Robert Gibbs Signals Temporary Extension of All Tax Cuts

[sabra]

Source: ABC News/GMA

Listen closely to Robert Gibbs on "GMA" this morning and it’s pretty clear that the only outstanding question on those tax cuts expiring on December 31st isn’t whether they will all be extended but for how long.

President Obama’s only “line in the sand”, according to Gibbs, is opposition to a “permanent” extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

“The president’s principles are clear, and that is for the middle class their taxes can’t go up at the end of the year when a series of tax cuts expire. His other line in the sand, quite frankly George, is that many Republicans would like to see the tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires extended permanently,” he told me.

Everything else is on the table. So I asked Gibbs about a possible trade. Would the President swap a temporary extension of the tax cuts for passage of the START Treaty and extending unemployment benefits?

“Well, I want to put these two issues aside George, because I think that we have a responsibility, Democrats and Republicans, to figure out this tax issue by the end of the year when tax cuts are said to expire,” he said.

Read more: http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/12/robert-gibbs-signals-temporary-extension-of-all-tax-cuts.html

[rocktivity]

1. Well, how temporary is temporary?

Two years? Four? eight? And how does it help the economy?

:(
rocktivity

[Autumn]

9. Maybe two years might be my guess,

then when the pukes get the White House in 2012 they can make them permanent. I hear tell the tax breaks have been creating a LOT of jobs since Bush enacted them.:shrug:

[karynnj]

11. One or three might make more sense as 2 lands in the middle of a Presidential election

[subterranean]

15. That is precisely why the Republicans want it extended for 2 years.

They want to revive it as a campaign issue in the next election.

[No Elephants]

37. 0 years makes sense for America and Americans

[karynnj]

46. True - I was meaning if they had to have it - 2 is particularly bad

[Thor_MN]

63. I vote for -10 years....

Retroactively claw back the windfall that the rich got from Bush...

[COLGATE4]

33. The Italians said is best (and they really should know, being

the ultimate masters of the bureaucratic system): "Nothing is so permanent as something temporary". Just the shell game with us again.

[wordpix]

65. We have a chance here to run out the clock on the repukes & let the cuts expire

We have the ball but we're handing it to the other side :(

[IScreamSundays]

2. Sickening.

I just threw up in the back of my mouth.

[slackmaster]

17. I know. I might have to buy some Christmas presents for people after all.

:argh:

I was planning on having my federal taxes go up by about $200 per month starting in January. Now I have no excuse to be stingy.

[aquart]

3. I didn't vote for gutlessness in the White House.

[SkyDaddy7]

5. Would you be willing to take a huge increase in your taxes...

Just to prove a point? Would you be happy with Obama if he stood his ground and allowed everyone's taxes to go up? I hope your answer is yes because otherwise I simply do not see your point...Well, I think I do but I will let you speak for you. But PLEASE answer the question.

The President main concern is protecting the middle class from a tax increase & right now to do that he may have extend them across the board.

[PSPS]

10. Huge?

At most, it would amount to a 3% increase, and that's on the top bracket only. It's even less on the lower brackets.

[karynnj]

16. A 3% change in the effective rate would lead to you paying something like 16% more if you had 20K

taxable income - and that is the percent change people would speak of.

Here is a calculator where you can compare 2000 (before the taxes - which is where they will return) an 2010. http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm

For someone with $20,000 taxable income - the amount in 2000 would be 20000 * .15 = $3,000. In 2010, it is 8375*.1 + 11625*.15 = $2581. That is a difference of slightly less than $419.

As to huge, I would guess that to someone with a taxable income of $20,000, $419 is pretty significant - and more than 16% increase in what they paid - 3000 / 2581 = 1.16234018. (This is likely what people will compute as the % increase - not the amount that you get subtracting the effective rate paid on the taxable income - ie 15% versus 12.9%.)

[Winterblues]

14. Huge increase???

You mean back to the same as it was in the nineties when America was experiencing "The Greatest Economic Expansion in History"? Yep that would be terrible all right...

[blackspade]

20. Yes.

To answer your question.
I would rather the tax rate go up to the late 90s levels than give 4 trillion dollars over the next 10 years to rich bastards who will only pocket the money.

Clear enough for you?

[SammyWinstonJack]

35. Clear enough for me and I agree with you.

[brentspeak]

21. Answer: Let the Bush tax cuts expire and then introduce middle class tax cut-only legislation

Then watch as the Republicans are forced to cave or else be labeled the party that didn't want to give the middle class a tax cut.

Once upon a time, we used to have Democratic presidents who actually knew how to fight and get things done. However, that was a long time ago.

[EJSTES2005]

25. +111111

Wish I could rec your post!!!!!

[chimpymustgo]

28. Should have made it THE issue of the midterms, but we are clueless, spineless sellouts.

[No Elephants]

40. I don't believe that not knowing how to fight explains what goes on in D.C.

[CLANG]

45. That's the way I look at it

Let them all expire, then throw that yoke over the republicans

In 2012 - republicans wouldn't extend unemployment
- republicans wouldn't give a tax cut to 95% of Americans

and the list will go on and on...

[SkyDaddy7]

53. The Republicans would block it and...

the public would not bat an eyelid! Well, enough of the public to matter. You may not want to admit it but the Republicans via FOX "news" & talk radio have convinced most Americans (over half) that "Trickle Down" works!

I would love to be wrong but to see how the Republicans get away with SO MUCH in the public eye & it only took less than two years for Democrats to be punished. Seriously, think about that. This is why the GOP is so arrogant about blocking everything they know the public will not hold them accountable for not working in a bipartisan fashion for the next two years! Plus, they have a media empire that shapes the message in this country & the MSM reacts like the squirrel in "UP"! Maybe I am too cynical but this is how I see America right now!

[KoKo]

62. Yep....WHY is it they won't do that?

:shrug:

[slackmaster]

24. I was prepared for it, and had budgeted for it

Damned government keeps changing the rules.

[No Elephants]

38. LOL!

[closeupready]

47. Yes, absolutely, let my tax cuts expire.

We can't afford it for the wealthy, but more importantly, we can't afford it for anyone.

[SkyDaddy7]

50. I would have agreed with that not long ago...

But like Warren Buffett said the middle class has been robbed for the past 30yrs with the failed idea of trickle down that our taxes should be cut more & the taxes on the rich should be raised even higher than the 90's. I like that idea but I know it would NEVER pass.

The middle class needs help!

[closeupready]

54. Well if this is about what SHOULD happen, you're correct -

the middle class should be paying less and the rich should be paying far more than they are, I agree with that. And no, it's not going to happen anytime soon.

What I should have stated was that if the choice was between letting the tax cuts on everyone either expire or be extended, then I would say when the tax cuts as originally approved merely shifted the tax burden even further onto the middle class and off the rich, it would be better for the fiscal health of the US to let the BUSH tax cuts expire on everyone and then approve a middle-class tax cut later.

Peace.

[SkyDaddy7]

59. Something else...

Many here do not want to admit that this would be big tax increase on the middle class because they feel that would somehow be buying into the fallacy that the GOP is spreading...You know the story that goes "This HUGE TAX INCREASE will kill the economy!".

However, if you add up like Warren Buffet did the middle class is paying more in % of income than the rich...So, YES this would be yet another piece of straw on the camel's back! This is why I call it huge.

Sorry for the sloppy writing but I think you get my point...in a hurry wife yelling! LOL!

[Hawkowl]

57. Yes.

It would put the burden on the Rethuglicans. Dems could go on the TV 24/7 screaming how the rethugs won't pass middle class tax cuts.
Obama has got to be the most politically incompetent President in the last 100 years. What a legacy he is going to leave as the first African American president. Maybe we'll only remember him at his worst like similar to Colin Powell, who people will only remember as lying us into a disastrous, criminal war.

[Renew Deal]

7. Have you considered running for president?

Then you will never disagree with the president.

[Iowa]

56. Yep. It's pathetic. It's hard to imagine a weaker President.

[vi5]

4. "the presiden'ts principles are clear"

Hahahahaha....oh man. That's rich.

[Freetradesucks]

36. I caught that too.

Hilarious. He doesn't even know what his principles are.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. I, for one, am proud that our President is putting hyperpartisanship behind us

Now we'll be able to continue to enjoy the fruits of Bush's economy.

Remember, when the rich have more money, they give the extra - and more - to the rest of us. I know this is a complicated economic principle, but those on the Left need to look beyond their bitterness, and realize that people like Reagan, Summers, and Geithner have studied this more than they have - they know what's best for us.

[mike_c]

8. weak, weak, weak....

Sigh.

[ProSense]

12. Where is the signal?

The MSM keep spinning "opposition to a 'permanent' extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy" as a signal. It's a statement of opposition.

[subterranean]

13. The signal is in the word "permanent."

The president only said he opposes a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy. If he also opposed a temporary extension, he would have said so, or just left out the word "permanent."

[Cal Carpenter]

18. The rich are getting richer

so while the rest of us get poorer and poorer - not just relative to the rich but in real wages - and services are getting cut, we are amassing so much debt as a nation, the rich get to keep their tax cuts while they are still getting richer...

Fuck that shit man.

This is barely crumbs at this point. This is a joke.

TAX THE RICH.

[EJSTES2005]

19. Shocker.....This was LBN 3 weeks ago.......

and then they denied it......and now they admit it. what a bunch of fucking liars. I am so sick of this shit. How do these spineless dems get rolled by the repukes on every gdamed issue ? Like how he asks about a possible trade and obv Gibbs shoots that down knowing in due time we will just cave on all of them. WHAT THE FUCK

[kestrel91316]

22. "Temporary" probably means until 2012. Gee, THANKS.

Keep pandering to the RW and giving the 2%ers what they demand. That'll win ya friends.

[whathehell]

23. Does this mean he's gong to give in without even asking ANYTHING in return??

If that's true...Tell me there's a signpost up ahead...because I must have just entered the fucking twilight zone!:banghead:

[struggle4progress]

27. No, it means George needed a headline, and didn't care whether it matched the facts

[No Elephants]

39. We'll soon see.

[struggle4progress]

26. So George tried to get Robert to bite on a question, so George could spin out the

headline in the OP, but Robert didn't bite, so George used the headline away

[chimpymustgo]

29. You wanna BET what's going to happen here? Seriously. We've seen this Kabuki dance how many times

before with these weasels?

[JustAnotherGen]

30. Where's the negotiation

You 'wealthy folks' getting this 'tax cut' must create 5 million new jobs by November 30 2011 or we put a 20 year tax HIKE on you.

[Cal Carpenter]

48. Well then they'd have to admit it doesn't really work that way

Cutting taxes on the rich does NOT create jobs. Plain and simple.

[HughBeaumont]

49. Well, it sort of creates jobs . . . just not in this country.

And if such a proviso would be held over their heads, they would just either offshore or inshore the jobs they do create. "Hey . . . ya never said I had to pay an American living wage . . Ha ha ha ha ha, suckerrrrr . .."

[wordpix]

66. here it is: $700 billion in tax cuts for the rich for $18 billion in unemploymt benefits

That's fair, right? :crazy:

[Roland99]

31. Negotiating and backtracking from the outset. What a progressive administration!

[disillusioned73]

32. What a gutless administration..

:wtf:

[COLGATE4]

34. The Invertebrate-in-Chief.

[No Elephants]

41. ........

[CLANG]

42. I would rather them all expire than appease these fucks one more time!

[newscott]

43. Hooray for the rich!

[closeupready]

44. NO, dammit!

:mad:

[Doctor_J]

51. There we go. The last few Obama voters get tossed off the bus

Palin landslide expected.

[City Lights]

52. The president has a "line in the sand?"

Who knew?

:shrug:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

55. Bravo! That is fucking brilliant. So well played indeed. Now your opponents will have another

bullshit issue they can throw at you on election year. Why not cut the bullshit and make them permanent? At least we avoid this unnecessary drama.

[ProudDad]

58. "Change" you can believe in, eh?

The right-hand graph is the Obama/republican plan...


To put it into perspective: Median Income around $50,000 so average taxpayer would pay an extra $75 per month...on $4167 per month gross...


Oh, yeah, and another $1.7 trillion added to the debt...

[OlympicBrian]

60. How is this going to look for the deficit next year and our credit rating?

US bond rating agency Moody's warns, "extending the Bush tax cuts would be bad for the US credit rating."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/treasurys-pare-losses-after-data-2010-11-15?dist=afterbell

And they are talking about more spending and cuts on top of the above.

[KoKo]

61. Hell Yeah, Robert! But, we "Fucking Retard, Crazed Druggies" figured out the Kabuki Theater

do you aren't going to FOOL US TWICE!

[wordpix]

64. BOO! Once again, Dems "compromise" by going to the repuke side

:puke: I want my campaign donations back, Obama! I'm for Bernie Sanders next time around.

[last_texas_dem]

67. Wait, I thought all of our brilliant reps in DC were oh-so-very-concerned

about deficits?

[last_texas_dem]

68. Ooh, a dupe!