Economists of all political stripes widely agree the checks sent out last spring were ineffective in stemming the economic slide, partly because many strapped consumers paid bills or saved the cash rather than spend it. But Obama aides wanted a provision that could get money into consumers’ hands fast, and hope they will be persuaded to spend money this time if the credit is made a permanent feature of the tax code.
As for the business tax package, a key provision would allow companies to write off huge losses incurred last year, as well as any losses from 2009, to retroactively reduce tax bills dating back five years.
Krugman weighs in, Is Obama relying too much on tax cuts?
Look, Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they’ll demand 100%. Then they’ll start the thing about how you can’t cut taxes on people who don’t pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they’ll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid — which would undermine that part of the plan, too.
OK, maybe this is just a head fake from the Obama people — they think they can win the PR battle by making bipartisan noises, then accusing the GOP of being obstructionist. But I’m really worried that they’re sending off signals of weakness right from the beginning, and that they’re just going to embolden the opposition
One of the reasons the country doesn’t have cash in the bank and will continue to pile up record deficits is because of, not tax cuts per say, but large irresponsible tax cuts oriented toward the wealthy. The theory was these people would pump money into the economy, which in turn would boom and according to Bushnomics, the increase in GDP growth would bring in more revenue. That didn’t work. More tax cuts to the wealthy don’t guarantee more spending on domestic business. Americans that live at poverty level don’t ultimately pay any federal income tax. That leaves the middle-class. They might go out and spend a tax cut on domestic products or go on a continued spending spree of Chinese, Japanese and German imports which will do little in the way of stimulating the economy long term. Or they could decide that thinks look so bad they put the cash aside in savings. Why not shift half the Bush-Blue Dog Democrats tax to the middle-class. If Obama and team want to try the tax cut route, how about a one year jolt and see what happens. Krugman is absolutely right about Republicans, they’ve learned nothing from the last eight years. They had plenty of opportunity to make the regulatory changes that would have prevented or lessened the severity of the current financial crisis, did nothing and fought changes proposed by Democrats.
If Obama wants to throw Republicans a bone by all means cut corporate taxes. Because of loop holes, credits and write offs some of America’s wealthiest corporations pay little to no taxes.
If you don’t get punished, you didn’t go anything wrong, right?
That’s the message Vice President Dick Cheney gave in an interview with CBS’ Bob Schieffer on Sunday, suggesting that a president’s actions are legal if those actions didn’t result in his impeachment.
Asked by Schieffer if he believed that anything the president does in time of war is legal, Cheney said there is “historic precedent of taking action that you wouldn’t take in peacetime.”
The Courts have ruled multiple times that even in war exective power has its limits. The so-called “war on terror” to which Cheney is obviously referring exists only in rhetorical terms. The AUMF should have been more narrowly defined, but it was not so broad as to mean an unending war that spanned the globe, thus the rights garantted in the Constitution be suspended indefinitely. Though as usual there is that atom of truth in all of Cheney’s bull. Any legal precedents that have gone unchallenged could henceforth be considered as part and parcel of the president’s powers. So we shouldn’t hear any whining from Republicans who swore by the “unitary executive” when President Obama decides he’ll use or abuse those extraordinary powers too.
..department officials say much of the money was spent on lavish wood paneling and tile.
Republicans are almost never funny, except inadvertantly. Listen to Limbaugh or Faux News, or read Conservative blogs for plenty of examples. A John Hawkins at Right Wing News posts The 7th Annual “20 Most Annoying Liberals Of 2008”. First I note there is an empty banner ad telling potential advertisers they can buy that space for 75 cents. Thirteen of the the twenty people listed are not even liberals – Senator Harry Reid a liberal and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ? In what universe, where liberalism starts just to the left of Mussolini. His trashing of Hillary Clinton, well I’ve read better and funnier analysis from Democratic blogs and columnists. Cynthia McKinney might be a liberal on her home planet, but here she’s just a character that has no power and that most people, especially liberals find annoying.