House, Senate Dems break from Obama's tax policy for wealthy

[cal04]

Source: The Hill

Democrats in both chambers of Congress are pushing for legislation that would raise taxes on millionaires, breaking from President Obama who has long endorsed tax increases for families making more than $250,000.

(snip
In an interesting development, liberals are calling for taxes to be raised on people making more than $1 million annually while Obama and other party leaders have embraced $250,000 or more per year. The left-leaning lawmakers stress they still support what Obama wants to do though the president wasn't able to convince the Democratic-led Congress to pass his tax blueprint last year.

(snip)
The legislators – who include Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) – argue that poll numbers suggest the public is on their side and that added revenue is needed to narrow deficits and keep programs like Head Start from being placed on the chopping block.

(snip)
“I don’t think there’s anything magical about 250,000 or a million. It’s how much money do you need,” said Sanders, whose proposal would set a 5.4 percent surtax on income over $1 million a year. “In my view, the Democrats and the president should be very strong on this issue – that our goal is shared sacrifice and let’s not balance the budget on the backs of the working and middle class.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/150861-house-senate-dems-break-from-obamas-tax-policy

[somone]

1. How convenient

Now that Republicans control the House, Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the rich.

[cali]

10. uh, many of them ALWAYS supported that position.

[liberalmike27]

12. God have I been saying that for a decade or more

Why do our tax brackets stop at 300K or so a year, when there are people who earned over 4 billion in 2010, mostly by betting our government would bail out banks that misbehaved??

Why do capital gains earnings get exempted from SS tax, and then only pay 15 percent no matter how much they earn? It only makes for market churning anyway, cuts back on long-term investment, and allows the richest to manipulate the markets to squeeze 401K accounts of regular Americans...Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question!

I've always suggested another bracket from 340K to a million, a million to ten million, ten to a hundred million, a hundred million on up. At some point, it should become confiscatory, I'd suggest on all bucks over a million. Keeps the wages down, and the money in the company.

[old mark]

2. K&R- Late, but better than never...and better than the WH, too...

Are there REAL DEMOCRATS in Congress after all?


mark

[Lasher]

3. It's OK to make a point but this is just for show.

We missed the boat on this one in December.

[dkf]

5. Does anyone think this will pass the house?

Is politics all for show nowadays where symbolic gestures mean more than getting realistic legislation? Or is this part of a larger proposal that both sides will hate but reluctantly support?

Our overwhelming majorities are no more. Unless both sides complain about the deal but accept the compromise it's not going to pass.

[Lasher]

13. Nobody with a lick of sense.

If you sweep all the bullshit aside, the one thing that Republicans care about most is tax cuts for rich people. They now control the House. In December they got the Bush tax cuts extended for two years. We will be ice skating in hell before they would ever consider raising taxes on the affluent.

[Autumn]

4. Kind of like locking the barn, after the horses

get out. That would have been nice to hear last year, Oh well, a day late a dollar short.

[russspeakeasy]

6. Too damn little, too damn late.

[Agent William]

7. Just in the nick of time....

Oh wait, this would have been just in time TWO yeas ago.

[Silence Dogood]

11. Yes, if Obama hadn't been the president- Change? What Change? n/t

[wordpix]

8. ugh---where were they in '10? At least Bernie was with us, a real leader

[wordpix]

9. finally they're looking at poll numbers---corporate $campaign $ were the big ticket in '10,

apparently, and not what the people wanted.

[grahamhgreen]

14. K&r to the top. Taxing the wealthy is key to solving our debt.

[indepat]

15. Welfare for the wealthy and large corporations and wars are responsible for a goodly portion of the

national debt. The upside or other side of the national debt issue is the fact that a goodly portion of the orchestrated national now reposes in the coffers of the wealthy and large corporations. :patriot: