Skip to comments.Fiscal Cliff: Majorities Only Favor Solutions Impacting the Wealthy
Posted on 12/14/2012 9:24:45 AM PST by SeekAndFind
A poll by Pew Research Center shows that majorities of Americans only favor solutions that impact wealthy Americans to reduce the national debt and avoid the "fiscal cliff."
Pew provided respondents with 12 deficit reduction options and asked if they approved or disapproved of each option. Majorities approved of five of the options: raise taxes on income over $250,000 (69 percent), limit deductions a taxpayer can claim (54 percent), raise the tax rate on investment income (52 percent), reduce Medicare benefits for higher income seniors (51 percent), and reduce Social Security benefits for higher income seniors (51 percent).
Deficit reduction solutions that impact a broader range of Americans received less support. The options that majorities disapproved included: reduce military spending (55 percent), gradually raise Social Security retirement age (56 percent), gradually raise Medicare retirement age (56 percent), and limit the home mortgage deduction (52 percent).
If congressional Republicans and President Barack Obama do not reach an agreement on long-term deficit reduction, taxes will go up for all income groups and spending will be cut for military defense and other non-entitlement programs.
The programs that Americans most disapprove of cutting would be cut if the fiscal cliff is not avoided -- funding to help lower-income Americans (58 percent), for roads and transportation (67 percent), and for education (77 percent).
The poll suggests that Democrats have an advantage in the current negotiations. They mostly want to increase taxes on the wealthy while Republicans mostly want to cut spending and reform entitlements. Republicans have, though, suggested means testing Social Security and Medicare benefits.
Most Americans, 55 percent, also believe that Obama is making a serious effort to reach an agreement, but only 32 percent believe the same about Republican leaders.
The Dec. 5-9 poll of 1,503 adults has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.
They’ve successfully rolled more than half the country into the “Eat The Rich” column. We are now officially Europe.
I believe this poll is correct.
It’s human nature. it’s easy to demand your fellow man’s economics get destroyed and not yours
However, Americans are also not living in reality
Taxing the “rich” will make little difference on the deficit. Obama’s tax increase on those making above $200,000 will raise about $68 billion per year, but we are borrowing $4.6 billion per day so that tax increase covers less than two weeks of spending. The sheeple will soon find that funding the governments insatiable appetite for taxes will mean more than the “rich” will see huge tax increases.
First, you cannot trust Pew.
Second, the republicans have done nothing effective to counter an Obama media blitz.
Third, whatever the reason, whatever the polls, taxing the rich can’t solve the problems so for the good of the country other solutions are needed.
We’re just witnessing the reason not to go down this liberal road in the first place.
RE: First, you cannot trust Pew.
They turned out to be more accurate in November 2012 than either Rasmussen or Gallup. The election results bear them out.
America has changed man. This is not the same America a generation ago when Reagan defeated Carter.
You mean a tax increase on the rich but an “obama tax cut” for everyone else? What happened to the “Bush tax cuts”?
Isn’t human nature reality?
The bad news is we’re all “rich.”
Slow learning party?
Here's one not to waste money on taking:
Which would you rather have the gubment do to reduce the deficit:
a) Raise taxes on those making much more than you?
b) Raise the age you get medicare till 70 yrso?
c) Raise taxes on YOU??
Remember how fun the R primary was? I mean we got to imagine a country sooo different for a few months or so.
It’s the Willie Sutton solution.
[William “Willie” Sutton (June 30, 1901 November 2, 1980) was a prolific U.S. ... legend that he said that he robbed banks “because that’s where the money is.” ...]
I guaran-dang-tee you that we’re going to end up applying FICA taxes to every last penny of income above $110K. There is simply no political will for any other solution to the Social Security crisis.
Never thought I would be no longer be proud to be an American. The Country lost the Constitution and many no longer believe in our foundation of Christian principles.
Your cartoon reminds me of “Der Besuch die Alte Dame.” I majored in German, had to read the screenplay as part of my German literature class. Read the plot summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Visit
Obama will place taxes on all people not just the rich.He ran up the debt and out of money to pay for it.
The fail light is on for socialism,bend over.
No it’s not. The REAL money is in the middle class. You could take every buck the top 2 % earn and it won’t dent the deficit.
Personally, as an ER doc, if my taxes are going up , my work hours are going down. Screw it. Not gonna work all those weekends nights and holidays so I can pay for EBTs and Obamaphones.
The majority are ignorant idiots.
History has shown unequivocally that socking it to the wealthy has always filtered down to everybody.
Except the parasite class; e.g. professional parasites and unions.
Of course these latter will ALWAYS vote to soak the productive.
Well... yes; perhaps the phrase should be "rational reality."
It's hardly rational when everybody must lose.
Except the more equal than others folks... they assume
RE: Which would you rather have the gubment do to reduce the deficit:
a) Raise taxes on those making much more than you?
b) Raise the age you get medicare till 70 yr so?
c) Raise taxes on YOU??
Where’s the choice about REDUCING SPENDING?
RE: Taxing the rich will make little difference on the deficit.
People should understand this ( but most prefer not to ): OBAMA IS NOT INTERESTED IN BRINGING DOWN THE DEBT OR THE DEFICIT.
How do I know this? HE SAID SO.
Here is a partial transcript of Charles Gibson’s interview with Obama on April 2008:
GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, “I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton,” which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.
But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.
GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
How about Obama’s exchange with Joe the Plumber?
“Im getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year,” Wurzelbacher said. “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isnt it?”
Obama said, “First off, you would get a 50% tax credit so youd get a tax cut for your healthcare costs .. if your revenue is above 250 then from 250 down, your taxes are going to stay the same. It is true that from 250 up from 250 300 or so, so for that additional amount, youd go from 36 to 39%, which is what it was under Bill Clinton. And the reason why were doing that is because 95% of small businesses make less than 250. So what I want to do is give them a tax cut. I want to give all these folks who are bus drivers, teachers, auto workers who make less, I want to give them a tax cut. And so what were doing is, we are saying that folks who make more than 250 that that marginal amount above 250 theyre gonna be taxed at a 39 instead of a 36% rate.
Responded Wurzelbacher, “the reason I ask you about the American dream, I mean Ive worked hard. Im a plumber. I work 10-12 hours a day and Im buying this company and Im going to continue working that way. Im getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American dream.”
“Well,” said Obama, “heres a way of thinking about it. How long have been a plumber?”
Wurzelbacher said 15 years.
Obama says, Over the last 15 years, when you werent making 250, you would have been given a tax cut from me, so youd actually have more money, which means you would have saved more, which means you would have gotten to the point where you could build your small business quicker than under the current tax code. So there are two ways of looking at it I mean one way of looking at it is, now that youve become more successful through hard work you dont want to be taxed as much.
Exactly,” Wurzelbacher said.
Obama continued, But another way of looking at it is 95% of folks who are making less than 250, they may be working hard too, but theyre being taxed at a higher rate than they would be under mine. So what Im doing is, put yourself back 10 years ago when you were only making whatever, 60 or 70. Under my tax plan you would be keeping more of your paycheck, youd be paying lower taxes, which means you would have saved Now look, nobody likes high taxes.”
“No,” said Wurzelbacher.
“Of course not,” said Obama. “But whats happened is that we end up weve cut taxes a lot for folks like me who make a lot more than 250. We havent given a break to folks who make less, and as a consequence, the average wage and income for ordinary folks, the vast majority of Americans, has actually gone down over the last eight years. So all I want to do is Ive got a tax cut. The only thing that changes, is Im gonna cut taxes a little bit more for the folks who are most in need and for the 5% of the folks who are doing very well even though theyve been working hard and I appreciate that I just want to make sure theyre paying a little bit more in order to pay for those other tax cuts. Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear its not that I want to punish your success I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you that theyve got a chance at success too.
Wurzelbacher said it seemed as though Obama might support a flat tax.
Obama says, you know, I would be open to it except heres the problem with a flat tax is that if you actually put a flat tax together, in order for it to work and replace all the revenue that weve got, youd probably end up having to make it like about a 40% sales tax. I mean thats the value added, making it up. Now some people say 23 or 25, but in truth when you add up all the revenue that would need to be raised, youd have to slap on a whole bunch of sales taxes on. And I do believe for folks like me who have worked hard, but frankly also been lucky, I dont mind paying just a little bit more than the waitress that I just met over there whos things are slow and she can barely make the rent.”
Obama said, “My attitude is that if the economys good for folks from the bottom up, its gonna be good for everybody. If youve got a plumbing business, youre gonna be better off if youre gonna be better off if youve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybodys so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, its good for everybody.”
So, it’s NOT about bringing the deficit or the debt down. It’s about his notion of FAIRNESS and how it is to be achieved — VIA GOVERNMENT REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH.
Just keep that in mind and you begin to understand where Obama is coming from.
HE COULD CARE LESS ABOUT OUR DEFICIT OR DEBT.
If REDUCING SPENDING was a popular choice then it wouldnt have skyrocketed under the last two term R POTUS GWB (with his own congress), and his dad.
Reducing waste, fraud and abuse always seems to poll well, problem is waste fraud and abuse is what the gubmnt does best.
Ask your kids which one would pick one if they had to:
1) choose less Christmas presents for themselves this year
2) over more credit card debt for you, or
3) you making bigger CC payments next year.
I understand judging what appears to be someone’s reality as rational or irrational from an observers standpoint, but can an individual’s reality be irrational to himself?