Quickie: Tax Cuts and Huge Deficits edition

By GottaLaff

Today's Quickie:

As I read about the CBO's prediction of enormous deficits, this stood out:

The larger deficit so far is due almost entirely to a drop in tax revenue.

The preceding Quickie is dedicated to Tea Tantrumers everywhere.

Poll: Stimulus views vary by race

You know what to blame for this? The middle class tax cut that the majority of Americans didn't (and don't) even realize they got. The last time the President mentioned it, even Jeff didn't know what he was talking about, his check gets direct deposited and he never even noticed he was having less taken out in taxes. I would think those people who overwhelmingly get paper checks and scrutinize the deductions are the ones who know they got a cut.

Perceptions of the effectiveness of President Barack Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package differ dramatically between racial groups, according to a new poll released Tuesday.

The poll, sponsored by New America Media, a corroboration of 2,500 ethnic media outlets, reported that less than 40 percent of whites, Hispanics and Native Americans said the stimulus has made the economy better, compared to 59 percent of African-Americans and 47 percent of Asian-Americans.

(snip)

In total, 54 percent said the stimulus package has been ‘a good thing for their family or local community’ while 27 percent said it was ‘a bad thing’ and 19 percent either did not know or had no opinion.

Only 45 percent of the white Americans polled, however, thought the stimulus has been a good thing compared to 36 percent who think it was a bad thing. But among African Americans, 84 percent said the stimulus was a good thing and only 4 percent said the opposite.

Hispanics, Native Americans and Asian Americans all polled above 60 percent in concluding that the stimulus was a good thing.

Asian-Americans trailed the other two groups, with 62 percent concluding that the stimulus was a good thing, 10 percent saying it was a bad thing and 28 percent did not know or had no opinion. Hispanics and Native Americans polled identically at 67 percent good, 11 percent bad and 22 percent did not know or had no opinion.

Feds see biggest tax revenue drop since 1932

By GottaLaff

Here's what happens when you cut taxes:

The recession is starving the government of tax revenue, just as the president and Congress are piling a major expansion of health care and other programs on the nation's plate and struggling to find money to pay the tab.

The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion.

Other figures in an Associated Press analysis underscore the recession's impact: Individual income tax receipts are down 22 percent from a year ago. Corporate income taxes are down 57 percent. Social Security tax receipts could drop for only the second time since 1940, and Medicare taxes are on pace to drop for only the third time ever.

The last time the government's revenues were this bleak, the year was 1932 in the midst of the Depression. [...]

The sheer magnitude of the tax decline, however, points to the deep recession that is reducing incomes, wiping out corporate profits and straining government programs.

Now then, let's everyone follow the advice of the Rushpublics, in all their wise wisdom, and cut more of them taxes. That should fix everything.

Always remember and never forget: Party first.

H/t: Chris

Health Care Hypocrisy Watch: Hurry up and wait

By GottaLaff

Stealing from David Kurtz, because it's worth going to Blogosphere Jail for:

Remember this?

President George W. Bush signed into law Thursday the first major piece of legislation of his presidency, a $1.35 trillion tax cut over 10 years.

Of the six senators begging President Obama to slow down health care reform, four of them -- Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Susan Collins (R-ME) -- voted for those huge Bush tax cuts.

Their votes were cast on May 26, 2001. Bush signed the tax cuts into law on June 7, 2001. Here we are in mid-July, eight years later, struggling to get health care reform passed by the end of the year.

So whatever these four foot-draggers are saying about why they want health care reform slowed down (and Nelson, for one, was all over the place yesterday warning against "rushing into this"), it's not really about wanting to be more deliberative or avoid ballooning the deficit. All you have to do is look back to 2001. Their records speak for themselves.

The Internets are a bitch, aren't they...?

VIDEO-- Jared Bernstein sets CNBC straight about tea parties: "I'm an economist, I'm not a theatre critic"

By GottaLaff

So there:



Aired: Wed. Apr. 15 2009

Government tax and spend policies are front and center today as multiple rallies are taking place across the nation, with Jared Bernstein, chief economist, Vice President Biden.

H/t: Jon Lester

McCain Adviser Flips on Bush Tax Cuts

By GottaLaff

Any chance of any McCainians flipping on the Iraq occupation? Never mind. That's asking too much:

Heard in the CQ newsroom:

Though economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin spent the 2008 presidential campaign advising Sen. John McCain to defend the Bush-era tax cuts, he now thinks they should be allowed to expire on Dec. 31, 2010 due to "the prospect of an Argentina-style fiscal meltdown."
Said Holtz-Eakin: "If you ask: 'Who pays the taxes?', it's the first step toward not having the answer be: 'Our kids.'"

Now that's change you can believe in.

$4.10 a day

By GottaLaff

Via Oliver Willis and Bob Cesca, who clarify the impact of the life-changing tax burden on those making $250,000 and over:

The increased tax burden isn't $410 a day. It's $4.10 a day.

Four dollars and ten cents. Per day. [...]

The horror! I can see it now. Rich people surviving like they always have, but without an extra $4.10 a day, which is the equivalent of having to turn off the heater in their pools for the total length of time it took you to read this blog post.

Since Cesca already took care of the snark, I'll cover the serious. Imagine what $4.10 a day could buy these people:

Somehow, I doubt that kind of cash would turn them into fat, slovenly, wasteful cell-phone-using addicts.

Didn't Republicans say they were for tax breaks?

By GottaLaff

What's the beef again?

Roughly 97% of American households could see tax savings as a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, according to a new analysis by a nonpartisan research group. [...]

"Never before in our history has a tax cut taken effect faster or gone to so many hardworking Americans," Obama said in his weekly video and radio address.

In addition, the economic recovery plan contains a host of tax breaks for small businesses.

(click on image to enlarge)

As I've previously posted, Republicans have boxed themselves in:

The economic stimulus package to be signed today by President Obama includes one of the largest tax cuts in American history -- $282 billion in tax cuts over two years.

Steven Waldman made this point last week, but few others have picked up on it.

Marc Ambinder: "It's hard imagine we won't hear about this four years from now. And if that's not boxing a future Republican candidate in ahead of time, I don't know what is. Think about how many potential Republican arguments are going to be pre-empted by that nice little fact?"

A bonus for Democrats: Nearly every Republican in Congress voted against it.

They've successfully tied themselves into a big, contradictory, obstructionist knot.

Obama boxes Republicans in

By GottaLaff

See? Tax cuts can work... if you count boxing Republicans in:

The economic stimulus package to be signed today by President Obama includes one of the largest tax cuts in American history -- $282 billion in tax cuts over two years.

Steven Waldman made this point last week, but few others have picked up on it.

Marc Ambinder: "It's hard imagine we won't hear about this four years from now. And if that's not boxing a future Republican candidate in ahead of time, I don't know what is. Think about how many potential Republican arguments are going to be pre-empted by that nice little fact?"

A bonus for Democrats: Nearly every Republican in Congress voted against it.

Not to worry. The Repubs will find a way to make everything Obama's fault.

Even if the economy were to turn around 100% by next year, they'd take all the credit, and blame Obama for blocking them, plus causing floods and famine, murder sprees, terrorist plots, and the past 8 years of economic disaster. Oh, and for not being truly bipartisan... like they are.

Senate GOP’s ‘stimulus plan’ costs 3.5 times as much as Obama’s

By GottaLaff

Think Progress has the details, but here is the gist:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said that President Obama’s recovery package, priced at roughly $819 billion, is too expensive. GOP “members” believe that they can pass a “very robust” stimulus at a cheaper price, he said.

A new Wonk Room analysis finds that DeMint’s plan will cost $3.1 trillion over ten years, more than 3.5 times the cost of Obama’s.

Not surprisingly, DeMint’s plan consists of permanent tax breaks for corporations and lowering income tax for the wealthy. For the Senate GOP, it seems that deficit spending is permissible as long as it is done via tax cuts for the rich.

Meantime, some moderate Republicans may be coming around.

Dems: House GOP’s Stimulus Plan Would Actually Raise Taxes For Many Americans

By GottaLaff

Rush job. Republicans. Desperate. 'Nuff said:

GOP leaders — led by John Boehner and Eric Cantor — have spent days bashing the economic stimulus package being touted by President Obama and Democrats because it doesn’t sufficiently cut taxes.

But is it possible that the alternative plan House Republicans unveiled as a more responsible approach earlier this week would have actually raised taxes for untold numbers of Americans?

That’s the surprising claim that House Democratic staffers who have taken a look at the GOP plan are now making. They insist to me that the Republicans did some almost comic number shuffling in drawing up their proposal, the upshot of which would be that the actual tax bill would go up for many.

And they’re now preparing to make an issue of this in the districts of Republican House members by painting Republicans as the would-be tax hikers.

The Republicans are sputtering their protests, as you'll see if you link to the piece. Even if they're right, it's still entertaining to see them get so apoplectic over this.

H/t: TPM

VIDEO: "We've gotta get back to being America, because we're losing sight of what my son died for."

By GottaLaff

Somehow I don't think tax cuts will help families like this one. Get out the Kleenex:

Via CBS, 60 Minutes.

Big h/t: Oliver Willis

McCain: Not many regrets about campaign

By GottaLaff

Gramm-pa may not have regrets about his campaign or his choice of running mates, but many of us disagree. And yes, that was an understatement:

Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, said Sunday he had few regrets about his White House campaign and no second thoughts about picking Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate.

“I don’t have a lot of regrets about it. I think we ran an honorable campaign,” McCain said on “Fox News Sunday.”

He's right, if you define "honorable" as smearing, lying, innuendo, confusion, contradiction, impulsiveness, bad judgment, and incompetence.

Asked specifically about Palin, McCain stressed that there were no regrets.

“I think the world of Sarah Palin. She energized our party. She has a bright future in our party. I’m pleased to have known her and her wonderful family,” he stated.

Her wonderful family. Uh-huh. Moving on...

He said he would not vote for the $825 billion stimulus package in its current form, urging a greater emphasis on tax cuts.

Because, you know, all those Bush tax cuts have resulted in overwhelming prosperity. Or am I just one of those bothersome whiners?

Pelosi differs from Obama on tax increases, Bush probe

By GottaLaff

Pelosi v. Obama:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears to differ from Barack Obama on at least two issues - tax increases and investigating the Bush administration.

The Democratic House speaker wants Congress to consider repealing President George W. Bush's tax cuts well before they expire in 2010, in contrast to what Obama is proposing.

Pelosi said Democrats have promised to end the Bush tax cuts for those who make more than $250,000.

But this is the part that got my attention (I wonder if it will be part of Keith Olbermann's Special Comment tomorrow):

Also Sunday, Pelosi said she wants an investigation into whether the Bush administration broke the law when it fired a group of federal prosecutors.

"I think that we have to learn from the past, and we cannot let the politicizing of, for example, the Justice Department, go unreviewed," she said. "Past is prologue."

House Democrats last week recommended a criminal investigation to determine whether administration officials broke the law in the name of national security. Along with the fired prosecutors, the report cited interrogation of foreign detainees, warrantless wiretaps, retribution against critics and manipulation of intelligence.

The president-elect has been more cautious, saying he wants to look to the future, not to the past.

I'm with Pelosi. There must not be a precedent set. Jonathan Turley, Pelosi, Kucinich... Let's hope that after Tuesday, President Obama will voice his agreement and stand up for the rule of law.

Axelrod: Obama may delay high-income tax-cut repeal

By GottaLaff

Tidbit time:

President-elect Barack Obama may consider delaying an election promise - to roll back tax cuts on high-income Americans - as part of his economic recovery strategy, a senior aide and an adviser said on Sunday.

David Axelrod, one of Obama's closest confidants chosen to be a senior White House adviser, was asked if the tax cut could be ended later than Obama called for during the campaign. "Considerations will be made," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

UPDATE:

Bill Daley, an adviser to Obama and commerce secretary under former President Bill Clinton, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that it “looks more likely than not” that President Obama will delay any tax increase after 2010, when the Bush cuts for those making more than $250,000 are due to expire.

Mr. Daley was reacting to a report in Sunday’s New York Times that said Mr. Obama was considering putting off the tax increases to give his ambitious economic stimulus proposals a chance to work, quoting several people familiar with the discussions.

And:

His aides' comments suggest Obama may be wary of imposing any additional tax burden at a time of deep crisis, despite the outlook for record budget deficits and mounting national debt. He may also be seeking to bolster Republican support for his recovery measures...

"The main thing right now is to get this economic recovery package on the road, to get money in the pockets of the middle class, to get these projects going, to get America working again, and that's where we're going to be focused in January," Axelrod said.

Gramm-pa McCain: Middle class tax cut is "welfare", uses "S-Word"

By GottaLaff

Middle class tax cuts are equivalent to welfare? Really, Gramm-pa? Hmm. Not so much. Actually, that word more likely describes what we'll all need if you manage to become--gulp--president:

John McCain stepped up his rhetoric against Barack Obama on taxes in his weekly radio address, comparing his plan to 'socialist' programs that would “convert the IRS into a giant welfare agency, redistributing massive amounts of wealth.”

[H]is most recent comments were the first time he directly invoked the word 'socialist.'

In the radio address that aired Saturday morning, McCain didn't directly call Obama a socialist, but he let the now-famous Joe 'the Plumber' Wurzelbacher nearly do it for him.

That must be the same Joe the Plumber who he apologized to on the Letterman show for, you know, all that needless, imposing media attention. It's good to see he's keeping shy, retiring Fake Plumber Joe out of the spotlight. Way to be consistent.

“You see, [Obama] believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that help us all make more of it. Joe in his plainspoken way, said this sounded a lot like socialism,” McCain said.

Clearly, Gramm-pa uses Fake Joe the way he uses women... speaking or which:

Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin has used the word in speeches the last two days as well.

I have an S-word I'd like to use right now, but apparently, I have more self-control than Grammps and IWRC* Palin do.

*"In What Respect, Charlie?"

Obama-Biden Instant Tax Calculator

By GottaLaff

This is just too cool. Calculate your tax cut instantly. Here's a copy and paste, but go here to actually try it out.

Enter the information below and click “calculate now.”

* The top two fields are required.

What's your annual income?* $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 - $75,000 $75,000 - $100,000 $100,000 - $150,000 $150,000 - $200,000 $200,000 - $250,000 $250,000 and up Your Filing Status* Married (File Jointly) Head of Household Single

How many dependents do you have? 0 1 2 3+

Check if you are over 65

Check if you have child care expenses

Check if you are saving for retirement

What is the outstanding balance of your mortgage? *If you itemize, leave blank

Check if you have college expenses

FAQ

H/t: Palin's No Hillary

Mainstream Media Stand To Receive $1.44 Billion From McCain’s Tax Cuts

By GottaLaff

(via)

Considering how much Gramm-pa's little running mate IWRC* Palin resents the media, this is some gift. Doggone it, I hope she's not boilin' mad now, ya know?

*"In What Respect, Charlie?"

CNN catches Gramm-pa McCain... again!

By GottaLaff

Meohmyohmeohmy. CNN is actually doing its job:

"He said he won't raise taxes for most people, but he's voted 94 times in his short Senate career for tax increases and against tax cuts."
-Sen. John McCain, at a campaign stop in Green Bay, Wisconsin, Friday Sept. 19, 2008

Oh, really now?

Factcheck.org, a non-partisan project of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center, pieced through records to determine just what these 94 votes were. Key findings:

-23 were against proposed tax cuts
-7 were "for measures that would have lowered taxes for many, while raising them on a relative few, either corporations or affluent individuals"
-11 were to increase taxes on people making more than $1 million a year, to help fund programs such as Head Start, school nutrition, or veterans' health care
-53 were votes on budget resolutions or amendments that "could not have resulted by themselves in raising taxes," though many "were clear statements of approval for increased taxes"
- The total includes multiple votes on the same measures

Annenberg says a close look at the record reveals that Obama has "voted consistently to restore higher tax rates on upper-income taxpayers but not on middle- or low-income workers."

Verdict:
Misleading. McCain's summary ignores the fact that some of the votes were for measures to lower taxes for many Americans, while increasing them for a much smaller number of taxpayers. A nonpartisan examination also finds that the 94 total includes multiple votes on the same measures and budget votes that would not directly lead to higher taxes.

My verdict:

McCain Adviser Commits To Balanced Budget By 2013 — After Govt. Spends $900 Billion In Bailouts

By GottaLaff

Via Think Progress:

Sen. John McCain has proposed doubling Bush’s tax cuts, resulting in a deficit of $505 billion. Yesterday, in an interview with Tom Ashbrook, McCain adviser John Taylor said McCain could still balance the budget by 2013 after the bailouts:

Q: So has Sen. McCain changed at all his plans on tax cuts? Can you lay out these big bailouts and still have these tax cuts that he’s been promoting — the Bush tax cuts extended and more?

TAYLOR: Well you need to have tax cuts that focus on creating jobs and getting America going. … Sen. McCain wants to make sure the economy grows. He has a detailed plan to balance the budget by the end of his first term. It requires discipline to keep spending keep spending growth from being too rapid. (listen to it here) [...]

Former Treasury Secretary and Obama adviser Lawrence Summers was incredulous, challenging Taylor to “make available a detailed budget documenting your claim that Sen. McCain will balance the budget with 2013 for external scrutiny and to show where the cuts are from.” Taylor, however, refused, claiming the ” information’s already been available to the Tax Policy Center.” In a tense exchange, Summers shot back:

SUMMERS: John, I am sorry that you are speaking in this way. And I make the challenge. The Tax Policy Center has laid out $3.4 trillion of extra deficits from Sen. McCain’s plan. Show us the spending cuts! Show someone the spending cuts!

With the $900 billion in bailouts, McCain’s plan to eliminate the deficit by 2013 is impossible without the most paralyzing of spending cuts. This problem becomes even worse for McCain after Henry Paulson’s announced today a new plan to help banks offload mortgage assets costing “hundreds of billions” of dollars.

Gramm-pa McCain continues to be dazed and confused. Hopefully, Obama will straighten him out after he wins the election.