Most in US won't be able to escape 'fiscal cliff'

I see the Clinton Myth still flies , as well as , no better than current smoke and mirrors in chief ......:)

Bushy's tax plan is to expire as planned , amongst a multitude of bad acting ,finger pointing and responsibilty meandering as representatives from all 57 states try to figure out how to introduce a national Vat.

:)

..a very large +1 here
 
-- Today's last day for the members of the US congress to get their act together.

* Can someone please tell me why the Republicans don't want any taxes for the rich?
{In France the rich pay at least 75% tax, and up to 85%.} ...See Gerard Depardieu (fiscal exile).
 
-- Today's last day for the members of the US congress to get their act together.

* Can someone please tell me why the Republicans don't want any taxes for the rich?
{In France the rich pay at least 75% tax, and up to 85%.} ...See Gerard Depardieu (fiscal exile).

First off the 75% tax in France has been overturned in court, secondly, the repubs have agreed to tax hikes. The only problem, democrats don't want to apply the new tax revenues to the national debt. They want to use them for more spending. Shame on the democrats. They continue to drive this economy into the ground.
 
-- Still though, the US is a much better country .... than the type of laws they have in Russia, China, India, .....

Well of course it is. Sometimes our system works well with both sides coming to a conscensus. This century hasn't seen that type of congress. It's all about politics of division.
 
Fiscal cliff deal heads to House after Senate vote

WASHINGTON --Legislation to negate a fiscal cliff of across-the-board tax increases and sweeping spending cuts to the Pentagon and other government agencies is headed to the GOP-dominated House after bipartisan, middle-of-the-night approval in the Senate capped a New Year's Eve drama unlike any other in the annals of Congress.





The measure cleared the Senate on an 89-8 vote early Tuesday, hours after Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky sealed a deal.

It would prevent middle-class taxes from going up but would raise rates on higher incomes. It would also block spending cuts for two months, extend unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless, prevent a 27 percent cut in fees for doctors who treat Medicare patients and prevent a spike in milk prices.

The measure ensures that lawmakers will have to revisit difficult budget questions in just a few weeks, as relief from painful spending cuts expires and the government requires an increase in its borrowing cap.

House Speaker John Boehner pointedly refrained from endorsing the agreement, though he's promised a vote on it or a GOP alternative right away. But he was expected to encounter opposition from House conservatives.

"It's three strikes in my book and I'll be voting no on this bill," Rep. Tim Huelskamp told CNN Tuesday morning. Huelskamp says the legislation would impose a hardship on small businesses around the country and falls short of addressing the need for cuts in spending.

Cordes reports that Democrats expect almost all of their members to vote in favor of the deal.

The measure is the first significant bipartisan tax increase since 1990, when former President George H.W. Bush violated his "read my lips" promise on taxes. It would raise an additional $620 billion over the coming decade when compared with revenues after tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003, during the Bush administration. But because those policies expired at midnight Monday, the measure is officially scored as a whopping $3.9 trillion tax cut over the next decade.

President Obama praised the agreement after the Senate's vote.

"While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country and the House should pass it without delay," Mr. Obama said in a statement. "This agreement will also grow the economy and shrink our deficits in a balanced way — by investing in our middle class, and by asking the wealthy to pay a little more."

The sweeping Senate vote exceeded expectations — tea party conservatives like Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., backed the measure — and would appear to grease enactment of the measure despite lingering questions in the House, where conservative forces sank a recent bid by Boehner to permit tax rates on incomes exceeding $1 million to go back to Clinton-era levels.

"Decisions about whether the House will seek to accept or promptly amend the measure will not be made until House members — and the American people — have been able to review the legislation," said a statement by Boehner and other top GOP leaders.

Lawmakers hope to resolve any uncertainty over the fiscal cliff before financial markets reopen Wednesday. It could take lots of Democratic votes to pass the measure and overcome opposition from tea party lawmakers.

Under the Senate deal, taxes would remain steady for the middle class but rise at incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples — levels higher than Mr. Obama had campaigned for in his successful drive for a second term in office. Some liberal Democrats were disappointed that the White House did not stick to a harder line, while other Democrats sided with Republicans to force the White House to partially retreat on increases in taxes on multi-million-dollar estates.

The measure also allocates $24 billion in spending cuts and new revenues to defer, for two months, some $109 billion worth of automatic spending cuts that were set to slap the Pentagon and domestic programs starting this week. That would allow the White House and lawmakers time to regroup before plunging very quickly into a new round of budget brinkmanship, certain to revolve around Republican calls to rein in the cost of Medicare and other government benefit programs.

Officials also decided at the last minute to use the measure to prevent a $900 pay raise for lawmakers due to take effect this spring.

Even by the dysfunctional standards of government-by-gridlock, the activity at both ends of historic Pennsylvania Avenue was remarkable as the administration and lawmakers spent the final hours of 2012 haggling over long-festering differences.

Republicans said McConnell and Biden had struck an agreement Sunday night but that Democrats pulled back Monday morning. Democrats like Tom Harkin of Iowa said the agreement was too generous to upper-bracket earners. Mr. Obama's longstanding position was to push the top tax rate on family income exceeding $250,000 from 35 percent to 39 percent.

"No deal is better than a bad deal. And this look like a very bad deal," said Harkin.

The measure would raise the top tax rate on large estates to 40 percent, with a $5 million exemption on estates inherited from individuals and a $10 million exemption on family estates. At the insistence of Republicans and some Democrats, the exemption levels would be indexed for inflation.

Taxes on capital gains and dividends over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples would be taxed at 20 percent, up from 15 percent.

The bill would also extend jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed for an additional year at a cost of $30 billion, and would spend $31 billion to prevent a 27 percent cut in Medicare payments to doctors.

Another $64 billion would go to renew tax breaks for businesses and for renewable energy purposes, like tax credits for energy-efficient appliances.

Despite bitter battling over taxes in the campaign, even die-hard conservatives endorsed the measure, arguing that the alternative was to raise taxes on virtually every earner.

"I reluctantly supported it because it sets in stone lower tax rates for roughly 99 percent of American taxpayers," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "With millions of Americans watching Washington with anger, frustration and anxiety that their taxes will skyrocket, this is the best course of action we can take to protect as many people as possible from massive tax hikes."
 
Hillarious ,

You cant TAX THE RICH !!!!

All tax burdens are paid for by the middleclass and the poor , only fools vote to give their meandering backstabbing double talking leeches of government more power to tax and control...

Yeah i said it ..:)

-- Today's last day for the members of the US congress to get their act together.

* Can someone please tell me why the Republicans don't want any taxes for the rich?
{In France the rich pay at least 75% tax, and up to 85%.} ...See Gerard Depardieu (fiscal exile).
 
I dont think youre far from the truth :D in europe they walk like sheep after brussels which is only after their money and above that Control
Hillarious ,

You cant TAX THE RICH !!!!

All tax burdens are paid for by the middleclass and the poor , only fools vote to give their meandering backstabbing double talking leeches of government more power to tax and control...

Yeah i said it ..:)
 
Despite deal, taxes to rise for most Americans

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER AP...

WASHINGTON — While the tax package that Congress passed New Year's Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.

That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.

The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of American households will face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the agreement negotiated between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans. High-income families will feel the biggest tax increases, but many middle- and low-income families will pay higher taxes too.

Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.

"For most people, it's just the payroll tax," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

The tax increases could be a lot higher. A huge package of tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush was scheduled to expire Tuesday as part of the "fiscal cliff." The Bush-era tax cuts lowered taxes for families at every income level, reduced investment taxes and the estate tax, and enhanced a number of tax credits, including a $1,000-per-child credit.

The package passed Tuesday by the Senate and House extends most the Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000.

Obama said the deal "protects 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small business owners from a middle-class tax hike. While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country."

The income threshold covers more than 99 percent of all households, exceeding Obama's claim, according to the Tax Policy Center. However, the increase in payroll taxes will hit nearly every wage earner.

Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers paying the other half. Obama and Congress reduced the share paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year.

Obama pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and to extend it through 2012. But it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general agreement to let it expire.

The new tax package would increase the income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent on income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples. Investment taxes would increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket.

High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama's 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.

Together, the new tax package and Obama's health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families.

For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341.

"If you're rich, you're almost certain to get a big tax increase," Williams said.
 
I'm not sure how I can participate in this thread without getting 'political.' I will note that in reading the most recent installment of Caro's biography of Lyndon Johnson, the same issues (with lower numbers) existed- gridlock, partisan bickering, and no leadership, except Johnson knew how to wheel and deal (and Kennedy was naive in how to work behind the scenes).
I don't care about a higher tax bite. I do care about all the waste and unnecessary government. You can delete the last line if this is inappropriate.
 
The deal is a fair one tax wise:
estate/gift tax up to 40% instead of 55% on estates over $5million as proposed
Cap gains/ Dividends at 20% instead of 39% as proposed
All permanent !

This is good news for the economy and small to medium size businesses, in addition to wealthy individuals.
 
I read tax-hikes for middle-income earners will rise around $600 to $800, or somewhere in that vicinity. That's a good chuck of extra change to cough up. Surely they can't be overly pleased?
 
Am I correct in the assumption that REPs want additional revenue to go towards paying the national debt, and DEM's to use it for spending?
 
The deal is a fair one tax wise:
estate/gift tax up to 40% instead of 55% on estates over $5million as proposed
Cap gains/ Dividends at 20% instead of 39% as proposed
All permanent !

This is good news for the economy and small to medium size businesses, in addition to wealthy individuals.

While i can agree it is better than What was originally proposed or the worst case scenario , I'm against any and all tax increases after acknowledging the high level of corruption and waste currently in our political system, one just had to look at the monies spent on the last presidential election , quid pro quo is near banana republic levels ...

Personally they can go **** themselves ...!!!

Ahh , yes , what is amiable now is just the opening for approval for more later, These basturds want their monies (yes they actually think its theirs) and there will be no brakes applied ...
 
Am I correct in the assumption that REPs want additional revenue to go towards paying the national debt, and DEM's to use it for spending?

As i understand it, the tax increases will be used to offset the tax breaks for now, rather than reduce the deficit or continued borrowing- the government takes in 7 and spends 11. Congress has decided to defer addressing the spending cuts for another couple months- sort of kick the can down the road.
My question- since the 'fiscal cliff' was itself a way of avoiding hard decisions at the time- well over a year ago, with the notion that draconian cuts would occur unless somebody really thought this through and came up with a plan, what has everybody been doing for the last year plus? All the drama in the last couple days is hardly thoughtful planning, but panic mode fire fighting. A business would have called in all department heads and said, 'come up with a plan.' Let the various 'departments' figure out where the fat is, and how to make things more efficient. Politicians are really incapable of doing this. I know Simpson-Bowles had problems but after that got ignored, I don't think there was a serious effort to address this.
The interesting thing about the reference to Lyndon Johnson was that he worked the phones, he knew what was needed to get things passed in Congress, and made the compromises necessary to pass a budget and get the tax cuts that were on the table at the time, all of which had been logjammed because Kennedy just assumed that Congress would function on the merits. It doesn't. That's where leadership and the ability to work the system come in.
The big concern, I guess, if we really went off the cliff was that it would put us 'back' into a recession. Frankly, I don't think we are out of a recession, but the truth is not something that's easy to get at.
 
Just take 80% of you incomes as they do with ours and if there's anything left over, then give it back as free hospital care, free dental,free college etc. We can send one of our previous ministers of finance to help you do it. ;)
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu