This is a vision that says even though America can?t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can?t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90 percent of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1 percent saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that?s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that?s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That?s not right, and it?s not going to happen as long as I?m president.
And:
The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code. In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans. But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.
Beyond that, the tax code is also loaded up with spending on things like itemized deductions. And while I agree with the goals of many of these deductions, like homeownership or charitable giving, we cannot ignore the fact that they provide millionaires an average tax break of $75,000 while doing nothing for the typical middle-class family that doesn?t itemize.
My budget calls for limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans ? a reform that would reduce the deficit by $320 billion over 10 years. But to reduce the deficit, I believe we should go further. That?s why I?m calling on Congress to reform our individual tax code so that it is fair and simple ? so that the amount of taxes you pay isn?t determined by what kind of accountant you can afford. I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the Fiscal Commission?s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there is enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit.
And:
Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach. Some will argue we shouldn?t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans. It?s just an article of faith for them. I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don?t need another tax cut. Warren Buffett doesn?t need another tax cut. Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. Or by cutting kids from Head Start. Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn?t be here without. That some of you wouldn?t be here without. And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me. They want to give back to the country that?s done so much for them. Washington just hasn?t asked them to.
In a separate set of remarks, McConnell asked, ?What does [the president] propose? What is he willing to do to reduce the debt and avoid the crisis that is building on his watch?? I?d refer him to the same speech quoted above. I get why McConnell doesn?t like Obama?s plan, but why does he want him to repeat it? What does he think will sound different this time?
Source: http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/click.phdo?i=70c3f9db93828e70d604af5ccef65ded
Clint Eastwood US Congress Digital media United Nations Financial Services Authority (FSA) Gabriel Agbonlahor
No comments:
Post a Comment