Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama’s Plan for Budget Would Shift Burden to Rich
NY Times ^ | February 25, 2009 | By JACKIE CALMES

Posted on 02/25/2009 2:57:21 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

WASHINGTON – President Obama will propose further tax increases on the affluent to help pay for his promise to make health care more accessible and affordable, administration officials said on Wednesday. [snip]

Mr. Obama will also propose in the budget outline he releases on Thursday to use revenues from the centerpiece of his environmental policy — a plan under which companies will have to purchase permits to exceed pollution emission caps — to pay for an extension of a two-year tax credit that benefits low and middle-income people.

The combined effect of the two proposals, on top of Mr. Obama’s existing plan to roll back the Bush-era income tax reductions on upper-income households, would be a pronounced move to redistribute wealth and reimpose a substantially larger share of the tax burden on the most affluent taxpayers.

Administration officials said the president would seek in the budget he releases on Thursday to cap itemized tax deductions for high-income people, such as couples earning more than about $250,000 a year.

The officials said the resulting revenues would account for about half of a $634 billion “reserve fund” that Mr. Obama will set aside in his budget to begin addressing health care. The other half would come from Medicare savings, including an end to billions of dollars in subsidies to insurance companies under the Medicare Advantage program, and other possible tax-law changes.

[snip]

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amerika; bho44; bhobudget; classwarfare; communism; marxism; obamarx; redistribution; serfdom; socialism; spreadthewealth; taxincrease; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
Redistribution of wealth/income on steroids.
1 posted on 02/25/2009 2:57:22 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Start shrugging.


2 posted on 02/25/2009 2:57:59 PM PST by dfwgator (1996 2006 2008 - Good Things Come in Threes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

High income earners are not “the rich”. We need to abolish the tax code and the IRS and tax spending in order to tax the cash economy, criminals, and the really rich.


3 posted on 02/25/2009 2:58:58 PM PST by austingirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

What happens when there are no more rich people?


4 posted on 02/25/2009 2:59:26 PM PST by Continental Soldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I’m just screwed. Time to retire.


5 posted on 02/25/2009 2:59:36 PM PST by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
"Obama’s Plan for Budget Would Shift Burden to Rich"

Who else to rob?

6 posted on 02/25/2009 3:00:49 PM PST by cweese (Hook 'em Horns!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Don’t worry...the rich have always found ways around burdensome tax policies. They will continue to do so (and I suspect the Obamas will be at the head of the charge). All this will prove to do is reduce revenues to the Treasury, because the vast majority of workers will stay under that $250,000 mark to avoid the bump in tax.

IOW, it won’t work.


7 posted on 02/25/2009 3:01:09 PM PST by erkyl (The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, stay neutral)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

If you outlaw the rich, only outlaws will be rich!


8 posted on 02/25/2009 3:02:50 PM PST by rfp1234 (Phodopus campbelli: household ruler since July 2007.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Hmmm... Let’s say I’m rich... The government is going to tax me up to 90% (Might as well listen to Biden - stupid but loves taxes). Just what should I do...hmmm..

Moving, or just moving money, or quit working, or quit hiring, so many choices... I just may wait until next month to make my decision.


9 posted on 02/25/2009 3:03:14 PM PST by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Sorry, 0’s plan will not touch the Kennedy’s, Kerry, Goldman Sachs execs, etc., and likewise old money tucked away in trusts and offshore accounts.


10 posted on 02/25/2009 3:03:48 PM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

So, umm, who is it that shoulders the majority me the budget now? The poor? Nope. But Obama is bringing change. Today’s change is that rich is now defined as a couple earning 250k. The next change will be even lower.


11 posted on 02/25/2009 3:05:03 PM PST by kingu (Party for rent - conservative opinions not required.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Shift?

SHIFT???

The structure of the US tax code has been SHIFTED against the "rich" for a very long time. Generations of Americans have grown up believing that progressive taxation is the way it should be.

Just imagine what the US would be like if wealth and achievement weren't punished!

12 posted on 02/25/2009 3:05:18 PM PST by TChris (So many useful idiots...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Shift?

You can’t “Shift” the burden to the wealthy when the non-wealthy pay nothing or get net checks already.


13 posted on 02/25/2009 3:05:35 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you are talking about Zimbabwe money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maggief
The burden was shifted to the rich most proficient wealth creators a long time ago.
14 posted on 02/25/2009 3:05:46 PM PST by Hoodat (For the weapons of our warfare are mighty in God for pulling down strongholds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

what a dumb headline. the poor pay nothing, much of the middle pays nothing in income taxes


15 posted on 02/25/2009 3:05:55 PM PST by GeronL (Hey, won't you be my Face Book friend??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Income couples making $250,000.00 this means if you are single and make $125,000.00 your taxes will go up as well


16 posted on 02/25/2009 3:06:06 PM PST by bzybee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Can someone explain to me how ANY progressive income tax is not un-fair discrimination/violation of the 14th Amendment, whereas different income earners are not "treated equally"?

True; we've had a progressive tax code for decades, but it's now runaway open season on success. There is NO WAY earning more should equate to higher tax bites (percentage-wise) and be "equal treatment under the law" in my book.

Worse yet is the handing out of this rapeage of high earners to the low-life that recieve 4th generation government assistane from it, and, even are "rebated" tax dollars they never paid!

17 posted on 02/25/2009 3:06:12 PM PST by traditional1 ("The American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

If he taxes these people he calls rich, then who the heck does he think is going to have money to spend to stimulate the economy? Create Jobs?
Obama is just a typical socialist. Tax and spend and tax and spend and the nation and the people suffer....


18 posted on 02/25/2009 3:06:26 PM PST by SECURE AMERICA (Coming to You From the Front Lines of Occupied America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Pretty sure that the taxes collected will be less with this plan. It’s pretty easy to hide money and defer profits. (Just a guess)


19 posted on 02/25/2009 3:06:53 PM PST by refermech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The “Rich” will soon be defined as anyone whose income doesn’t already come from the government...


20 posted on 02/25/2009 3:07:23 PM PST by philled ("I prefer messy democracy to the stability of tyrants." -- Howar Ziad, Iraqi Ambassador to Canada)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bzybee
Income couples making $250,000.00 this means if you are single and make $125,000.00 your taxes will go up as well

...for now...with the way they're spending, those numbers could come down fast.

21 posted on 02/25/2009 3:08:28 PM PST by BookmanTheJanitor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
Listen to the Beatles Taxman. It was written in the 60’s but is relevant today.

‘there's one for you nineteen for me’

‘if 5% should seem too small, be thankful I don't take it all’

We are heading in that direction. While working in Britain in the 80’s, I was making very low wages as my credentials didn't transfer there. My tax bite was 50%. Socialism is a pretty unhappy place for everyone involved. There are no Socialist Utopias in the world. Lots of people think there are, though.

22 posted on 02/25/2009 3:09:36 PM PST by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

It’s NOT going ot be taxing only those above $250K-

anyone want to bet on obamas threshold of being “rich”??

I’m guessing more like $150K


23 posted on 02/25/2009 3:09:47 PM PST by silverleaf (Freedom's just another word for "nothing left to lose")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I believe Biden’s money guy said this hits in 2011. My speculation is that, besides a funding source, it is also meant to suck up dollars to keep inflation down.


24 posted on 02/25/2009 3:10:39 PM PST by LZ_Bayonet (There's Always Something.............And there's always something worse!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Subjugation of the White Man.
The new slavery of the Obama era.

25 posted on 02/25/2009 3:10:50 PM PST by I see my hands (_8(|)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Continental Soldier
What happens when there are no more rich people?

Who is John Galt?
26 posted on 02/25/2009 3:11:07 PM PST by Cheerio (Barack Hussein 0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: philled

Now THAT is change I believe.


27 posted on 02/25/2009 3:11:11 PM PST by SueRae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TChris

This really burns me up. President Bush gave tax rate reductions to all taxpayers as well as I beleive eleiminated a few tax brackets for lower wage earners so some people pay nothing and they actually receive thousands of dollars back if they have kids and use an Earned (laughable)Income Credit. When I hear that Bush only gave tax breaks to the rich it is ridiculous he actually lowered the rates for everyone.


28 posted on 02/25/2009 3:12:57 PM PST by bzybee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: erkyl

Companies do not pay the taxes.....we pay the taxes. Raise the tax on a company and they will simply raise the cost of the products.


29 posted on 02/25/2009 3:14:12 PM PST by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Mr. Obama will also propose in the budget outline he releases on Thursday to use revenues from the centerpiece of his environmental policy — a plan under which companies will have to purchase permits to exceed pollution emission caps — to pay for an extension of a two-year tax credit that benefits low and middle-income people.

Not only is O and Co. claiming the revenue extorted from businesses to do business will be targeted toward a new specific spending program (revenue neutral) but then they have decided not to put that revenue towards the most obvious choice (global warming/green energy yuck yuck) but towards revenue loss programs, ie. welfare.

If anyone gets a chance to question a major member of the media then ask them how revenue raised from carbon credits should be used to pay for the revenue/moral loss of welfare.

30 posted on 02/25/2009 3:16:33 PM PST by torchthemummy (If You Still Have A TV Subscription You Are Funding The Socialist Takeover!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The US government collected the largest taxes ever under Bush because his tax cuts increased the economy.

I guess we’ll see if the democrat’s philosophy of doing the exact opposite will yield the exact opposite or the exact same.


31 posted on 02/25/2009 3:18:00 PM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

An accurate title would be:

Obama’s Plan for Budget Would Shift Burden to the People Who Create Jobs

Subheading: Thus Destroying Job Creation and Growth


32 posted on 02/25/2009 3:18:04 PM PST by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BookmanTheJanitor
Income couples making $250,000.00 this means if you are single and make $125,000.00 your taxes will go up as well ...for now...with the way they're spending, those numbers could come down fast.

They will calculate it on net worth as the Klinton was trying to do. Own a moderate home and a car? You are considered Rich. They will Tax workers down to what they deem National Poverty levels. One of the goals of Socialism is to equalize pay for the Serfs. Taxation is the tool they use.

33 posted on 02/25/2009 3:18:52 PM PST by jedi150
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye

Heh... Wait...Beatles are my generation (may not be yours). I’m way too familiar with the song and of course you’re right.

Taxes have been way too high now - much worse for the future.

Me, I think that I will play some of those Beatle songs and forget the disaster that is our current Presidency...

Hang tough...At least the Beatles saw what was coming in England...


34 posted on 02/25/2009 3:19:21 PM PST by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Drango

Same here. It would be SOOOO much cheaper to retire.

Of course, now that the 401Ks are gone, geeze.

This is BOs plan - to totally erode the economy, and he’s accomplished it in one month. Amazing.

Of course, he had a little help from a friend -GWB.


35 posted on 02/25/2009 3:19:29 PM PST by Reagan69 (No Representation without Taxation !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bzybee
When I hear that Bush only gave tax breaks to the rich it is ridiculous he actually lowered the rates for everyone.

Yes.

The absurdity of a graduated income tax system is obvious when you realize that even a "flat tax" is progressive!

A single percentage withheld from everyone, regardless of income, STILL hits you harder the more you earn.

Does a wealthy person use more of the nation's services than a poor one? No. But even with an "ideal" flat tax, he would pay more in taxes than one who earns less.

So, with that knowledge, to then INCREASE the percentage demanded of the wealthy is even worse.

36 posted on 02/25/2009 3:19:59 PM PST by TChris (So many useful idiots...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

You guys all miss the elephant in the room. Maybe Obama’s not as dumb as he seems.

What if hyperinflation triples prices and wages...then $250k will be simply middle class? It’s coming, but we will still have indexing to keep up with inflation? Big question.


37 posted on 02/25/2009 3:21:03 PM PST by BobL (Drop a comment: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2180357/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2

“Companies do not pay the taxes.....we pay the taxes. Raise the tax on a company and they will simply raise the cost of the products.”
.
It is amazing how many folk, usually liberals, do not understand that simple statement. Most liberals seem to think that anyone who hangs out a shingle and paints a name on a glass door is wealthy, and undeservedly so. It boggles the mind to think of how many shallow minds are in the gene pool.


38 posted on 02/25/2009 3:24:09 PM PST by ByteMercenary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
Nah, I'm a baby Boomer. Born in 1951. So many celebs left Britain in the 60-70s that the tax structure was revamped. But, trust me, Socialist taxes are still waaaaay to high. The Beatles songs are always a nice escape. We were so innocent and clueless then.
39 posted on 02/25/2009 3:24:15 PM PST by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

If I was rich, I’d simply quit and work at McDonald’s or something part-time. Why should I bust my ass for the gubmint? I’d make as little taxable income as possible.


40 posted on 02/25/2009 3:29:03 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (The Libertarian and Constitution Parties should merge into one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Obama’s Plan for Budget Would Shift Burden to Rich

If the top 5% are already paying 50% of the income taxes, how much more should they pay?

41 posted on 02/25/2009 3:30:12 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Continental Soldier

Tax the rich
Feed the poor
Til there are rich no more


42 posted on 02/25/2009 3:30:24 PM PST by A_Former_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: okie01
If the top 5% are already paying 50% of the income taxes, how much more should they pay?

That's an unpatriotic racist question. /sarc

43 posted on 02/25/2009 3:32:21 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer (The democRATS are near the tipping point.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Obama’s Plan for Budget Would Shift Burden to Rich

Rich = anyone not on welfare.

Never would have seen that coming!

44 posted on 02/25/2009 3:33:02 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: austingirl
High income earners are not “the rich”.

Exactly.

These are "the rich" and neither one of them has EVER paid a single dollar in Federal taxes on the $500 million forune that they BOTH married into and are now living off of while those of us who actually earn our money are taxed and taxed and taxed.


45 posted on 02/25/2009 3:33:29 PM PST by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye

Ha, got you by 6 years...heh. Yes, and what happened in England is about to occur here if they try to raise taxes to those levels... You and me have the experience to understand the disastrous results - government today - no chance...

Hey, at least I’m enjoying some 60’s music via your suggestions...heh.


46 posted on 02/25/2009 3:36:15 PM PST by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Who among you didn’t see this coming? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?


47 posted on 02/25/2009 3:37:39 PM PST by surely_you_jest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingu

I believe he said “family” earning $250,000. What constitutes a “family”? We must always listen closely when a democrat speaks.


48 posted on 02/25/2009 3:39:28 PM PST by Terry Mross (I Hate All Politicians, Republicans Included.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

That is exactly right. I really wish in any one of the press conferences that any reporter would state this fact, thus we can get to the real goal of redistribution.


49 posted on 02/25/2009 3:47:08 PM PST by fightin bronco (If you counted on America remaining passive...you counted wrong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"We don't have any positions for managers, right now."

"That's okay. I want the least possible amount of responsibility."

I always loved that line...

50 posted on 02/25/2009 4:01:05 PM PST by Clock King (Radical Conservatives, arise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson