Boehner Agrees To Trade Tax Rate Hikes For Entitlement Savings. Obama Says, Thanks Fo

[Wehrwolfen]

Report: Boehner Agrees To Trade Tax Rate Hikes For Entitlement Savings. Obama Says, Thanks For The Tax Hikes But I'll Pass On The Savings


—DrewM.

I know it's crazy but maybe, just maybe this big spending, statist really isn't interested in dealing with our spending problems. Shocking, I know.

President Barack Obama is not ready to accept a new offer from the Republican leader of the U.S. the House of Representatives to raise taxes on top earners in exchange for major cuts in entitlement programs, a source said late Saturday.
The shape and details of Boehner's offer were uncertain Saturday night, as was the exact reason the president was prepared to reject it.

The source said Obama sees the offer made on Friday by U.S. House Speaker John Boehner as a sign of progress, but simply believes it is not enough and there is much more to be worked out before Obama can reciprocate.

Tax rates and entitlements are the two most difficult issues in the so-far unproductive negotiations to avert the "fiscal cliff" of steep tax hikes and spending cuts set for the new year unless Congress and the president reach a deal to avoid them.​

I don't get why the GOP is negotiating in good faith. Obama isn't. He wants nothing short of absolute surrender. Either give it to him (Let It Burn) or change the terms of the debate drastically.


[Excerpt]

Read more:
www.ace.mu.nu

 

[TNHarley]

Would you want Santa to stop coming to your house?

 

[eflatminor]

I say give it to him and let 'em own it. Rand Paul has the right idea:

Rand Paul: Voting Present On Tax Hikes Would Be Better For GOP | RealClearPolitics

 

[occupied]

Boehner and Obama are just going through the motions, both know for a fact that Boehner cannot guarantee the votes on any agreement and Obama is not going to give away a thing on a useless gesture that the republicans are going to reject without consideration.

 

[Meister]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

 

[occupied]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

Get some sort of guarantee that the republicans will vote for a deal made by Boehner with Obama and the claims of dealing in good faith will be believable, it's why the Debt ceiling negotiations fell through and it is why Boehner can offer things he knows are impossible seeing as how he has little or no control over the republican caucus.

 

[g5000]

Boehner's offer was to raise taxes on incomes over one million dollars, instead of what Obama campaigned on in every speech he made during the election cycle, which is a tax increase on the top two percent.

.

 

[g5000]

Obama was elected on taxing the top two percent more.

When the GOP finally, finally, finally gets that through their heads, then maybe we will finally see some progress in the talks.

.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obama was elected on taxing the top two percent more.

When the GOP finally, finally, finally gets that through their heads, then maybe we will finally see some progress in the talks.

.

66 percent of the people want taxes AND cuts to entitlements. Obama will lose if he refuses to consider any cuts.

 

[g5000]

Obama was elected on taxing the top two percent more.

When the GOP finally, finally, finally gets that through their heads, then maybe we will finally see some progress in the talks.

.

66 percent of the people want taxes AND cuts to entitlements. Obama will lose if he refuses to consider any cuts.

Boehner will lose if he continues to refuse to raise taxes on the top two percent.

.

 

[Sallow]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

The GOP has yet to identify any "savings".

Obama owns the tax "hikes"..which is what he ran on.

If the GOP wants entitlement cuts they should put out EXACTLY what they want to cut.

And own that.

 

[Meister]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

The GOP has yet to identify any "savings".

Obama owns the tax "hikes"..which is what he ran on.

If the GOP wants entitlement cuts they should put out EXACTLY what they want to cut.

And own that.

Okay....I'll play...what are the spending cuts offered by Obama...exactly? That's what I thought

 

[Sallow]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

The GOP has yet to identify any "savings".

Obama owns the tax "hikes"..which is what he ran on.

If the GOP wants entitlement cuts they should put out EXACTLY what they want to cut.

And own that.

Okay....I'll play...what are the spending cuts offered by Obama...exactly? That's what I thought

Play all you want.

The Obama administration cut nearly a trillion dollars from entitlements over the last couple of years. Romney called it "stealing from medicare".

Well now they can do the "identifying".

Like I posted, Obama ran on the tax hikes...and owns them.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

He wasn't counting on the Republicans to accept the tax hikes...because he never-ever had any intentions of cutting entitlements, not for a second.

 

[Meister]

The GOP has yet to identify any "savings".

Obama owns the tax "hikes"..which is what he ran on.

If the GOP wants entitlement cuts they should put out EXACTLY what they want to cut.

And own that.

Okay....I'll play...what are the spending cuts offered by Obama...exactly? That's what I thought

Play all you want.

The Obama administration cut nearly a trillion dollars from entitlements over the last couple of years. Romney called it "stealing from medicare".

Well now they can do the "identifying".

Like I posted, Obama ran on the tax hikes...and owns them.

You are talking about the 800 billion from medicare to obamacare, right?
You're dodging my question....where IS the spending cuts from Obama?
Or, are you saying that he owns the tax hikes and he's not interested in spending cuts?

 

[ilia25]

I say give it to him and let 'em own it. Rand Paul has the right idea:

Rand Paul: Voting Present On Tax Hikes Would Be Better For GOP | RealClearPolitics

If only all Republicans were as stupid as Rand Paul!

Unfortunately, most of them don't buy their own propaganda. They know that rising taxes on the rich will not affect the economy, but will increase the revenues enough to make the case for dismantling the entitlements even less compelling.

In other words, rising taxes will ruin the Republican agenda by exposing their lies about taxes and entitlement programs.

 

[ilia25]

People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

People who want less spending only do so until they are asked which program they want to downsize or eliminate.

 

[tooAlive]

I say give it to him and let 'em own it. Rand Paul has the right idea:

Rand Paul: Voting Present On Tax Hikes Would Be Better For GOP | RealClearPolitics

If only all Republicans were as stupid as Rand Paul!

Unfortunately, most of them don't buy their own propaganda. They know that rising taxes on the rich will not affect the economy, but will increase the revenues enough to make the case for dismantling the entitlements even less compelling.

In other words, rising taxes will ruin the Republican agenda by exposing their lies about taxes and entitlement programs.

Tell me. Will a 4% increase to top marginal tax rates even make a dent in the deficit?

Will a 70% top marginal tax rate make a dent in the deficit?

Even if it did, taking 70% of a portion of anyone's income is flat out theft. So is 40%. Which is why conservatives won't stand for it. We don't care if it solves the revenue problem or not.

 

[Sarah G]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

Republicans want the focus to be on less spending rather than taxing the rich. They have never convinced the voters that they have any intention of combining spending cuts with a revenue increase on the wealthiest Americans.

 

[ilia25]

With this compromise the GOP has infact shown good faith in trying to deal with the problem. If the media is honest they will have to report it and it would bode well going into next year when we do go over the cliff.
It can't be reported just as the GOP obstructionists.
People DO want the rich to pay more, but they also want less spending, so the ball may very well be in Obama's court.

The GOP has yet to identify any "savings".

Obama owns the tax "hikes"..which is what he ran on.

If the GOP wants entitlement cuts they should put out EXACTLY what they want to cut.

And own that.

Okay....I'll play...what are the spending cuts offered by Obama...exactly? That's what I thought

There is no "government waste" to cut. And Obama is not so crazy as to offer cuts in defense spending or spending on entitlement programs.