# Obama {deals | caves} on tax cut extensions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 7, 2010, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266 "2010-12-07T13:56:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/181 "2010-12-10T00:02:12Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > … > > Conservatives view the government as having no inherent claim to anyone’s property. There’s a certain level of taxes that are required as a necessary evil. But when the government taxes people, it’s taking what really belongs to the people, and thus needs to be looked at long and hard before an assessment can be made that the need rises to the level that justifies seizing other people’s property. > > … Interesting. I’m a liberal who could agree with what you think is the “Conservative” view. Your description of the “liberal view” doesn’t ring true to me either. And to jump into the debate, this “deal” he cut is okay with me. I’m much more disappointed in his failure to get (or even try real hard) single payer heath care. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/182 "2010-12-10T00:21:17Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > Puzzles me as well that the Dems suck so badly at messaging. Laws, yes. M-O-O-N, that spells “Democrats suck at messaging”. The phrase “_tax cuts for the rich_” should not be in a Democratic politician’s vocabulary. With the Democratic plan, _everyone_ retains some of Bush’s tax cuts. Rather, the phrasing should be “_tax bonus for the rich_” (courtesy of Center for American Progress, I think). That’s a bit more clear that everyone has tax cuts preserved – just that high income earners don’t receive a disproportionate amount (in absolute dollars…see [Goolsby’s whiteboard](http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/goolsbee-on-tax-cuts-for-the-rich/)). Or, what I think might’ve been the phrasing if it were a Republican talking point, “_tax bailout for the rich_”. “Bonus” isn’t bad, but “bailout” has a more visceral effect. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/183 "2010-12-10T00:25:36Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I think there’s a fundamental difference in the way conservatives and liberals view the government’s relationship to the people that shapes their priorities as regards to these issues. > > Liberals seem to view the government, as representative of the people, as “owning” all the assets and income in the country. From this perspective, anything anyone has - no matter how they came by it - was effectively given to them by the government, either actively by transfer payments or passively by not taxing it. If the government gives something to someone or a group of people, the government is simply giving its own assets to these people. > > From this vantage point, it’s natural that liberals focus on who deserves to have what portion of the nation’s assets, and a tax cut is “giving” something to the people whose taxes were cut. Naturally they look askance at tax cuts for the rich, because why should the government “give” the rich anything? > > Conservatives view the government as having no inherent claim to anyone’s property. There’s a certain level of taxes that are required as a necessary evil. But when the government taxes people, it’s taking what really belongs to the people, and thus needs to be looked at long and hard before an assessment can be made that the need rises to the level that justifies seizing other people’s property. > > So it comes to tax cuts for the rich versus programs for the poor. Liberals focus on “giving” to the rich versus giving to the poor. Conservatives focus on taking people’s money to give other people versus letting people keep their own hard earned money. > > [I had half a mind to start a separate thread about this, but I don’t think I will have the energy to follow through on debating it.] I think you’re misinterpreted the liberal mindset. Put aside wild-eyed claims that the Democrats are socialists and/or communists. Both parties are fully committed to the right of personal property. And the Democrats don’t want to raise taxes anymore than the Republicans want to cut government services. Both sides agree that taxes are a necessary evil that is required to maintain necessary government serivces. The difference between the two parties lie in what they consider necessary (or desirable) government services. Conservatives tend to support the principle that the government should get out of the way and let (or force) people to take care of their own needs. Liberals tend to support the principle that the government should help people in need and act as a force for good. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/184 "2010-12-10T01:06:21Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Conservatives tend to support the principle that the government should get out of the way and let (or force) people to take care of their own needs. Liberals tend to support the principle that the government should help people in need and act as a force for good. I disagree. For example, Democrats are committed to an aggressive foreign policy, the garrisoning of the world, to a program of surveillance and statism at home, a policy of militarizing the police and subjugating individual autonomy to the false prerogatives of security, and helping their friends in the financial, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries. Republicans, in contrast, just wish to knit socks for their grandchildren. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/185 "2010-12-10T01:07:54Z")
Socks of DOOM! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/186 "2010-12-10T01:38:31Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > … Republicans, in contrast, just wish to knit socks for their grandchildren. Sure, but they knit those socks from the blood of the working class! I mean, wool made from the blood of the working…wool made from sheep that grazed on the blood of… Well, anyway, they suck. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/187 "2010-12-10T02:12:02Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > There are a lot of cuts that could be made. The argument for raising taxes shouldn’t be “but we are already spending too much, we want to spend more” > > As has been pointed out here before, cuts need to be made across the entire landscape of the federal government: > > Defense, SSN, Welfare (and other handout programs) > > Let’s start there and we can move on to other places. > > The question isn’t really where do we need to make cuts, it’s who is going to take the hit for making the necessary ones. The projected deficit is not much larger than before the recession. We have had the better part of ten years of Republican rule. There isn’t a lot of fat in budget. Among the people who have to take the hit are the taxpayers, its really that simple. No matter how much they kick and scream that they can’t possibly survive under a Clinton era tax regime (which is significantly lower than the tax regime we had under MOST of the Reagan years), they can not only survive, they can flourish if the years between 1981 and 2000 are any indicator. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/188 "2010-12-10T03:12:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Liberals seem to view the government, as representative of the people, as “owning” all the assets and income in the country. From this perspective, anything anyone has - no matter how they came by it - was effectively given to them by the government, either actively by transfer payments or passively by not taxing it. If the government gives something to someone or a group of people, the government is simply giving its own assets to these people. I don’t think liberals see government that way but it is how you see liberals. Its telling. > [@](#): > > So it comes to tax cuts for the rich versus programs for the poor. Liberals focus on “giving” to the rich versus giving to the poor. Conservatives focus on taking people’s money to give other people versus letting people keep their own hard earned money. I don’t know how to tell you this but when you spend money on the poor you have passed a tax, maybe not now but eventually that spending has to be paid for and it will likely be paid for in taxes. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/189 "2010-12-10T03:17:11Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Liberals seem to view the government, as representative of the people, as “owning” all the assets and income in the country. From this perspective, anything anyone has - no matter how they came by it - was effectively given to them by the government, either actively by transfer payments or passively by not taxing it. If the government gives something to someone or a group of people, the government is simply giving its own assets to these people. I love these arguments where somebody puts the stupidest thing they can think of into the minds of their opponents, and then argues against that. It is almost impossible to lose! ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/190 "2010-12-10T03:57:24Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > [**Who Loses Under Obama’s GOP Tax Compromise? The Working Poor**](http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/taxes/working-poor-pay-more-obama-gop-tax-compromise/19752400/?icid=fbuzz%7Cworking-poor-pay-more-obama-gop-tax-compromise/19752400&a_dgi=aolshare_facebook) > > "But as tax experts look at the proposal more closely, it has become clear that the working poor will actually end up losing money under the new arrangement. > > “Single working people with earnings below $20,000 and married couples with earnings below $40,000 are worse off under the payroll tax cut proposals in the compromise between the president and the Republicans,” explains Bob Williams, a senior fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Policy Center. > > Here’s why: The Obama proposal substitutes a Social Security payroll tax cut for the Making Work Pay credit, which was targeted to do the most good for low-income families. Under current rules, the working poor receive $400 when they earn at least $6,452 a year through the Making Work Pay credit. Married couples with earnings above $12,900 get $800 under the program. > > **The compromise cuts the Social Security payroll tax from 6.2% to 4.2%, so a couple would have to earn $40,000 to get the same $800 tax benefit. Every working-class couple earning less than that will get less than $800, meaning they lose money under the Obama proposal.**" > Call, call, call! Shayna, you know I think you’re great, but the Making Work Pay credit was expiring. In the absence of a deal, working families would have gotten neither the credit nor the payroll tax cut. Consequently, between that fact and the unemployment benefit extension, it seems clear to me that this deal, distasteful as it is, is better than just letting everything fall through. And while better compromises can be written, this one has the backing of the GOP leadership, which is a precondition to getting it through the Senate. I can call my Democratic congresscritters from dawn to dusk, and it won’t change the fact that at least some GOP acquiescence is required for any compromise, and nobody’s produced a better deal that they’ve also demonstrated the existence of GOP votes for in the Senate. This is really a take-it-or-leave-it deal. The GOP is quite willing to throw the unemployed and the working poor under the bus. That’s not how I’m made. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/191 "2010-12-10T04:40:36Z")
The bad news? The Republicans are barking mad. Worse? Next month, they go off their meds. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/192 "2010-12-10T04:46:55Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The bad news? The Republicans are barking mad. Worse? Next month, they go off their meds. There are meds for what they’ve got? Who knew? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/193 "2010-12-10T05:18:00Z")
Well, did you ever see “Old Yeller”? ---
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/194 "2010-12-10T05:38:58Z")
A great [post](http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/12/more-tax-deal)by Kevin Drum who examines an [argument](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/opinion/10krugman.html?hp)made by Krugman that this deal is bad politically for Obama. Krugman argues that forecasts show the deal is expansionary in 2011 but contractionary in 2012 and what matters is how the economy in 2012 compares with 2011. As Drum points out, it’s a bit more complicated than that especially because the forecasts assume a baseline in which some but not all of Bush’s tax cuts are extended. Compared to the real alternative of all the tax cuts expiring the deal is likely expansionary in both 11 and 12. Overall given the circumstances this is a pretty decent tax bill both for the economy and Obama’s re-election chances. Of course it would be possible to design a better bill repealing the tax cuts on the top brackets and compensating with a bigger stimulus targetted at the middle class. However that is not on the table and Obama did a pretty good job of negotiating with what he had. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/195 "2010-12-10T06:01:47Z")
And will only get worse, once the Bachmann-Palin Overdrive gets into town. Cowbell. Lots of cowbell. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/196 "2010-12-10T14:37:28Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Interesting. I’m a liberal who could agree with what you think is the “Conservative” view. I didn’t mean you personally. There are exceptions to all generalizations. They’re only true in general (at best). Possibly you are someone who would not view the “tax cuts for the rich versus unemployment benefits” issue solely in terms of “rich versus poor”, to the exclusion of any consideration of the fact that one is people keeping money that they themselves have earned and the other is forcefully taking money from some people to give to others. Possibly you are someone who would not refer to tax cuts as “giving” people something. But there are quite a lot of liberals who do view these things that way, as evidenced by the discussions of the issues on this MB and elsewhere. I’m talking about all those people. They seem to be the predominant liberal viewpoint. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/197 "2010-12-10T14:44:35Z")
No, it doesn’t. You know perfectly well that no liberal thinks that. _Communists_ think that. Most liberals _do_ agree that _a portion_ of an individual’s earnings rightfully belong to the people. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/198 "2010-12-10T15:05:11Z")
I think everyone agrees that some amount of tax is necessary. My point is not about the actual positions of liberals, but rather about the way they frame the issues. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/199 "2010-12-10T15:20:30Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I think everyone agrees that some amount of tax is necessary. > > My point is not about the actual positions of liberals, but rather about the way they frame the issues. Hey, how about you name a single real person who holds the positions you ascribe to ‘liberals’, instead of railing against your straw man. Seriously, it makes for a much more satisfying debate for participants and lurkers alike. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2010, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266/200 "2010-12-10T16:07:14Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I didn’t mean you personally. There are exceptions to all generalizations. They’re only true in general (at best). > > Possibly you are someone who would not view the “tax cuts for the rich versus unemployment benefits” issue solely in terms of “rich versus poor”, to the exclusion of any consideration of the fact that one is people keeping money that they themselves have earned and the other is forcefully taking money from some people to give to others. Possibly you are someone who would not refer to tax cuts as “giving” people something. > > But there are quite a lot of liberals who do view these things that way, as evidenced by the discussions of the issues on this MB and elsewhere. I’m talking about all those people. They seem to be the predominant liberal viewpoint. The liberals you’re imagining are extremely rare. They’re as uncommon as the conservative extremist fringe who are living in bunkers and talking about secession. These people exist but they have no influence on the political mainstream. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-deals-caves-on-tax-cut-extensions/563266.md?page=11)