idiocy abounds on DU nowadays.

An embarrassment to Democrats everywhere.

[jgraz]

50. Not as much as conventional, DLC-friendly "thinking" does.

An embarrassment to thinking humans everywhere.

[jefferson_dem]

59. You still beating the DLC drum.

Are they even still around?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

60. The DLC is the DU "Resident Bogeyman"

Anytime you don't understand something, or if you sense you're losing an argument, just accuse the other guy of being DLC. I think they think it will somehow end the argument in their favor.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Number23]

65. Sorry your thread got highjacked. NOTHING can be discussed around here

anymore, and every single poster who thinks the President is doing something good or right has to be attacked relentlessly. It's a fucking shame.

It's still a good thread. Thanks for posting.

[uponit7771]

66. +1!!!!!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

67. It's getting nutty around here....

I noticed Clio the Leo posted about GM repaying its TARP money by this June. Want to bet it's going to get dumped on and unrecommended?

You'd swear this place is a Fox News chat room.

[RoadRage]

74. +1,000

I'm seriously looked up "How do I stop my DU monthly donantion" yesterday. Evidently I just email Skinner... i'm contemplating it. I feel like i'm supporting a version of FR.. I can't tell the difference between the people on the left from the people on the right who hate him.. and right now, i'm not sure who hates him more.

They act like the guy walked in with the country & economy on a silver platter and he's just puking all over it. What REALLY happend is that he walked into the bathroom and looked at the country floating in the toilet.. and he's trying to fish out what he can.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

69. i will do the same thing but only in lowercase....

so show my complete contempt for president obama.

[Bobbie Jo]

71. Um, you forgot...

!!111!11!

[Divine Discontent]

77. great. none of that applies to me or most of the people I know, but good for those who COULD get it