I won’t have a real handle on the Obama budget for several days at best, but what I do understand about it at this point impresses me. I am pleased that it will increase revenue, by rising the rate on and closing loopholes that benefit the 1%. I have no problem with his intent to reduce the nominal corporate tax rate, because the loopholes it closes and corporate giveaways it ends actually raise the effective tax rate for the large corporations, that have evaded paying their fair share, while lowering them for small companies. I like the investments in infrastructure, job training, and technology development. I especially like that the cuts to Medicare spending come exclusively through reducing Drug company profits.
In the last annual budget of his term, President Obama for the first time projects a deficit below $1 trillion and foresees the federal shortfall declining to sustainable levels by 2017.
To help reduce deficits and offset the costs of his proposed spending on job-creation initiatives for infrastructure, job-training and innovation, Mr. Obama uses his budget for fiscal year 2013 to call for raising $1.5 trillion over 10 years from the wealthiest taxpayers and from closing some corporate tax breaks, chiefly for oil and gas companies. For the first time he proposes a higher tax on dividend income of the wealthiest taxpayers, which would raise about $206 billion over 10 years. The budget proposal leaves him short of his goal to cut the deficit in half by 2013.
Later this month, the administration will propose an overhaul of the corporate tax code to root out many tax breaks and lower the 35 percent rate, but Mr. Obama is proposing that the change would not raise any more revenues than the current system, despite the nation’s chronic deficits…
Inserted from <NY Times>
Ed Schultz covered this story with Bernie Sanders.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
As usual Bernie is spot-on.
The best analysis I have encountered so far comes from Ezra Klein and Peter Orzag, who compared the Obama and the Romney budgets.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Is there any question about who represents Main Street and who represents Wall Street?
7 Responses to “The Obama Budget”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I watched Ezra Klein and Peter Orzag dissect the budgets of Pres. Obama and Mittens. By far, the President’s budget is better for Main St.
Bingo!
At this point i really agree with you TC , what i am reading sounds right on target— Proof comes in how the Repigs — Boner and crew are already screaming—
“In the last annual budget of his term, President Obama for the first time projects a deficit below $1 trillion and foresees the federal shortfall declining to sustainable levels by 2017. ”
Time for the wealthy to pay a fair share of Tax which they have avoided for far too long…
Amen to both!
Well, good news —
point 1 : the Republicans appear to be caving on the expiry of the payroll tax cut; (they really did paint themselves into a corner with that one, no doubt about it!) obviously, they would rather add to the deficit than ask the wealthy to kick in their fair share; (can’t go back on their Norquist pledge, but they have no qualms about sticking it to the country!)
point 2 : Mr Obama would bring in the Buffet Rule and end the tax breaks for the wealthy;
point 3 : Mr Obama would rein in the tax loopholes and subsidies for companies like Exxon Mobile who made billions in profits yet paid no income tax;
point 4 : the tax rate for 2011 is 15.4% and with this budget, increase to 19.2%; that compares to 18.2% under Regan and 20.4% under Clinton; and 17.9% if the US keeps the Bush tax cuts. Considering that taxes have not been as low since 1950, why are the Republicans castigating Mr Obama?
Paul Ryan calls Mr Obama’s budget a ‘dishonest budget’ but I still fail to see how he comes by that claim. The budget has to serve ALL the people in the best ways possible which Mr Obama’s budget attempts to do. Ryan’s budget is nothing more than a call to class warfare by providing tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations.
Under Rmoney, taxes for the wealthiest would be 25.9% and he would provide a balanced budget. To get there, he says no cuts to National Defense and no raising of of taxes elsewhere. The only way to deliver a balanced budget would be to cut programmes by 36% which means that the poor and seniiors will be the ones to pay! After all, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security amount to 43% of the current spending and defense 25%.
And Jabber Jowls McConnell calls this a divisive budget?! I call it an inclusive budget — it calls on the wealthy to pay their fair share, and it includes the programmes that the poor and the elderly rely on.
Clearly a budget is not an easy thing to draw up or understand. It is always guaranteed to be fractious but from the little I’ve seen, this is a good budget.
Very well said. Remember also, a Presidential budget is simply a statement of policy.