President Obama said he would veto legislation that would extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts, Fox news reported.
Obama has proposed extending the tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000 for another year, the Chicago Tribune reported. Obama said it would be imprudent to extend all of tax cuts – including those for upper income earners – because they were a major driver of the budget deficit (Note: Obama's complete remarks are attached to this story).
"By the way, these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans are also the tax cuts that are least likely to promote growth," Obama said. "So we can't afford to keep that up, not right now. So I'm not proposing anything radical here. I just believe that anybody making over $250,000 a year should go back to the income tax rates we were paying under Bill Clinton."
Obama said his plan still would maintain the cuts for 98 percent of Americans.
The tax cuts will expire for all Americans without congressional action on Jan. 1, the Tribune reported. Politico reported that Republicans in the House are planning a vote later this month to extend the tax cuts across the board for one year, something Obama says he would veto.
Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucy, said Obama's plan was based on politics, not economics. USAToday quoted McConnelll as saying "In the Obama economy, we need policies that are designed to create jobs. Not designed to protect his."
The newspaper also quoted House Speark John Boehner, R-Ohio: "How will these small business tax hikes create jobs?"
Obama said the plan would not hurt small businesses: "The proposal I make today would extend these tax cuts for 97 percent of all small business owners in America. In other words, 97 percent of small businesses fall under the $250,000 threshold. So this isn’t about taxing job creators, this is about helping job creators."
If and when Obama is defeated in November, we should anticipate an explosion in business and entrepreneurial activity among ordinary Americans who realize they're about to be liberated from the most anti-business president in our history." David Limbaugh Source: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/07/17/limbaugh-the-most-anti-business-president-ever/?subscriber=1 Only two things holding the American economy back-President Obama and Obamacare. Get rid of both and we'll be in good shape. This recession should have been over 3 years ago.
"In his heart of hearts, President O is always enraged at the American people -- those bitter clingers -- but this time it's personal. Gone is the smiling messiah, and in his place we see a persecutory personality, a real witch-hunter who may lose the election but won't pass up a chance to scourge this country with the whip of righteousness, to tell us what he really thinks. Under the smiling mask, Obama is Rev. Jerry Wright." "Obama is not a conventional politician. For sure, he loves the trappings, Air Force One, the chance to finally lord it over other people. But Obama is dyed-in-the-wool ideologue. In the last four years he's changed everything except his deeply embedded beliefs. America is still the real enemy." Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/is_obama_ripping_off_the_mask.html#ixzz20taPxWpU You can see it in President Obama's campaign-he's just another Chicago thug politician. And now President Obama is threatening Americans with economic chaos if he doesn't get the tax bill that he wants. Mr. President, it's not about you.
"Your comment, on July 15th, included 'Unfair tax burden on many of the haves....'; and your definition of 'haves' is important."
I can't say that this applies to all municipal public employees, but many muncipal worker are not part of the social security system-they have their own retirement system. The reason for that is that sociaI security is a rotten deal and so some how the muncipal worker have slipped out of SS to get a better deal.
The dictionary includes incorrect usage of a word when enough of us use it that way. The question raised was what does the word mean. Someone said ten percent. I was simply agreeing that that was the ORIGINAL, and as you note, the FIRST/PRIMARY meaning of the word.
Richard: Regarding why the Iraq war, in particular was considered illegall, there was a LOT of such discussion about that a decade ago. Are you too young to have been there?
Obama seems oblivious to the fact that ever letter in every word he speaks will be taken out of context. So he should not have used the term "give back." Most Americans don't feel that they "owe" anybody anything. Let your parents rot in an old-folks' home. Not your problem. Likewise, he shouldn't have said, "somebody else made it happen." He should have said, "somebody else HELPED make it happen." Likewise, he shouldn't have said, "you didn't build that." He should have said, "you didn't build that alone." As for "Marxist," you clearly don't hear left-leaning people screaming at him for being a sell-out, such as using the Republican recommendation to hand over our health-care system to the corporate insurance industry. Did you miss his comments about the "unbelievable American system," "great teacher. . .roads and bridges. . .Internet," "when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative." Sounds like Ronald Reagan to me.
It would seem that the use of the word "decimate" in the context of the Romans is archaic. The Roman Empire doesn't exist anymore, but it shouldn't be necessary to explain that.
It is standard practice of the left to refer to their political opponents as idiots, being dumb or stupid, bigots, racists, etc. Call Rush any name you want. Call me any name you want. Name-calling is what children do. Rush has an audience of between 15 and 20 million adults on a daily basis. There is almost nowhere where you can't hear Rush on the radio in the United States. The Rush Limbaugh Show has been on the air for almost 24 years. If Rush was a "flaming idot" as you've said, then it is unlikely that he would have been so successful. My guess is that you've never listened to Rush and are just repeating the standard Democrat line. Mr. Behr, you should try listening to Rush some time-you might change your mind. I said exactly the same thing as you did, until I started to listen to Rush in October 1994. The first day I listened, I said that this man is an ass. The second day I listened, I said that this man is an ass, but he's right. The third day I listened, I said no this man is not an ass, this man is just right. I've been listening to Rush for 17-1/2 years now. I would also recomend that you try listening to Mark Levin. Both Rush and Mark Levin can be heard on WLS-AM radio in Chicago (AM 890). Laura Ingrahm is really good too.
"Obama of Roanoke, understand, is not merely a specific person named Barack Hussein Obama. He is Van Jones. He is Elizabeth Warren. He is Valerie Jarrett. He is Steven Chu and Cass Sunstein. He is Jeremiah Wright and Frank Marshall Davis and Karl Marx and many others. Obama of Roanoke is not some benign elegant speaker. Obama of Roanoke is a malignant mindset. His fingerprints are all over the biggest disasters in world history. For this reason, he was and is utterly predictable long before Friday last." Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/obama_of_roanoke_we_saw_you_coming.html#ixzz21HDcWAFJ There is much more to this article than the excerpt above. It's well worth a read.
"It is no secret that owners circulated endless emails leading up to election day discussing lay off plans were Obama to win. Entrepreneurs instinctively understand the danger posed by larger liberal majorities... the risk-reward equation and fierce independence spirit of start up businesses are anathema to the class warfare, equality of outcome and spread the wealth mentality of the left. [...]" Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/obama_of_roanoke_we_saw_you_coming.html#ixzz21HHEebh9 Yes, you read that right. My company's phones stopped ringing about one week before election day and didn't ring again for 7 months. The election of Obama was an absolute disaster.
My impression is that it would be very complicated to institute. Also, as a tax on consumption, it would tend to discourage consumption--at least consumption of American products--so it would probably be bad for the economy. We'd probably see a lot more models of BMW and Lexis that were bought abroad. I live in Michigan, so I could avoid all taxation by taking a little jaunt over the border to get provisions. We have a long border. We'd probably have merchant ships moored off the coast, like the old "pirate radio stations." The site I went to quoted 30%. That's in addition to the state income tax. That might scare people off. Another issue is that the super rich "spend" only a tiny amount of their money. They use the rest of it to, basically, gamble. Would you consider stock purchases as purchases? If not, why not?
this is free consultation for me.i seek for permission to apply yr method in my business. anyway i am not in us. i am in Ghana where the tax system is different.