Sep 14, 2010
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
© 2023 Boston Globe
Derrick Z. Jackson
Derrick Z. Jackson is a 2018 winner from the National Society of Newspaper Columnists, a 10-time winner from the National Association of Black Journalists and a Pulitzer Prize finalist and co-author of Project Puffin: The Improbable Quest to Bring a Beloved Seabird Back to Egg Rock (2015).
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.
Derrick Z. Jackson
Derrick Z. Jackson is a 2018 winner from the National Society of Newspaper Columnists, a 10-time winner from the National Association of Black Journalists and a Pulitzer Prize finalist and co-author of Project Puffin: The Improbable Quest to Bring a Beloved Seabird Back to Egg Rock (2015).
Those attacks went nowhere in recent polls, with barely more than a third of Americans supporting tax cuts for the super rich. CBS
and Newsweek respectively found 56 and 52 percent of Americans
supporting eliminating tax cuts for households making above $250,000.
Gallup found that 44 percent supported expiration of the cuts for the
top 3 percent and 15 percent more wanted the tax cuts to expire across
the board.
That left a
defensive Boehner telling CBS's "Face the Nation'' on Sunday, "If the
only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I'll
vote for them . . . But I think that's bad policy . . . we've got to cut
spending.''
But lest you
think Obama is "winning'' and Boehner is "losing,'' the context of all
this must not be forgotten. America will lose no matter what. Obama is
still upholding one of the most regressive Republican fiscal policies in
modern times. Boehner complained Sunday that the Democrats "haven't
reached out to us for the last 20 months.'' But Obama more than reached
out as a candidate. Looking for that sweet center of middle-class
appeal, he promised, "If you make $250,000 or less, we will not raise
your taxes. We will cut your taxes.''
The cost of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts has been enormous and will continue to corrode the American economy.
In
2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities said that the Bush tax cuts "have been the single
largest contributor to the emergence of substantial budget deficits in
recent years.'' The center said the tax cuts added about $3 trillion to
deficits between 2001 and 2007.
Making
them all permanent, as the likes of Boehner would prefer, would cost
the Treasury $4.4 trillion over the decade, including interest on the
federal debt, the center said. The Tax Policy Center of the Brookings
Institution and the Urban Institute said that while Obama's pledge to
cut taxes was less than presidential rival John McCain's, Obama's plans
would still boost the federal deficit by $3.6 trillion by 2018 (McCain's
would have increased the debt by $5.1 trillion).
While
Obama is saying that repealing the tax cuts for the most wealthy
Americans will add $700 billion back to the Treasury, that only begins
to whittle away at the $4 trillion value of the cuts. Moreover, there is
no evidence that tax cuts did anything to boost either the economy or
personal wealth. According to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, median income in 2006 was $1,300 below its level before the
2001 cuts.
Yet, taxes are
such a third rail in American politics that Obama felt he had no choice
but to act Republican even as he was wooing liberals with his stances
on Iraq and the environment. There has never been an honest discussion
about what the tax cuts, even for the middle class, will cost us in the
long run.
Last week, the new
World Economic Forum's global competitiveness index found the United
States to be slipping in global competitiveness, with a major reason
being our huge deficits. Ending the tax cuts for the wealthy now is only
a first step. Ending the notion that tax cuts are good at all is the
next.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.