Obama to GOP: How do you pay for tax cut extensions?

Very poignant question.

While the GOP remains intent on keeping temporary tax cuts, have they really come up with a way to pay for them?

I know, there's all kinds of wacky statements floating around like "make government smaller" or "less government involvement", but has anyone on the GOP actually put forth a plan to pay for their welfare for the wealthy? McConnell says paying for them is not an issue, a rather odd statement.

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...gop-how-do-you-pay-for-millionaire-tax-cuts/1
When President Obama and the Republicans meet this week to discuss the George W. Bush tax cuts, he will have a question for them about extensions for the wealthy.

"If they feel very strongly about it, then I want to get a sense of how they intend to pay for it," Obama told reporters yesterday as Air Force One made its way back from Asia.

Obama supports extending the tax cuts for the middle class, but raises a deficit objection for Americans who make more than $200,000 a year, and couples who make more than $250,000.

"I believe it is a mistake for us to borrow $700 billion to make tax cuts permanent for millionaires and billionaires," Obama said. "It won't significantly boost the economy, and it's hugely expensive. So we can't afford it."

The lame duck Congress needs to resolve the issue soon: The Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year.

Republicans say no one should have their taxes raised in this economy, and that the wealthy people Obama talks about include business owners who create jobs.

"We aren't going to get our economy moving unless we stop the tax hikes and cut government spending," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for incoming Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio. "That's what Republicans pledged to America, and that's what we'll fight for."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the issue isn't paying for tax cuts -- it's whether people will be facing tax hikes when the Bush rates expire.

"While the president and some of his allies in Congress have a strange desire to raise taxes on hundreds of thousands of small businesses across the country, we would welcome the president's help to extend all the current tax rates so that no one sees a tax hike," McConnell said.

Obama meets Thursday with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders, including Boehner.

The high-end tax cuts are something "the Republicans expressed some strong feelings about," Obama said. "I want to hear from them how strongly they feel about it, particularly given that they're also saying they want to control the deficit and debt."

In the meantime, other lawmakers are floating various ideas for a compromise on the Bush tax cuts.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., talked about changing the definition of "rich" during an appearance Sunday on CBS' Face The Nation.

"Democrats had originally called for tax cuts for people below $250,000, Republicans for everybody," Schumer said. "What if we moved it up to $1 million? Everyone below $1 million will get a tax cut but the millionaires and billionaires won't."

 

I personally think every single bill that spends money should be required to also have in that same bill the means to pay for it. That way whenever anything is passed, the benefits to costs must be weighed to see if it's worth it. I think this is a good strategy for the president but we all know they won't have an answer.

 

The tax cuts will pay for themselves just like the did for they 2001 and 2003 cuts that produced a short-lived bubble economy with the help of Republican sponsored deregulation followed by a massive deficit and mounting public debt due to legacy spending passed on by the Republican controlled Congress and Presidency.

 

cue crickets! the cons have no idea how they're gonna pay for their richie rich tax cuts. scary thing is, the obama deficit commission wants to cut taxes for the rich too! guess that's what happens when the politicians are all on the richie rich payroll.

 

but...but tax cuts do pay for themselves just like wealth trickles down,the Republicans told me so and they would never lie!

 

I haven't seen any numbers worked out but from how I understand it everyone's effective tax rates would go up under their plan. The actual tax rates go down but ALL the tax breaks are basically gone which means they will actually be paying the 23% instead of now where some pay much less than that with tax breaks.

 

Maybe Obama's going to fight for this (extending tax cut for everybody but top %) after all.

Good on him. It's a hard argument for the Republicans to make....politically or logically.

 

republican solution to fixing the economic crisis?

the current tax rates....because they have done such a great job at preventing and stopping recessions so far....

 

i found almost 2 billion.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-04-03-government-pay-raises_N.htm

I'm sure if i went through the budget of the government i could find 698 places to make this deficit neutral

 

Well if the GOP has some ideas on how to pay for it, we'd all love to see it. If they don't have a way, all the talk of fiscal responsibility is a joke.

 

The only way you can ask the question "How do you pay for tax cuts?" is to assume all the money is the government's to begin with. Why not ask the question of the government, "How are you going to live within your means?" It is incumbent upon our representatives to right our government's financial ship, not the taxpayers to provide for the government's whims. And yes, that includes military spending.

 

Good job. Now find another 698 billion and you've paid for the tax cut.

 

That's what Obama is asking the Republicans to do, they are trying to increase the deficit by 700 billion over 10 years and he asking them (The Government) how they are going to live within their means if they want to keep taxes for the rich where they're at.

 

that would be great logic if we were starting a new government

but fact is we have had one for a while.....and we have bills, we ahve debt, we have interest on that debt etc etc

 

Fiscal responsibility is more about not spending more than you take in than how much money you can take from your neighbor to pay for your expenses.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl_m8khoJI0"]YouTube - Rick Santelli Shouts that Government Must "Stop Spending, Stop Spending, Stop Spending!"[/ame]

Do the Republicans have the balls to do this? I doubt it. All entitlement programs, "mandatory spending" and military, education and government jobs have to be on the table. The table with a bunch of hatchet marks in it.

 

Which is why he is asking what they would cut to compensate for the loss in tax revenue.

 

The GOP should fire away with the elimination of whole departments of the Federal gov't and propose massive cuts in welfare payments.

 

lmao of course they dont.....

when have you EVER seen even a fraction of the dramatic cuts that would be required? now they want us to believe they will do what they never did....and do it about 1000% better?

 

Ok lets get this straight. Paying for things means you take money you have and give it to someone. Tax cuts mean you take less from other people. So you don't pay for tax cuts. It really is quite simple, I don't know why you guys can't seem to understand this concept. You act like its already the governments money. The government needs to learn to spend what they take in, not take whatever they want to spend. You seem to support the later which is downright foolish because the spending will never go down.

Now before you start yelling about how the deficit is going down lets look at Obama's budget proposal for 2011 vs the 2010 budget. Here is a pdf from whitehouse.gov
Spending of 2010 Budget: 3.72 trillion
Proposal for 2011 Budget: 3.83 trillion
Yet they suspect a deficit to be 300 billion less than 2010 because of more tax revenue. If you look at the first page the only time the budget goes down from 2009-2020 that this pdf shows is from 2011-2012, with the numbers go from 3.83 - 3.755 trillion respectively. Yet in 2013 the budget bounces back up to 3.915 trillion and continues its upward trend. Yes I know they are all estimations but they prove exactly what I am saying. They aren't cutting spending they are just taking more. Heck in 2020 they say the budget will be 5.713 trillion. Going by their own estimations of 2010 budget of 3.72 to a budget of 5.713 in ten years, thats over a 50% increase in budget spending in 10 years. Obviously Obama has no plan to cut spending, so he will need to raise taxes. How can you support this lunacy?

Please don't jump onto the numbers regarding spending as percentage of GDP, saying "sure spending is going up, but its not that much when compared to % of GDP". Look at what they expect the GDP to be. 2010 GDP of 14.624 trillion. 2020 GDP 24.067 trillion. For a wonderful difference of 9.443 trillion. In other words they expect the GDP to go up by about 65% in 10 years. Thats going to require quite a turnaround from our current economic woes. Good thing government spending counts for part of that GDP!

I also like the part how all of the budgets are well over 20% of the crazy GDP predictions. Not even Bush's budgets were that high of a percentage.

I guess what I am saying is tax cuts don't have to be paid for, government spending has to be paid for. As long as we have politicians who only want to do is increase spending, they are going to have to take more from us. How long do you let them just keep it up? When do you finally say enough is enough, stop the spending?!

 

If this is about closing the deficit why don't we let all the tax cuts expire, thats a lot more revenue and we can pay the deficit off quicker? Why only attack one arbitrary class of Americans?

 

Explain to me how the gov "pays for" a tax cut? Go ahead, give it a shot.

 

Balance the U.S. budget? I did it in under a minute

 

This is what Obama is asking them to do, if they want to "take less" of peoples money then they need to decide what they want to spend the money they have on. Since keeping tax cuts at the current rate will cost 700 billion more than letting the cuts expire, he's asking that they choose what to spend that reduced revenue on, which means they have to cut something since they're spending more than they're taking in.

 

This is why I say the next congress is the rebirth or the death of the Republican Party. They got back into power on the backs of people that want them to take less, spend less and do less. If they continue the spending, rising of the debt cap and trying to outspend the Democratic Party, they will be done.