Here's an interesting take on President Obama that I stumbled across:
http://www.theroot.com/views/how-barack-obama-became-republican?wpisrc=obinsite
Monday, December 13, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Fair...But Balanced?
As I've been out of town on business with limited computer access , I haven't been able to comment on recent events in a timely manner. But I'm here now... (smile)
Despite all the posturing and protesting on by various Senators and Congress members, it appears that President Obama's recommended compromise of extending the Bush-era tax cuts to all incomes for two additional years in "exchange" for an additional year of unemployment benefits will eventually pass. The fact that few politicians - and citizens in general, perhaps - are happy about all aspects of the recommendation means that it is a good start.
Nonetheless, I'm still not convinced about the benefit of extending the tax cuts to those in the upper-income brackets. However, just as some question the material effectiveness of the Bush/Obama stimulus package over the last two years, I can also respect the argument that conditions could have been much worse over the last eight years without the presumed reinvestment of Bush tax cuts by the upper class. I don't understand, though, why Obama did not push for two more years of unemployment benefits to balance out the benefit to those who are working or otherwise living comfortably.
It will be interesting to see what happens in December 2012 when this issue is brought to the table again. Conservatives will surely see the current tax cuts as a new baseline from which future spending cuts - and, of course, even deeper tax cuts - should be made. Progressives will see the tax cuts as the temporary measure they were meant to be and will bristle at what they see as the continued loss of an estimated $70 billion in annual tax revenue.
Unfortunately, the cuts that will be made - at least if Republican politicians have anything to say about it - will likely happen to programs involving those who most need the help (e.g. Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, welfare). I've previously shared my skepticism about an increase in charity by upper-income households. U am also concerned that the objects that some desperate "entrepreneurs" may pull out of their proverbial bootstraps may turn out to be morally and legally unacceptable.
Now if Social Security and welfare are going to indeed take a hit, let's look at other supposed "sacred cows" that conservatives may favor such as defense (as recommended by the bi-partisan Bowles-Simpson commission) as well as capping the tax benefit of mortgage deductions and dividend interest.
Despite all the posturing and protesting on by various Senators and Congress members, it appears that President Obama's recommended compromise of extending the Bush-era tax cuts to all incomes for two additional years in "exchange" for an additional year of unemployment benefits will eventually pass. The fact that few politicians - and citizens in general, perhaps - are happy about all aspects of the recommendation means that it is a good start.
Nonetheless, I'm still not convinced about the benefit of extending the tax cuts to those in the upper-income brackets. However, just as some question the material effectiveness of the Bush/Obama stimulus package over the last two years, I can also respect the argument that conditions could have been much worse over the last eight years without the presumed reinvestment of Bush tax cuts by the upper class. I don't understand, though, why Obama did not push for two more years of unemployment benefits to balance out the benefit to those who are working or otherwise living comfortably.
It will be interesting to see what happens in December 2012 when this issue is brought to the table again. Conservatives will surely see the current tax cuts as a new baseline from which future spending cuts - and, of course, even deeper tax cuts - should be made. Progressives will see the tax cuts as the temporary measure they were meant to be and will bristle at what they see as the continued loss of an estimated $70 billion in annual tax revenue.
Unfortunately, the cuts that will be made - at least if Republican politicians have anything to say about it - will likely happen to programs involving those who most need the help (e.g. Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, welfare). I've previously shared my skepticism about an increase in charity by upper-income households. U am also concerned that the objects that some desperate "entrepreneurs" may pull out of their proverbial bootstraps may turn out to be morally and legally unacceptable.
Now if Social Security and welfare are going to indeed take a hit, let's look at other supposed "sacred cows" that conservatives may favor such as defense (as recommended by the bi-partisan Bowles-Simpson commission) as well as capping the tax benefit of mortgage deductions and dividend interest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
