Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CBO: Millionaires tax raises $452.7 billion (more than enough to pay for Pres. Obama's Jobs bill)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:11 PM
Original message
CBO: Millionaires tax raises $452.7 billion (more than enough to pay for Pres. Obama's Jobs bill)
Edited on Fri Oct-07-11 04:13 PM by flpoljunkie
CBO: Millionaire's tax raises $452.7 Billion

The Congressional Budget Office said Friday the Senate Democrats’ proposed surtax on millionaires would raise $452.7 billion over 10 years, more than enough to pay for the $447 billion in spending and tax cuts included in President Barack Obama’s jobs bill.

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the CBO estimated the net deficit reduction would be $6 billion, a modest impact but still added ammunition for the Nevada Democrat in trying to unite his caucus going into floor votes next week.

The proposed of 5.6 percent surtax would take effect in 2013 and apply to a taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income in excess of $1 million or $500,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return. It would be indexed for inflation, but the CBO cited estimates showing a more than doubling in the annual tax revenue increase from $28.4 billion in 2013 to $68.633 billion in 2021.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Wielding Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hurray! Direct from the CBO! Republicans lose their talking point!
Edited on Fri Oct-07-11 04:44 PM by The Wielding Truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
r0nr0ntaiwan Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Can be very misleading, though.
I posted this further down on the thread, but thought it would be a good reply to your post:

Many of the CBO's claims need to be read in a different light.

The CBO can only make predictions based on the information its given. The CBO cannot make predictions based on human behavior. For example:

If there are 1,000,000 people in the U.S. earning exactly $1 million per year, and these people are taxed at 50%, the government would be receiving $500 billion from these people. If taxes are to be raised to 100% for these same people, the CBO would surely tell you that the government's revenues would increase by $500 billion... to $1 trillion.

However, the CBO can't predict human behavior. So, many of these people, knowing that they will be taxed more, will change their behavior. They will intentionally earn less. They will put money in other areas that can't be taxed. They'll get out of their line of work and invest their money, which will be taxed according to capital gains tax rates. Bottom line, if the CBO says that higher taxes will bring in a certain amount of revenue, that figure can't be trusted because the CBO can only look at the information it has been given and can't take into account how the new policies will change peoples' behaviors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
simmonsj811 Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. k&r back to the top
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. If Dems could actually get on the teevee, this message might get out there.
Let's face it, the right has the media machine to propagandize on a massive scale; we don't have that. And bully pulpit or no, the president, alone, cannot fight the massive media manipulation that takes place by the $$$$$.

When the media chooses to cover the president, they make sure to have a dozen Repukes on to debunk anything he says. Not only that, he's got the professional left working against him as well. How do you win the war of words, when only one side gets out? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm torn
I like the President's plan better:

The Senate bill replaces a number of tax increases on the oil and gas and financial industry in Obama's plan with a millionaires' surtax, a change the White House approves.

Sure it's $3 billion less in deficit reduction, but when will be the next opportunity to end subsidies for these industries?

How Obama’s tax hikes would really impact the rich, in three easy charts

<...>

Under Clinton, the top 1 percent paid 33.4 percent; under Bush it paid 29.8 percent; and under Obama it would go back up to 35.3 percent, less than two points than under Clinton.

Meanwhile, under Clinton, the top 0.1 percent paid 36.9 percent; under Bush it paid 32.8 percent; and under Obama it would go back up to 39.7 percent. By contrast, every other group would be paying lower rates under Obama’s proposals than under Clinton. (A table detailing these numbers is right here.)

<...>

Also, here's a table with the after-tax incomes.

Charts posted here.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Why not enact the Senate Millionaires' tax and cut the dirty Oil subsidies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Fine by me. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Because Harry Reid can't get the votes from his own party
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Harry can't get the votes to tax everyone making more than $250K that is different
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That's true. Was referring to the old subsidies that won't fly with oil state senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-08-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. That is EXACTLY why we have to have public financing of elections
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. Wholeheartedly agree. The Fair Elections Now Act has been reintroduced in the 112th Congress.
Sadly, it will go nowhere--unless the public demands public financing. So far, they have not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. Good!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-07-11 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. The path is obvious. Now if our politicians will just take it NT
Edited on Fri Oct-07-11 06:39 PM by juajen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taught_me_patience Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. That's over 10 years.
That's only 45B/year... folks, our deficit alone is 1.5T/yr. This tax almost is dust in the wind. Hopefully we begin to realize that we need to raise taxes on everybody... Clinton tax rates were not higher just on the rich... they were higher across the board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
r0nr0ntaiwan Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. True
This "additional revenue" will be over a 10 year period. Very good point. But I believe that higher taxation doesn't have to be the only answer. We've increased government spending by well over 20% in the past couple of years. Even more in the past few. Surely, some spending can be cut. I don't see why not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
13. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harmony Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-09-11 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
14. Facts?
This can't be? I wonder how the Republicans will spin this?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
r0nr0ntaiwan Donating Member (47 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-11 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
16. Misleading
Edited on Mon Oct-10-11 04:40 AM by r0nr0ntaiwan
Many of the CBO's claims need to be read in a different light.

The CBO can only make predictions based on the information its given. The CBO cannot make predictions based on human behavior. For example:

If there are 1,000,000 people in the U.S. earning exactly $1 million per year, and these people are taxed at 50%, the government would be receiving $500 billion from these people. If taxes are to be raised to 100% for these same people, the CBO would surely tell you that the government's revenues would increase by $500 billion... to $1 trillion.

However, the CBO can't predict human behavior. So, many of these people, knowing that they will be taxed more, will change their behavior. They will intentionally earn less. They will put money in other areas that can't be taxed. They'll get out of their line of work and invest their money, which will be taxed according to capital gains tax rates. Bottom line, if the CBO says that higher taxes will bring in a certain amount of revenue, that figure can't be trusted because the CBO can only look at the information it has been given and can't take into account how the new policies will change peoples' behaviors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC