WaPo/ABC poll: Six in ten favor raising taxes on $250K+ households for fiscal-cliff solution

posted at 12:11 pm on November 28, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Well, that $80 billion a year will come in handy, no?  That’s the impression that six in ten Americans have as a solution to the trillion-dollar deficits in the latest Washington Post/ABC poll — and 39% of Republicans, too.  The result demonstrates the political leverage of Democrats in the fiscal-cliff fight, and perhaps the leeway for the House GOP to compromise as well:

Sixty percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll support raising taxes on incomes more than $250,000 a year, long a popular option overall, but also a divisive one: While 73 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents are in favor, far fewer Republicans, 39 percent, agree.

Interestingly, the move to limit deductions doesn’t get nearly as much support:

Americans divide on another item on the table, reducing income-tax deductions. In a question testing the concept generally – that is, without suggesting that wealthier Americans would be harder hit – 49 percent oppose limiting deductions, while 44 percent are in favor. On this option, strong opposition exceeds strong support, although intensity isn’t high on either side, 28 vs. 20 percent.

Partisan divisions on this question are less pronounced than they are on a tax hike for the better-off: Support ranges from 45 percent of Democrats and independents to 39 percent of Republicans; opposition, 48 to 51 percent across these groups. “Strong” opposition, likewise, is similar across partisan groups, 26 to 30 percent.

Does that make any sense at all?  Part of the problem with the tax rates, from the populist point of view, is that the wealthy are perceived to have too many ways around them.  That’s why Mitt Romney belatedly took up the cause of limiting deductions to a capped amount.  That way one can limit the ability to shield income without having unpleasant conversations about the distortions provided by certain types of deductions.

Peter Orszag writes today at Bloomberg that these unpleasant conversations are the reason we won’t see deduction reform, even with a cap:

Let’s take a closer look at the effects of such a limit, though. In 2009, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service, taxpayers who itemized their deductions and had incomes of more than $200,000 had average deductions of $50,000 or more. For those with $200,000 to $500,000 in income, average deductions amounted to more than $51,000; from $500,000 to $1 million in income, the average was more than $100,000. At higher incomes, the averages rose further.

That households with incomes of more than $200,000 would be disproportionately affected by the deduction limit is neither surprising nor necessarily troublesome. Here comes the problem. In 2009, those taxpayers deducted more than $300 billion, 90 percent of which came from just three categories: taxes paid (mostly state and local taxes), home-mortgage interest and charitable contributions.

Of the big three, charitable giving is the most discretionary (unless a family moves to a smaller house with a smaller mortgage, or a city or state with lower taxes). The charitable sector thus has the most to lose from a limitation on itemized deductions.

How much money is involved? In 2009, households with incomes of more than $200,000 claimed almost $60 billion in charitable deductions — or about 20 percent of total charitable giving in the U.S. that year. Households with incomes of more than $10 million claimed an average of $1.75 million each in charitable donations in 2009, and they accounted for roughly 5 percent of all giving.

Charitable giving reacts to tax incentives, and in response to any limits on deductions it could even fall by about the same amount as the increase in the tax bill, according to John List of theUniversity of Chicago, who recently reviewed the literature on this subject. Other studies have suggested an effect about half as large. Even that smaller estimate, though, suggests that limiting deductions to $50,000 a year could easily reduce giving by tens of billions of dollars.

How long do you think it will take the charitable sector to figure this out?

Well, how about some simple entitlement reform — like raising the retirement eligibility age?  That’s the most unpopular option of all, opposed by two-thirds of Democrats and Republicans:

Sixty-seven percent in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, oppose another suggestion, raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67.  And on this idea, strong opposition surpasses strong support by more than 3-1, 49 to 14 percent.

Opposition to increasing the Medicare eligibility age crosses partisan and ideological lines; it’s 68 percent or more among Democrats and Republicans and liberals and conservatives alike. Instead views relate to age; opposition peaks at 78 percent among adults age 50-64. It’s also higher among women and people with less than $100,000 incomes, compared with men and the better-off.

Terrific.  The only broad consensus for action is the populist tax-hike option which will solve less than 10% of the problem, and two-thirds won’t even take a basic step like mildly indexing retirement eligibility to life expectancy in order to reduce costs in the biggest fiscal train wreck of the federal budget.

If we could trade marginal tax-rate increases for real cuts in spending and actual entitlement reform that would end the long-term problems in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, I’d take that trade, if somewhat reluctantly.  This poll shows that Americans still have not come to grips with the scope and size of the problem … or even basic math.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Well for those “employees” who work for one of the richy rich’s…’let them eat cake’.

wsucoug on November 28, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Well, that $80 billion a year will come in handy, no?

Except those tax increases won’t yield $80 billion for at least three interdependent and overlapping reasons. And they will cause increase federal expenditures.

1) They will drive unemployment up from what it would otherwise be, reducing tax revenue from the employed and increasing government unemployment related expenditures.

2) Most of the “wealthy” will take steps to reduce their taxable income. There are many ways to do this, and all of them will reduce economic activity.

3) They will drive the GDP lower as assets are shifted to less productive non-income generating investments wherever they may be, including overseas.

The net effect will be no be either no change in the deficit or an increase, no change in the GDP or a decrease, and no change in unemployment or an increase. The regime will try to mitigate and hide this in the short term by printing more money, further debasing the dollar and fueling inflation. Dear Leader’s beloved middle class will get screwed by that right along with the “wealthy”.

It is a purely putative class warfare measure that will negatively impact the economy and economic activity.

Further increasing taxes on anyone in this economy (Obamacare already increases taxes) will only redirect us towards and apply the throttle at another cliff, a financial one.

farsighted on November 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM

“Solution”?? If only the media would report that what we really have is a spending problem. I’m reminded of the “eat the rich” video by Bill Whittle.

tommer74 on November 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM

PAPER: Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50% tax rate…

CoffeeLover on November 28, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Oh great, this means we can spend more money on pork in our districts. yay!

jake49 on November 28, 2012 at 1:04 PM

OT: Ebay Yanks Beck’s ‘Obama in Pee Pee’ Art Project Meant to Raise Money for Charity

LMAO!

tom daschle concerned on November 28, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Such B.S. No one I know believes that 250k a year amounts to being “rich”. The Hollywood “elite”, the musicians that have made it and the uber wealthy leftists qualify as rich.

totherightofthem on November 28, 2012 at 1:07 PM

There is an inverse relation between Obama and America. A seeming paradox in that a weaker America means a stronger Obama (and vice versa). But it is easily explained-Obama draws most of his voters from the poor and lower middle class. The more Obama fails the more people are driven down into poverty. This means more people than ever are dependent on government subsidies and are likely to vote for Obama. This schema should work just as well for Obama’s successors.

MaiDee on November 28, 2012 at 1:07 PM

6 in 10 also believe in fairies & unicorns ….

What this means (IMO) is there will be no “solution” because a majority of our fellow citizens don’t believe there is a problem. We’re telling them “We have to act now, before it’s too late.”

They don’t think “too late” is ever going to arrive. People have been talking about Social Security, Medicare and deficits on this scale being unsustainable for years – “but we’re still here.”

Or they don’t give a rat’s rear end about the next generation. “I’ve ‘earned’ it and it’ll hold together until I’m gone … after that, I don’t care what happens.”

This doesn’t get “fixed” until fixing it is the only choice. As Churchill said (paraphrasing here), Americans will do the right thing after we exhaust all other alternatives.

BD57 on November 28, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Well, how about some simple entitlement reform — like raising the retirement eligibility age? That’s the most unpopular option of all, opposed by two-thirds of Democrats and Republicans:

Sixty-seven percent in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates, oppose another suggestion, raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67. And on this idea, strong opposition surpasses strong support by more than 3-1, 49 to 14 percent.

Ed, you’re misstating the findings here. The poll did not ask about raising the retirement age; it asked about raising the age for Medicaid eligibility. These are two very different things. It is difficult if not impossible for someone over the age of 60 to get affordable health insurance coverage in the private insurance market. With the GOP threatening to limit/repeal Obamacare, can you blame seniors for not wanting to delay their eligibility for coverage under Medicare?

cam2 on November 28, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Well for those “employees” who work for one of the richy rich’s…’let them eat cake’.

wsucoug on November 28, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Twinkies=Cake… Cake no longer available

SWalker on November 28, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Sorry, I meant Medicare eligibility.

cam2 on November 28, 2012 at 1:10 PM

If you are not paying taxes now, under the George Bush tax rates, you are NOT MIDDLE CLASS. If you get the Earned Income credit, YOU ARE NOT MIDDLE CLASS. If you are eating on food stamps, bless you, YOU are NOT middle class.

Fleuries on November 28, 2012 at 1:11 PM

So we raise taxes for money spent 10 years ago. Makes sense.

rickyricardo on November 28, 2012 at 1:12 PM

In the meanwhile, row, row, row your boat…off the cliff.

Schadenfreude on November 28, 2012 at 1:16 PM

If we could trade marginal tax-rate increases for real cuts in spending and actual entitlement reform that would end the long-term problems in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, I’d take that trade, if somewhat reluctantly. This poll shows that Americans still have not come to grips with the scope and size of the problem … or even basic math.

Been there, done that, got the footprints-on-the-back T-shirt from 1986. You know damn well the Rats won’t cut non-defense spending.

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Heh

Schadenfreude on November 28, 2012 at 1:19 PM

“Tax and spend liberal” used to be an effective term of opprobrium and a kiss of death. Now it gets you elected. We really are done, at least for now. America may reemerge but only after the fire, and from the ashes.

rrpjr on November 28, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Something seems odd here. I thought Bush = Bad.

If these are the “Bush” tax cuts, shouldn’t Obama want them to go away? You mean they were a good idea, just not for rich people?

Is that what he’s saying? I’m never sure but it sounds like it.

IndieDogg on November 28, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Parameters of the situation.

1). The Left won, the means may be argued, but they won.
2). Boehner’s surrender on sequestration set it up so that no matter what, taxes are going up, and defense is going to be slashed.
3). All the Left has to do is refuse to cooperate, with the willing assistance from the government-controlled media, they win.
4). Given Boehner’s and the Institutional Republicans’ history, all they can do by negotiating is allow the blame for everything that follows to be placed on Conservatives.
5). Therefore, since taxes are going up anyway, and defense is going to be slashed anyway, the only rational response is to try to let the Left have all the credit and responsibility. Probably will not work, but it saves the effort that would otherwise be wasted.
6). Yes, it will devastate small businesses. They are going to be devastated anyway. In my small town, the smart Kulaks have been shutting down since November 6, because they can see the writing on the wall. I personally know of 6 small businesses shutting down because they know the inevitable taxes and Obamacare makes business survival impossible for them. The $250 K is not the rich, and it is moving downward, inevitably.
7). We know, from where Obama got his support and money, that the “rich” actually sided with the Left. Our goal should be to make them pay the cost of their support. When the second round of tax increases post-Cliff comes up, we need to make sure that they pay. Cap deductions based on income, remove the deductability for state and local taxes so that Blue States are no longer subsidized by the rest of us, place mandates on non-profits and foundations so that they can’t use their accumulated wealth to support the rich and the Left forever, place the media industries and their stars under the same tax laws as the rest of us [under the accounting rules they are allowed to use, taxable profits are minimal; under current tax law the movie "The Empire Strikes Back" has yet to show a profit].
8). Will #7 cure our fiscal problems? Hell,no! But it will make the pain affect the Enemy’s base too. It will weaken them and their position after the collapse.
9). And yes, the collapse is coming. With the re-selection of Obama, a Democrat Senate that ignores the Constitution, and the deliberate incompetence of the Institutional Republicans; we are going to crash, hard.
10). AFTER the crash, there is a miniscule chance that we will be able rebuild something. If we are lucky, it will resemble a Constitutional Republic. But don’t bet on it.
11). Therefore, there is no point in trying to save it. LET IT BURN, but try to make it a controlled burn that hurts those destroying the country, too.
12). From what I saw at our county Republican Central Committee meeting last night; the 39% and then some are proponents of LIB.

Subotai Bahadur on November 28, 2012 at 1:21 PM

since 6 in 10 americans are not affected by this-have less than 250,000 in income-is this a surprise?

gerrym51 on November 28, 2012 at 1:22 PM

This poll shows that Americans still have not come to grips with … basic math.

And they won’t. Basic math skills are no longer required to get a HS diploma or a B. A. degree, and even some B. S. degrees. I regularly see high paid TV “journalists” state two numbers that cannot both be true, and they do it without raising an eyebrow. They are clueless. They lack the basic reflexive math skills to know that almost immediately.

Testing does not show how bad the problem is because the tests themselves have been dumbed down over the decades.

Empirical evidence, as represented by polls and elections, indicates the American electorate is unaware that trillion plus dollar deficits cannot go on forever, that taxing the “wealthy” more would barely put a small dent in that problem, and that taking $700 billion dollars in future Medicare tax revenue and spending it on something else means there will be less money to fund Medicare.

farsighted on November 28, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Been there, done that, got the footprints-on-the-back T-shirt from 1986. You know damn well the Rats won’t cut non-defense spending.

i would only go for this if it’s all in one bill.tax increases and the cuts get passed simultaneously

gerrym51 on November 28, 2012 at 1:25 PM

You know, there is a point at which this representative republic notion under which we supposedly operate is supposed to kick in.

CONGRESS is there to address the tax code, whether or not to limit deductions, the comparative effect to raising rates and the rest of the pretzel that the tax code has become. Taking public opinion polls on tax treatments and waxing shocked at the lack of in-depth understanding represented by the results is just silly.

Don’t we send people to Washington to do something, such as, perhaps, represent their constituents?

IndieDogg on November 28, 2012 at 1:27 PM

What about the $920 billion shortfall?

I don’t understand why Romney and Ryan didn’t make “Obama’s Plan: $920B/$80B” a slogan. Eventually, I think, enough people in the middle would have come to their senses before Election Day.

Obama keeps citing “the arithmetic.” When are the media going to make him explain these numbers?

I know: never.

BuckeyeSam on November 28, 2012 at 1:34 PM

So residents of the United Piglets of America overwhelmingly want their welfare, and want someone else to pay for it.

What’s news?

MNHawk on November 28, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I have already decided that people are going to have to learn things the hard way. Four years ago, I thought they might have learned, say, math, by the end of four years. Now I figure they might learn by the time I’m dead, maybe. I now take a very long, and resigned, view.

Alana on November 28, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I still favor the “vote present” option for those in Congress not on the left. Let the dems do what they want, don’t obstruct it but don’t vote for it either. That way, they really do own it. Lock, stock and barrel. The public will or will not turn on them when the crap hits the fan. Whatever.

totherightofthem on November 28, 2012 at 1:35 PM

We’re heading for economic dictatorship

The whole of the West is falling into the economic black hole of permanent no-growth
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9684778/Were-heading-for-economic-dictatorship.html

Forget about that dead parrot of a question – should we join the eurozone? The eurozone has officially joined us in a newly emerging international organisation: we are all now members of the Permanent No-growth Club. And the United States has just re-elected a president who seems determined to sign up too. No government in what used to be called “the free world” seems prepared to take the steps that can stop this inexorable decline. They are all busily telling their electorates that austerity is for other people (France), or that the piddling attempts they have made at it will solve the problem (Britain), or that taxing “the rich” will make it unnecessary for government to cut back its own spending (America).

Colbyjack on November 28, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Because we’re a majority. Let’s make it 80%.

forest on November 28, 2012 at 12:47 PM

And why do you want to steal other people money?

mnjg on November 28, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Ed, you’re misstating the findings here. The poll did not ask about raising the retirement age; it asked about raising the age for Medicaid eligibility. These are two very different things. It is difficult if not impossible for someone over the age of 60 to get affordable health insurance coverage in the private insurance market. With the GOP threatening to limit/repeal Obamacare, can you blame seniors for not wanting to delay their eligibility for coverage under Medicare?

cam2 on November 28, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Obamacare steals $ 716 billion from Mediacare… Most seniors are against Obamacare…

mnjg on November 28, 2012 at 1:42 PM

This is why the GOP needs to just give Obama and the Dems the damn tax hikes already. It’s obvious there are too many ignorant(or perhaps selfish is a better description) citizens out there who either don’t understand basic arithmetic or want someone else to pay for their government goodies and the only remedy for this is total economic collapse.

Once it becomes obvious to the public that the only way to fund a government this bloated is to have everyone paying exorbitant taxes, you’ll see a new push for austerity so severe it’ll make even the most hardcore Tea Partiers blush.

Doughboy on November 28, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Illustrates a big failure of Romney. How can these people still think that raising taxes on those making over $250K will bring enough money into government coffers to do much of anything (even assuming that such people won’t change their behavior)?

besser tot als rot on November 28, 2012 at 1:44 PM

Increasing tax rates increases power of the federal government to steer peoples spending toward favored groups, capping deductions would reduce the power. Given only those choices I would be in favor of the latter.

agmartin on November 28, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Yeah, we are so screwed.

cdog0613 on November 28, 2012 at 1:47 PM

That’s what they voted for. Give it to them. Cut your Obamavoters from your payroll.

Resist We Much on November 28, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Cuts from payrolls ain’t going to be confined to Obama voters.

Right Mover on November 28, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Something seems odd here. I thought Bush = Bad.

If these are the “Bush” tax cuts, shouldn’t Obama want them to go away? You mean they were a good idea, just not for rich people?

Is that what he’s saying? I’m never sure but it sounds like it.

IndieDogg on November 28, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Yeah, those “very bad Bush tax cuts” (according to socialists and their media) are suddenly a must to extend for the middle class and low income people or else it will be a disaster… Who knew that Bush did something good…

mnjg on November 28, 2012 at 1:53 PM

This is why the GOP needs to just give Obama and the Dems the damn tax hikes already. It’s obvious there are too many ignorant(or perhaps selfish is a better description) citizens out there who either don’t understand basic arithmetic or want someone else to pay for their government goodies and the only remedy for this is total economic collapse.

Once it becomes obvious to the public that the only way to fund a government this bloated is to have everyone paying exorbitant taxes, you’ll see a new push for austerity so severe it’ll make even the most hardcore Tea Partiers blush.

Doughboy on November 28, 2012 at 1:43 PM

RIGHT! The ticks and leaches will just abandon the nearly dead host. Like they have so many times in the past.

WryTrvllr on November 28, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Yeah, WaPo/ABC, I’d trust one of their polls.

GarandFan on November 28, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Something seems odd here. I thought Bush = Bad.

If these are the “Bush” tax cuts, shouldn’t Obama want them to go away? You mean they were a good idea, just not for rich people?

Is that what he’s saying? I’m never sure but it sounds like it.

IndieDogg on November 28, 2012 at 1:20 PM

That’s because Obama and Bush agree on the other goal of the Bush tax cuts – get fully half the working population off the income tax rolls entirely.

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 2:00 PM

This poll shows that Americans still have not come to grips with the scope and size of the problem … or even basic math.

Well…of course. Reference the Presidential election. I’m convinced we are living among idiots! This poll only solidifies my belief that there are far too many uneducated “dumba$$es” influencing what goes on in this country.

SPGuy on November 28, 2012 at 2:00 PM

When the bottom quintile (20% for those of you in Rio Linda) starts sending 8% of their income and the second-to-bottom quintile starts sending 14% of their income (both the average between 1979 and 1992) to Uncle Sam, then we can start talking about the amount of money the “rich” are paying in taxes (and my answer will be to cut the spending).

As of 2007, the bottom quintile paid 4% of their incoem in all the various federal taxes and the second-to-bottom quintile paid 10%. Meanwhile, the top quintile paid the same 25% of their income in federal taxes they averaged between 1979 and 1992.

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 2:08 PM

force the democRATS to own this tax hike, just like obamacare. do not give the MSM a way to attack fiscal conservatism

burserker on November 28, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Taxing the rich will not solve the problem. It is a political ploy that has been used over and over to get votes and it works every time, unfortunately. The only way to get the deficit under control is to cut spending. The Democrats are going to ruin the economy. They accused Reagan of using Voodoo Economics. They themselves are using Screw You Economics. Class envy has no place in a moral political environment. It plays one segment of society against another to score political points. The burden will eventually fall on the middle class and then we will be “eating our peas” as prescribed by Obama, while the liberal elite will be eating steak and lobster.

kemojr on November 28, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Because we’re a majority. Let’s make it 80%.

forest on November 28, 2012 at 12:47 PM

And why do you want to steal other people money?

mnjg on November 28, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Because I’m entitled. Let’s make it 85%. I have altered the deal, pray I don’t alter it any further.

forest on November 28, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Peter Schiff talked about this on YouTube. This is the tyranny of the majority trying to punish a minority. In this case those who make over $250k a year.

Thugocracy. I am to the point of wanting to infiltrate government and then use governments forceful hands on everyone to force them to read Ron Paul’s books so they’ll understand economics and equality. Equality applies to income just as much as it applies to sexuality/social issues. But non-libertarians always try to split them up.

fatlibertarianinokc on November 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

since 6 in 10 americans are not affected by this-have less than 250,000 in income-is this a surprise?

gerrym51 on November 28, 2012 at 1:22 PM

More than 6 in 10 Americans will most certainly be affected. They obviously don’t understand the mechanism by which they will be affected, but they will most certainly be affected.

Oh, lets quit arguing out of envy of the more financially well off, just bite the bullet and have the government directly collect and manage all our incomes, and after taking its share, let them decide from month to month how much we really need and dole out from what is left the amount determined to be our fair and just allowance.

We can trust them to do that, right?

/sarc

hawkeye54 on November 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Americans don’t think taxing the rich is going to help them. They just want to stick it to the guy who is doing better then them or achieving what they never have. It’s the American way in 2012.

Rockshine on November 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Yeah, WaPo/ABC, I’d trust one of their polls.

GarandFan on November 28, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Oh good Lord, we’re not going to start with this again, are we? Because disregarding unpleasant facts from sources we don’t like worked out so well last time?

cam2 on November 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Americans don’t think taxing the rich is going to help them. They just want to stick it to the guy who is doing better then them or achieving what they never have. It’s the American way in 2012.

Rockshine on November 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Riug-a-ding-ding. Give that person the Comment of the Day™ award.

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Let’s go for it.

Many, many of the people making over $250,000 supported and voted for Obama. Let them feel the full brunt of their stupidity. Sorry for the other guys, but like us who held our nose and voted for that moron Romney, the good will have to suffer for the bad. Maybe letting the dims have what they want will shake these well-off and rich dolts out of their stupor and we can have a new conversation in this country about taxation.

Perversely, to end class warfare in this country, you’ll probably have to wage it fully.

avgjo on November 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM

This is not as bad as the CNN poll…that one actually had a small majority of Republicans in support of a tax hike on high earners. The truth is no one is going to like any solutions they come up with. I just hope that Obama gets to share in the blame.

Terrye on November 28, 2012 at 3:19 PM

That’s what they voted for. Give it to them. Cut your Obamavoters from your payroll.

Resist We Much on November 28, 2012 at 12:17 PM

Already done. I pick and choose my work according to what I can accomplish on my own and only through the use of part-time help on a project by project basis. Since I also know who the end users/owners are of what I manufacture, I do a web search on them and if I find political contributions to Democrats, the price I quote increases by a minimum of 10%. They asked for it after all.

moo on November 28, 2012 at 3:21 PM

I’d like to see one poll that would point out what does what and then have people take a vote. Let’s say: A will save 1 trillion, B will save 500 billion and C will save 100 million, which would you do. All of these polls only tell use what people want to keep, without weighing the benefits of giving it up. Politicians aren’t stupid, unless of course they’re Republicans, and they know that, with certain deductions, they have people on the hook.

If they were to raise the standard deduction to say $6,000 per dependent but get rid of the mortgage tax deduction, some people might go for that.

Let’s put it this way, this is NOT about revenue. It’s about Obama being able to tell his base he raised taxes on rich folk, without being accountable to how it is possibly a solution to the problem.

I believe they should just let the fiscal cliff come and allow all tax rates to go up and then, come March or April, when the voters figure out that the “Bush tax cuts for the rich” were actually pretty good for them too, then we can negotiate with the phony Democrats.

bflat879 on November 28, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Say…how ’bout we just make all those folks receiving federal entitlements work for their benefits? What a novel idea! You want food stamps? Great – just show up at this federal construction site with a pick or shovel and a lunch because we have 8 good solid hours of hard labor for you to do to earn 8 hours worth of food stamps. You’ll get more if you show up tomorrow. You want housing assistance? No problem – here’s a burlap bag …see that 10 mile stretch of highway? As soon as it’s completely free of litter, you can have 10 clean highway miles worth of housing assistance. You want free medical services for your kids? We’re there for you – just sign on the dotted line and show up for boot camp within 72 hours.

Wonder how fast the “fiscal cliff” would become manageable if we did this?

So Cal Jim on November 28, 2012 at 4:23 PM

This where class warfare, dumbing down the educational system and an instant gratification society culminate. A majority populace who haven’t got the mental capacity for vision that extends past their fingertips, never mind basic reasoning skills. As evidenced by the recent election. This is akin to the guy in steerage on the Titanic making some extra holes to let the water out.

Oh, well at least if I can’t be productive at least I can punish someone who is. /

ghostwalker1 on November 28, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Could they see Wyatt’s Torch from the Gulch?

LegendHasIt on November 28, 2012 at 4:43 PM

If the media did its job, people would know it adds up to only $80 billion.

The Rogue Tomato on November 28, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Ya – but they wouldn’t understand what that number really means.
Math is too hard for Obummer voters.

dentarthurdent on November 28, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Math is hard…I swear, we are the most illiterate people on earth when it comes to plain basic math…when you spend more than you can ever receive in taxes or income, you will go broke…tax everyone in that bracket 75% and we still wouldn’t resolve the budget (if we had a budget) issue…sheeesh, liberals, conservatives, most everyone, just plain stupid when it comes to math.

This is what you get when you move from an agricultural society.

Every farmer knows, if you spend $100 on feed for your cattle and you sell it for only $75 you lose money…if you buy $100 worth of seed, but only sell $75 worth of corn, you lose money…income has to be greater than expenses, it’s that simple, yet that most simplest of ideas is completely and utterly foreign to most people.

Amazing, simply amazing…

right2bright on November 28, 2012 at 5:04 PM

$80 billion? Pfffshaw – get rid of the Obama tax cuts. If the federal government had 2007 tax policy this year, it would have raked in an extra $115-120 billion.

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 5:04 PM

The only broad consensus for action is the populist tax-hike option which will solve less than 10% of the problem, and two-thirds won’t even take a basic step like mildly indexing retirement eligibility to life expectancy in order to reduce costs in the biggest fiscal train wreck of the federal budget.

So solve less than 10% of your problem. Then work from that point.

This entire thing of “It’s a drop in the bucket!” seems to ignore the fact that every little bit helps.

Stoic Patriot on November 28, 2012 at 5:05 PM

WaPo/ABC poll: Six in ten favor raising taxes on $250K+ households for fiscal-cliff solution

…GREAT!…and when it doesn’t even put a little dent in the problem…what then?
Stupid morons!

KOOLAID2 on November 28, 2012 at 5:05 PM

It’s a WaPo/ABC poll so it might actually be closer to 7 or 8 in 10 who want the tax increases cuz too many Americans are what you call ignorant when it comes to math and taxes–it’s just soooooo hard–and a lot of ‘em can’t read either so they have no clue that the tax increases will do pretty much absolutely nothing to the debt or deficit.

stukinIL4now on November 28, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Boehner needs to “Soak the rich” and let the Bush tax cuts expire, just be sure and take liberals (read “takers”) over the cliff with him.

Tater Salad on November 28, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Translation of this poll– Obozo’s class warfare tactics of fueling envy/jealousy of the successful and demonizing wealth have worked

It’s pathetic that a majority feel that it’s OK for them to decide that the govt can steal more money from others

Until 70-80% pay any federal income taxes at all, I don’t want to hear a damn thing from them about taking more from me.

thurman on November 28, 2012 at 5:14 PM

…GREAT!…and when it doesn’t even put a little dent in the problem…what then?
Stupid morons!

KOOLAID2 on November 28, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Like Greece, MOAR!!1!!11eleventY!!!!!!@@#!~@

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM

since 6 in 10 americans are not affected by this-have less than 250,000 in income-is this a surprise?

gerrym51 on November 28, 2012 at 1:22 PM

True, but those 6 in 10 probably work for a small business owner who files as S corp.

Let’s see, if I were a small business owner making $300,000/year and they raise taxes on those making more than $250,000, then I’m going to make sure I’m below that amount by cutting back on business, then get rid of a couple of employees. Oh too bad for them. Oh, and that expansion that I had planned? Not going to happen. No additional tax revenues for local, state, or feds, less tax revenue because income is less.

People who can will ALWAYS find a way around paying higher taxes. It’s us slobs who only have regular income that will pay, we have no choice unless we quit and get jobs that pay less. My husband and I are finally out from under most of our child expenses since they’re out of school now. Unfortunately, that also means that we’ve lost most of our deductions. So right when we finally have a little leeway between paychecks and can start saving, we’re going to be slammed with thousands more in taxes. Our health care premiums will probably go up as well.

The economic ignorance in this country is astounding.

Common Sense on November 28, 2012 at 5:25 PM

It’ll be a drop in the bucket, but, go for it, Teh Won.

Ward Cleaver on November 28, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Like Greece, MOAR!!1!!11eleventY!!!!!!@@#!~@

Steve Eggleston on November 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Reagan once said that Democrats are economic ignoramuses. So true.

Ward Cleaver on November 28, 2012 at 5:31 PM

APACHEWHOKNOWS hereby claims all rights via Hot Air blog to the following post to be used only to pin the tail on the liar B. Obama.

“Pres. Obama’s lies are weaponized bull shit.”

Property of APACHEWHOKNOWS AND HOT AIR BLOG.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on November 28, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Atlas is fixin to shrug, Bitches…

Kuffar on November 28, 2012 at 5:35 PM

9 out of 10 making $250K or more prefer to cut back on their spending to pay for the tax increases.

COgirl on November 28, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Including 39% of Republicans.

That doesn’t sunrise me a bit. Defending the extension of the Bush tax cuts for those making above $250,000 is not a winner and certainly not a hill to die on and lose all chance at everything else to boot.

VorDaj on November 28, 2012 at 6:00 PM

This is what happens when Republicans try to argue an issue within the narrative set up by Democrats rather than trying to educate the public on the issue.

Republican desperately need to educate the public on all these things. Reagan was called “The Great Communicator” because that’s what he did. Republicans should craft a coordinated message and not breathe a word about this issue to the press without first channeling their comments through some pithy statement designed to educate the people. The media will not educate, nor will the Democrats. Republicans always act like people know things rather than understanding that they have to be educated about them. It is baffling.

daviddunn on November 28, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Pravda is right.

WestTexasBirdDog on November 28, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Politics is about persuasion Republicans. Don’t argue on the terms the enemy has set up for you. Persuade! Educate! With every single breath you should be educating.

daviddunn on November 28, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Democracy in action. Obama promised to fudamentally transform this nation and a majority of voters agree with him.

LIB

jnelchef on November 28, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Most of that 60% believes “taxing the rich” means “take from the rich…and give it to me!” which is why the GOP will never win another presidential election. The voters aren’t voting for “new taxes,” they’re voting to line their own pockets, or at least they imagine they are. And which party will help them to continue imagining that?

Rational Thought on November 28, 2012 at 6:59 PM

39% of Republicans, too.

phony survey.

Fleuries on November 28, 2012 at 7:21 PM

…GREAT!…and when it doesn’t even put a little dent in the problem…what then?
Stupid morons!

KOOLAID2 on November 28, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Then they will have license to tax the daylights out of anyone earning over 100k.

dogsoldier on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Let’s see, if I were a small business owner making $300,000/year and they raise taxes on those making more than $250,000, then I’m going to make sure I’m below that amount by cutting back on business, then get rid of a couple of employees. Oh too bad for them. Oh, and that expansion that I had planned? Not going to happen. No additional tax revenues for local, state, or feds, less tax revenue because income is less.

Really? You’re going to lop $50,000 off your income to save $1,500 in taxes? A net loss of $48,500?

Heck of a businessman you are.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

With equally effective results.

dogsoldier on November 28, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Don’t forget that if Obama gets his way, and the rich get a little higher tax rate, the FISCAL CLIFF is not fixed. For one, the entrepreneurial class will be discouraged. Other taxes are coming to make this worse, and the problem with REVENUE, is that the economy is not Humming, and has not been Humming for four years.

What is Obama’s plan to fix the economy, for the rest of us, for the unemployed, to increase revenues by adding taxpayers to the rolls??? HE doesn’t have one. No Plan. No Budget.

I hope they keep him in Washington thru all of his Hawiian vacation…on behalf of those who used to dream of going to Hawaii, and those who used to be able to afford it.

Fleuries on November 28, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Really? You’re going to lop $50,000 off your income to save $1,500 in taxes? A net loss of $48,500?

Heck of a businessman you are.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

They re-arrange their income to show less.

dogsoldier on November 28, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Fleuries on November 28, 2012 at 7:26 PM

In fact Zero’s proposed fix will actually make it worse.

dogsoldier on November 28, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Really? You’re going to lop $50,000 off your income to save $1,500 in taxes? A net loss of $48,500?

Heck of a businessman you are.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

They re-arrange their income to show less.

dogsoldier on November 28, 2012 at 7:27 PM

“Common Sense” said he was going to “cut back on business” and fire people, not hire a more creative accountant.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:31 PM

i didn’t take the time read all the comments to see if this had already been mentioned several times. but one was to ask me if i thought taxes should be raised in the wealthy, i would say yes. not because i think it would help the economy or lower the deficit, but because i want everyone to taste the medicine they have prescribed themselves.

open up the hanger… here comes the plane! mmmmmmmmm!!! does it taste good!?! no?… well at least you got to taste it. ready for another bite?

dbilly76 on November 28, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Really? You’re going to lop $50,000 off your income to save $1,500 in taxes? A net loss of $48,500?

Heck of a businessman you are.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Well Elitist, what’s your free time worth to you?

WryTrvllr on November 28, 2012 at 7:40 PM

The Republicans are going to blamed no matter what happens, nobody ever mentions that the DemocRATS had full control of the House and the Senate from 2007 until 2010, what did they do NOTHING but spend money.
Repubs need to grow a pair, damm the torpedos, full speed ahead let the DIMS have what they want, it’s going to happen anyway then when everything comes crashing down around everyone they have no one to blame except themselves.
It will be a rough time but after this they will never be in power again.
Sometimes you have to hit bottom to rise again stronger.

concernedsenior on November 28, 2012 at 7:48 PM

The United States of Moronica.

Dr. ZhivBlago on November 28, 2012 at 8:08 PM

We’re screwed. We need to let it burn.

hawkdriver on November 28, 2012 at 8:29 PM

First off, that’s bull squeeze numbers and you know it.

Second off, let the motherf@#$er burn.

I actually think I hate these squishy GOP’ers calling for tax hikes almost as much as I deeply, horribly, desperately, with a white hot rage, hate Obama and the Democrats.

Almost.

I’ve never really historically *wanted* very bad things to happen to people. I’m largely over that now; I *want* bad things to happen to Obama, the Dems, and the feckless Republicans. May they live long enough to suffer, badly, from what they are doing. And I want to see it.

Midas on November 28, 2012 at 9:50 PM

With the GOP threatening to limit/repeal Obamacare, can you blame seniors for not wanting to delay their eligibility for coverage under Medicare?

cam2 on November 28, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Huh?

You think that the “GOP threatening to limit/repeal Obamacare” is the reason why most seniors don’t want to raise the eligibility age?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/health-care-law-lacks-support-but-so-does-the-status-quo/

http://shark-tank.net/2012/08/16/new-rasmussen-poll-more-fear-obamacare-than-ryans-medicare-plan/

LOL at the Kool-Aid you’re trying to serve up.

Seniors know that more than 700 billion will be taken away from Medicare in order to pay for Obamacare.

And seniors, by definition, are eligible for Medicare already-making the eligibilty age a moot point for them.

Please-could you lefties at least try to keep the Obama agitprop somewhat within the boundaries of reality? I know the kneejerk reflexes are strong with your crowd, but I mean….really.

Dreadnought on November 28, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Midas on November 28, 2012 at 9:50 PM

You like microbrews???

WryTrvllr on November 28, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Really? You’re going to lop $50,000 off your income to save $1,500 in taxes? A net loss of $48,500?

Heck of a businessman you are.

urban elitist on November 28, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Oh yeah, Elitist….

Really think anyone pays 3%?

Elite at what?

WryTrvllr on November 28, 2012 at 11:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3