The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
AskArchiveFAQ

April 11, 2012
We could call it the Reagan Rule instead of the Buffett Rule. I’m not the first president to call for this idea that everyone has to do their fair share.
President Barack Obama • During a speech before a group of executives at the White House, the second pitch he’s made for the policy in as many days. The President said he agreed with critics who claim the policy doesn’t put a large enough dent in our debt, saying that the absence of a complete fix was not an excuse for inaction, and that it would be “something that will get us moving in the right direction.” Obama also took aim at Republican opposition, saying, “If Republicans in Congress were truly concerned with deficits and debt, then I’m assuming they wouldn’t have just proposed to spend an additional $4.6 trillion on lower tax rates….for every millionaire in America.”source (viafollow)
15:51 // 2 years ago
February 13, 2012

GOP caves on payroll tax cut; 10-month extension set to pass

  • 10 month extension of the payroll tax cut is likely to pass source

» Good news for Democrats:  GOP leadership has indicated that they’ll pass a 10-month extension of the payroll tax without any offsets in spending. Democrats had wanted to balance the tax cut, in part, with higher taxes on the rich; Republicans wanted to do so, in part, with cuts to unemployment benefits. Ultimately, they couldn’t agree, and so it will be passed with no offsets at all. Why is this good news for Democrats? Well, the GOP took a hard-line against the payroll tax cut—which largely benefits the middle-class—last December, making the once-benign policy a partisan issue. Democrats, by and large, were okay passing it sans offsets—the suggestion to pay for it via tax cuts on the rich was more a general effort to increase taxes on the rich—and so the fact that the extension is going to pass is a political and legislative win for Democrats. But the extension expires in ten months—right around the presidential election—so this fight is only over in the short-term.

Read ShortFormBlogFollow

16:47 // 2 years ago
Obama vs. Romney on tax rates: As you can see, rates are largely the same—except for the nation’s richest and poorest. The poor would pay almost twice as much in taxes under Romney’s plan; meanwhile, the very richest in the country would be forced to cough up about 10% more of their income under Obama. The net effect? In short, Romney’s plan would reduce federal revenues to about 17% of GDP—down .9% from where they are now. Obama’s budget would raise revenues 19.2%, with most of that money coming from those making over $250,000 a year (Graphic and data courtesy of The Washington Post / Tax Policy Center).

Obama vs. Romney on tax rates: As you can see, rates are largely the same—except for the nation’s richest and poorest. The poor would pay almost twice as much in taxes under Romney’s plan; meanwhile, the very richest in the country would be forced to cough up about 10% more of their income under Obama. The net effect? In short, Romney’s plan would reduce federal revenues to about 17% of GDP—down .9% from where they are now. Obama’s budget would raise revenues 19.2%, with most of that money coming from those making over $250,000 a year (Graphic and data courtesy of The Washington Post / Tax Policy Center).

16:15 // 2 years ago