General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe 250K pledge is important
by kid oakland
I want to keep this short and sweet.
Nothing tells us more about the state of politics right now than the emerging Biden-McDonnell deal to extend Bush tax cuts on income between $250K and $450K per year. (That's tax cuts on income between $20,800 and $37,500 per month, for those keeping score at home.)
Obama, Biden and the Democratic Party now seem prepared to turn their backs on the simplest, clearest campaign promise of the last five years, a campaign promise that Obama won two national elections espousing:
That the Bush tax cuts should expire on income over $250K per year.
Every day when I drive to work through West Oakland I see men in rags collecting cans.
Most of them are my age, and most of them are African-American.
They aren't alone. 1 in 4 children in America lives in poverty. In 2010, 9.2 million families, and 46.2 million Americans lived in poverty.
We've chosen this as a society. Homelessness. Extreme poverty. Children who go without.
32 years after Reagan cut the social safety net and two decades after Clinton passed NAFTA, this is clear. We know what it looks like.
It's us.
You can hardly go anywhere nowadays without stopping at a chain store, filled to the brim with retail employees. Many of them are young, bright people. They didn't go through our educational system to work at Starbucks or Payless or Target or Cabela's, but, there they are.
As a society, we've chosen that, too.
The Republicans say the answer to all of this is to give more money to Mitt Romney's of the world and to cut expenditures on the least of us, asking seniors to work into their late 60s and accept a reduced retirement.
Democrats disagree. (Or at least I thought we did.)
We held an election in which we told the nation that we think that income over $250,000 per year, or $20,800 per month, should be taxed at a more equitable rate and that those funds should be used to grow our economy and protect those in need. And we won.
Apparently, now, we are backing off that.
Apparently, now, we are backing off that.
Now the Democratic position is that we should give slightly less money than the GOP to the Mitt Romneys and Bill Clintons and Barack Obamas of the world, and there should be "shared sacrifice."
46.2 million Americans living in poverty, including 1 in 4 of our children, already know what sacrifice means.
What they need, right now, is not more empty promises or last minute sleights of hand that create carve outs that put money in the pockets of multi-millionaires.
They need jobs. Jobs we can create by fixing roads and bridges and building schools and investing in clean energy infrastructure.
Jobs, that are, in fact, long overdue.
The $250K campaign pledge was a clear, simple promise.
Obama said he supports extending Bush-era tax cuts for everyone making under $200,000, or $250,000 for couples. He had agreed in 2010 to a two-year extension of the lower rates for all taxpayers.
But that extension ends on Dec. 31, and Obama has said he would let the top two tax rates go back up 3 to 4 percentage points to 39.6 percent and 36 percentand raise rates on capital gains and dividends for the wealthy.
Going back on that modest pledge not only makes no sense, but it sends a clear message to every activist who knocked on doors, made phone calls and turned out voters all while explaining this simple campaign pledge for fairness in our tax code.
I am left wondering if there are Democrats in Congress principled enough to stand up and say.
Not now, not this time, Mr. President. This time things are going to be different. America can't wait to take much needed first steps towards economic justice.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/31/1175187/-The-250K-pledge-is-important
Note:
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Nader kept maybe 10 million voters from wanting to vote with his crazy rants on both are the same and his hatred of Al Gore (rivalling Ross Perots personal grudge against 41).
Nader threw the election to the repubs and was happy about the outcome
just a reminder, timely at that.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Seriously, looking forward to your return.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Manohla Dargis
ProSense
(116,464 posts)and likely everyone else, of the space between Rand Paul's ears.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)one after another
ProSense
(116,464 posts)distract you from your primary concern: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022105952
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)Random Thoughts . . .
because when I am through reading one of his posts I always think that
I am due beer and travel money and many good experiences.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)I wish you hadn't reminded me of that person. I think he was in an institution.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)Skittles
(153,193 posts)wow, you truly are desperate
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)half a century. Americans that have changed from, "we're all Americans and we're all in this together", to "I've got mine, fuck everybody else". The vocal minority position of "I'm completely willing to sacrifice you for the chance that I'm going to win".
The people that can't feed their children, "To bad for them if it means I have to pay another $50 in taxes every week". "Your kids are graduating HS without the ability to reason and with no knowledge of art, music, history, or mathematics, well fuck them and fuck you. You should have sent them to a private school like I do."
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)Seriously, none.
No. Clue. Whatsoever.
Response to graham4anything (Reply #1)
Post removed
former_con
(47 posts)a principled stand on a measly 250K bottom bracket is whining and going to cost Democrats seats in congress? Really?
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)living wage jobs, if Obama raised the bottom number, in 2013
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)kath
(10,565 posts)They're two totally different entities.
bigtree
(86,005 posts)handwringing bullshit
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)the monthly income of someone making $250,000 a year is great than the average yearly social security recipient's $15,000. Yep they need a tax break.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)I know that is where he wanted the tax cuts but I believe that was a point from which he could negotiate. Some Dems are as bad as the GOP who want it all or nothing...hurting many people in the process.
Robb
(39,665 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)point.
I've said so here in DU several times. I ALWAYS thought he was really going to go to $500,000, if necessary, so he's gotten a better deal that I expected.
You never START negotiations with your end figure. $250k was the starting point.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)In Truth We Trust
(3,117 posts)that the 250k threshold is "just a starting point in the negotiation process" and claiming I am naive for not accepting that premise.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)These are not the millionaires and billionaires hoarding gobs of cash in tax free havens.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)the difference between $250,000 and $450,000 is a significant chunk in actual treasury dollars. You want to express this not as good idea or bad idea but tell us the actual percentage drop in revenue that $450,000 threshold means.
railsback
(1,881 posts)And the way the Bush cuts were structured, those making up to $500k weren't benefitting that much as compared to those making $1 million +, who got whopping tax cuts.
JoeDuck
(79 posts)The way I understand income taxes, even someone earning billions of dollars gets the same tax cut. The cut would apply to the first $450,000 of income, no matter if the total salary was much higher than that. In other words, all those wealthy people we all seem to dislike get the same tax relief as the middle class. They do, however, wind up paying more on earnings about the $450K level.
railsback
(1,881 posts)The trick now is to clamp down on those off shore tax havens, and create some seriously generous tax incentives to get that money flowing through OUR system, not in some foreign country. That's what Clinton did.
high density
(13,397 posts)for this group of families.
However, it still leaves me annoyed that the GOP gets away with this nonsense.
former_con
(47 posts)should stick to principles because the Right loves it when this side caves in, furthermore this whole debate is about pennies really we are talking about a 5 percent tax increase on the very wealthy that is nuts, that won't even give Obama enough money to pay for spending increases over the next 10 years what we really should be talking about is serious tax increases, this country is facing a financial threat bigger than any threat from any War in our history the tax rate called out in 1942 by FDR was 94 percent marginal income tax rate and he lowered the top bracked from a million down to 200K So truely the rich paid a fair share of their income to sponsor the War the countries very survival depended on it.... Today I argue we face the same threats.... How can we even be considering messing with programs that the most vulnerable among us depend on to live in favor of allow the fat cats to get fatter and fatter, It is time for a truly patriotic call for those with the means to pay the most to get this country back on an even keel. If we keep going down this dysfunctional road of beleiving the rightwingers meme of government spending being the problem than we are going to hurt the most vulnerable.
If the choice is do nothing and face ultimate collapse of the currency or force the richest to pony up and pay their real fair share than that is exactly what we the people should be demanding...
Why aren't we talking about a VAT?
Why aren't we talking about wealth tax?
Why aren't we talking about a banking or trading transaction tax?
How about a massive yearly tax on people that want to "bear arms" 5k per yearly renewable license, no infringement on your rights just pay whats due?
Seems to me that the moderates are the ones that will be pulling us ultimately toward paying this debt on the backs of the elederly and the poor.... and that really sucks.
Thank you.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)You never start negotiations with the number you're prepared to go to. You start with what you wish.
I always thought the $250,000 was a wish, but that it was a starting point to use for negotiations. I expected him to go up to maybe $500,000, so he's gotten a better deal on that point than I thought he would.
It wasn't a promise. When Obama says he thinks something should be this way or that way, he's not making a promise. He's saying that's what he'll shoot for. But he's not a dictator. There are hundreds of other politicians who have to agree.
I'm okay with $400,000/$450,000. I would WISH for a lower threshold, but this is a negotiation. Neither side gets what it wishes for.
As long as the CPI affecting Social Security isn't in there...I haven't heard about that, yet. Now THAT would get me upset.
Response to ProSense (Original post)
Post removed
Omaha Steve
(99,708 posts)http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/03/03/147994/unions-income-inequality/
By Zaid Jilani on Mar 3, 2011 at 9:55 am
Across the country, right-wing legislators continue their attack on labor unions, claiming that they are saving their states money. Yet in waging these anti-labor campaigns, these politicians are ignoring one very simple fact: unions were a major force in building and sustaining the great American middle class, and as they declined, so has the middle class. As CAPs Karla Waters and David Madland showed in a report they first published this past January, as union membership has steadily declined since 1967, so too has the middle classs share of national income, as the super-rich have taken a larger share of national income than any time since the 1920s:
FULL story at link.
NewEngland4Obama
(414 posts)former_con
(47 posts)Cliff averted Obama caves in to 450K and above tax hike... Had he done nothing he could have generated nearly twice the revenue... You see now this is nothing more than distractions...
http://news.msn.com/politics/update-white-house-gop-reach-a-deal-on-the-fiscal-cliff
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)There's a difference.
I personally think it would've been better to go over the cliff. But I'm not in charge. If this deal is approved, we can move on.
former_con
(47 posts)but how is it going to look the Pubbies are now going to go on the offensive and say look we gave Obama what he wanted, we taxed the rich but the deficit is still over a trillion per year, they will demand increasingly painful cuts to SS and Medicare and they will demand the Democrats give in....
Personally I think this is all one big game that they are all up there laughing at us as they play in this Kabuki theater...
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)We choose what we want from society. This is what we have chosen.
I never thought that I find support for this here.
Arcanetrance
(2,670 posts)Yearly. Meanwhile people making $250,000 a year or Monthly $20,833 tell me why do those people need anymore relief when there are people making less yearly than what they take home in a month. I think this is a terrible deal and it just postpones the eventual pain that those in power plan to inflict on the rest of us and I include the president that my father and I both voted for twice.