A few thoughts and questions on the tax cuts

[ProSense]

If President Obama should have let all the tax cuts expire given the current state of the economy, why will it be problematic for him to raise taxes in an improved economy?

Why would allowing the tax cuts to expire in a couple of years be more advantageous to the Republicans (i.e., President Obama is going to raise taxes) if such a move wouldn't have been advantageous for Republicans had the tax cuts been allowed to expire now?

The tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012. It's likely the tax cuts will not be addressed before the 2012 election. What would be the disadvantage of allowing them to expire?

[Enrique]

1. cutting taxes is advantageous for any politician

especially Obama, where it would be a sign of going against the hated base.

It would be especially advantageous if Obama campaigns hard against cutting them, but then "compromises" by cutting them again. Shows how reasonable he is.

Advantageous for Obama, advantageous for rich folks, but disastrous for the rest of us.

[ProSense]

4. That doesn't answer my question

Why then, not now?

[Enrique]

8. it's the same then as now

same reasons they extended them now will be the reasons they'll be extended then.

[ProSense]

12. Maybe, but

what about the question of it being advantageous to Republicans?

[Hello_Kitty]

2. Why can't you just drop it?

The tax compromise is a done deal. And when the time comes to "temporarily" extend them, including the payroll tax cut, it will also be done.

[CakeGrrl]

22. Were you saying this in the OTHER thread that brought up taxes today?

Or was that one OK because it cast doubt on the President?

:eyes:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. A few answers:

If President Obama should have let all the tax cuts expire given the current state of the economy...
:eyes:

...will it be problematic for him to raise taxes in an improved economy?
:eyes:

Why would allowing the tax cuts to expire in a couple of years...
Because they could have been ended now.
:eyes:

The tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012.
It could have been 2010.
:eyes:

:think:

[ProSense]

5. Doesn't answer my question,

which is: "Why would allowing the tax cuts to expire in a couple of years be more advantageous to the Republicans (i.e., President Obama is going to raise taxes) if such a move wouldn't have been advantageous for Republicans had the tax cuts been allowed to expire now?"

You stated an opinion, but didn't answer the question.

[Hello_Kitty]

9. What do you think will happen and why, ProSense?

[ProSense]

13. I think

the tax cuts for the rich will expire because there will be no benefit in allowing them to continue.

[Hello_Kitty]

16. I think they won't expire because it's advantageous to the rich that they don't. eom

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

10. It isn't. It won't.

It's Reaganomics.

[mtnsnake]

6. "The tax cuts are set to expire at the end of 2012"

They were set to expire in 2010.

If President Obama should have let all the tax cuts expire given the current state of the economy, why will it be problematic for him to raise taxes in an improved economy?

First you're assuming that the economy is going to get better in a year and a half from now. That remains to be seen, but let's say it does improve... If he campaigns on raising taxes in an improved economy, the Republicans will make it sound like he's crazy to raise taxes when things were going so well by not raising them. I'm speaking hypothetically of course.

[ProSense]

11. "First you're assuming that the economy is going to get better in a year and a half from now."

The end of 2012 is two years from now, and you don't think it will be doing better?

"...That remains to be seen, but let's say it does improve... If he campaigns on raising taxes in an improved economy, the Republicans will make it sound like he's crazy to raise taxes when things were going so well by not raising them. I'm speaking hypothetically of course."

I didn't say he was going to campaign on raising taxes, but who cares what crazy spin the Republicans try to advance?

Also, you didn't answer the question about the advantage Republicans will have then versus now.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. Well, there you go again, talking policy when it has nothing to do with policy.

It's politics, not policy. No matter the reality on the ground, then or now, the repukes will be screaming about Obama raising taxes, and the idiot sheeple will listen, whether they understand policy or not.

1) There is NO problem, in regards to financial policy, to raising taxes in the improved economy (supposing we have one).

2) What makes you think the tax cuts will expire in '12? Just because they are scheduled to? They were scheduled to expire this year. Did they? You are asking "why would Repukes use the 'raising taxes' thing two years from now, just because it worked so well this year?" Duh?

3) As policy, no disadvantage. Again, it's not about policy - it's about politics.

[Capn Sunshine]

14. The tax cuts were a bargaining chip, lets not forget that

we got the republicans on record witholding extension of Unemployment Benefits during Christamastime along with supporting the rich.
We GOT the Unemployment benefits extended, before a more RW congress comes in.

I still don't understand what's not a good deal about this. What it did reveal to me is that the poor and unemployed are seen as some sort of invisible group who should disproportionately suffer while politics takes a front seat by a significant part of the political spectrum. I was surpised to see such callousness portrayed as the high road.

[mtnsnake]

17. The tax cuts were not a bargaining chip

The bargaining chip was the extension of federal unemployment benefits, and it's a shame that this was used as an excuse to extend the tax cuts. Tax cuts and unemployment benefits were never joined at the hip and each should have been dealt with separately.

[Capn Sunshine]

18. true, in unicorn ponyland that would have been an option.

Sadly we have to play inside the beltway in Washington DC, where everything is contingent on something else.

[subterranean]

15. My $0.02...

Extending all the tax cuts for two more years is advantageous to the Republicans for two reasons:

1) They will be able to use the tax cuts as a campaign issue again in 2012 ("Obama/Democrats will raise taxes on American families and small businesses, and kill the economic recovery").
2) At the end of 2012, Obama will be faced with the same choice again: either extend ALL of the tax cuts, or let them ALL expire. The Republicans are betting he won't want to raise taxes on middle-class families, so he'll make another deal to re-extend the tax cuts for the wealthy, or even make them permanent. They could also again decide to block everything else from getting done until Obama meets their demands.

On the other hand, if Obama loses the election, he may very well just say the hell with it, and let 'em all expire as scheduled in 2012.

Assuming, of course, that the Republicans don't force him to make the upper-bracket cuts permanent before 2012, which they might try to do.

[Atticus]

19. Unrec. That horse is SO dead--- nt.

[lonestarnot]

20. Done deal there, and we were fucked again. So rather than rehash, I'm scheming.

:evilgrin:

[hulka38]

21. What America sees and hears is tax cuts stimulate the economy

and the President is on board with that. Predictably, very few people payed attention to his nuanced hedge to liberals that he doesn't think tax cuts for the wealthiest are very helpful. He pushed hard for tax cuts and he got it and it was praised by everyone but the left. The result is that a "liberal" President has further solidified conservative mythology on taxes. So in 2012 he's going to tear down a long standing wall that he just strengthened and do it with less political strength. Problematic.