Obama’s Huge Tax Increase
by Big Dog on Aug 7, 2011 at 13:48 Political
Barack Obama is the first leader of this country to allow our credit rating to be downgraded. The US was downgraded by S&P to AA+ from AAA. The other credit ratings agencies have not followed suit but have indicated that they could. This downgrade comes because politicians refused to cut our debt by at least 4 TRILLION dollars, as the agencies indicated was necessary to avoid a downgrade.
The downgrade will likely mean higher interest rates for all of us on our credit cards, at the bank, and for any item we buy on time. This downgrade is a tax increase on us all. Barack Obama told us it would be:
This is not some abstract issue. These are obligations that the United States has taken on in the past. The Congress has run up the credit card and we now have an obligation to pay our bills. If we do not it could have a whole set of adverse consequences. We could end up with a situation, for example, where interest rates rise for everybody all throughout the country, effectively a tax increase on everybody. Guardian UK [emphasis mine]
When the debt ceiling fight was in full swing Obama warned us that failure to resolve it could jeopardize our credit rating and if it was downgraded the result would effectively be a tax increase on us all. Looks like we have that tax increase even though we raised the debt limit because we did not cut enough. The ratings agencies warned us and the bull headed politicians who went for the debt limit deal ignored them.
The Obama regime knew this was coming and has been arguing to keep it from happening. This is why Obama and his cronies were all out shouting that the TEA Party got what it wanted. They want the public to believe that the plan put forward is the one the TEA Party wanted so that they can blame the TEA Party for the downgrade. The fact is, the only part of the deal that matches with TEA Party desire is the part that involves no tax increase. I have already pointed out that there are going to be tax increases (the credit rating drop and the elimination of the Bush cuts) but no tax increase was directly written into the bill.
The TEA Party wanted greater cuts. The Ryan Plan, which was really cut, cap and balance, cut more than 4 TRILLION dollars which is what the agencies said we needed to avoid a downgrade. The TEA Party favored that plan and that is not the plan that was passed. The one that passed favored big spending politicians who will continue to spend but will ignore the required cuts. We will be 7 TRILLION more in debt in ten years because of what they did.
Seven TRILLION more is not a cut, period.
So don’t pin this on the TEA Party with phony slogans about being held hostage and guns to heads. If they had listened to the TEA Party members our credit rating would not have been lowered and we would have over 4 TRILLION dollars in cuts though one wonders if a future Congress would honor them.
Seems they only live up to the tax increase part of debt “deals.”
To top it off, Democrats are saying the credit downgrade means we need to raise taxes. They just got raised by the downgrade (ask Barack Obama) and they will rise again when the Bush cuts expire. That is not stopping the Democrats from trying to raise them even more. This is all they know how to do and now their buzz word is “balanced” as in a balanced approach.
To them balance means to add more taxes so they can spend more money we do not have.
Tell your members of Congress that we just got an Obama tax increase because he allowed the credit rating to drop and that we do not need more taxes. We need to make meaningful cuts that Congress will honor.
Absent that we will see the other agencies downgrade our credit rating and we will have even more Obama tax increases.
As an aside, Obama said we needed a deal to avoid the downgrade and Turbo-Tax Timmy Geithner said that there was no risk of us losing our rating. Both were wrong. Is it obvious yet to the Obama followers that he and his regime are incompetent?
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: balanced budget, credit downgrade, lies, Obama, tax increase
Well, you can also pin the blame on people like your friend Adam. He and his ilk insist that tax cuts and government spending cuts have no place on the budget planning table. Only tax increase can be considered, and only increased spending will cure what ails the country.
Adam is not alone in thinking that, either; many socialists and liberals are so uneducated or myopic about their agenda that they will rather see the entire system fail and die than admit that liberalism IS the problem. I can’t buy into the concept that they really believe what they say. How is it possible to be so stupid?
Well, it isn’t. It is impossible to be so stupid and still function.
Liberalism, a mental illness. Proving again and again they are not trust-able with politics or power.
Yep, their idea of a balanced approach is to tax more and spend more. They figure more tax revenue and more spending balances things out.
They have no concept of how to balance the other way or to do so without stealing our hard earned money.
Funny how you blame Obama. But for what? It happened on his watch? Fair enough. Anything else? You give no blame to Congress for the gridlock that was the primary reason for the downgrade. That is the most revealing detail about your attack on Obama. You don’t understand the primary reasoning behind the downgrade but you’re sure it’s Obama’s fault somehow or for some reason.
I like how the 2012 GOP candidates are marching out similar attacks but can’t seem to agree why he is to blame. Did he do too much? Did he do too little? Did he refuse to use his rainbow unicorn machine to magically make everyone in Congress agree with the GOP? Personally I would have never voted for Obama had I known he was holding out on us and using his unicorns for his own projects.
The gridlock was not the primary reason. S&P stated that there was not significant cuts or revenue increases. It warned that any method that did not get us to 4 trillion in debt reduction would risk the downgrade. That is what THEY said was the main reason.
I know you can scream about gridlock but gridlock is how our government was designed. The Obama regime has had months to address this as he was made aware of the debt ceiling issue early on. Considering he already had the (at the time) largest debt ceiling increase just last year one would assume he knew how to deal with it.
The reality is he wanted it pushed to the brink because he figured that Republicans (particularly TEA Party Republicans) would blink first. He was sure these freshmen would get worried and would give in to his demands. They did not blink. This issue went to the end because Democrats (especially Obama) wanted it to go to the end to gin up the whole “crisis” meme. Obama likes to create a crisis so that he can push through things that might not normally pass. Remember, never let a crisis go to waste and in order to do that he sometimes (actually all the time) has to make up the crisis.
He took a risk that if he and his Dems could push this to the brink they could get what they wanted from skittish Republicans. He was mostly right in that a deal was struck by establishment Repubs and Dems. The far left voted no and the TEA Party voted no (for very different reasons) but the only compromise Obama was concerned with happened. he got it pushed past the last election so he does not have it smacking him in the face when he is trying to get reelected. He was more than happy to agree to no tax hikes to get it pushed past the next election. He already knows he will get a tax increase hwne the Bush tax cuts expire.
This tax increase that he has given us (his words) will not bring revenue to the gubmint like a direct tax increase but will cost us more nonetheless.
The Democrats have had control over the period of time this all took place. It has culminated on Obama’s watch because he is spending more and more and his budgets have bigger and bigger deficits. He has no concept and is spending us into oblivion.
The ratings folks wanted a reduction of 4 tillion and they do not care if that comes from tax increases (which will not reduce the debt) or from cuts so long as thta happened.
To say that it is because of the TEA Party or because of no tax increases is wrong and flies in the face of the reality of the S&P report. Obama was warned he needed 4 trillion in cuts and he did refused to entertain any plan that gave us that much.
Now we are downgraded and it is his fault.
Obama could have gotten his Dems to agree witht he cut, cap, and balance but he refused to consider it and never offered his own plan. He led from the rear…
As for his rainbow unicorns, he issued them all to the gays in the military…
And Adam,
Why is it that no one seems to be willing to accept the blame? And no one seems to be willing that this mess has not only been brewing for years, but has also been caused by Democrats and Republicans; no one party is off the hook, because bad players from both sides did this. Now, at the rarified level our dear leaders play at, party affiliation makes no nevermind. At their level, they see that party platforms is something they use to keep us at each other’s throats. Get that through your head. Party division is the ol’ divide and conquer voodoo they do so well! So you whine about why blame Obama? Easy: It happened on his watch, and as he was uniquely positioned to a.) use the strategy that would end the fracas and b.) make the most political hay out of this as anyone before him, he chose to do neither, and that’s because he hasn’t the courage to, nor the will to. Does that mean I am against him because he’s the first black president? Hmmm…I have to be honest with you, I don’t really know if he’s black or not. And I really don’t care. What concerns me is that he’s a crook, everyone knows it, but nothing is being done about it. And that could be because he’s just part of the club, and to expose him for his crimes exposes everyone.
Remember, The Ryan Budget would have cut 4 trillion- the Cut, Cap, and Balance would have done the same, and more than satisfied S&P, and all the others- instead, we have these socialist whiners who are addicted to spending and can’t realize that the cuts will have to be deep- the libbies don’t do deep, they haven’t the capacity for it.
It’s like an amputation- you sure do not want to do it, but the patient will die if you do not. BTW, this will hurt everyone- that’s the nature of a democracy here.
Now the fact that some in our society will be more insulated than othersis just how life works.
JFK once said, “Anyone who expects life to be fair has been grossly mis-informed.”
Actually, we blame you and your ilk, Adam.
“That is what THEY said was the main reason.”
No they did not. If they did then prove it.
“The Obama regime has had months to address this as he was made aware of the debt ceiling issue early on.”
Yes. Obama had months to cave in completely to everything the GOP wanted. Why did he take us to the brink? How dare we blame the gunmen when it’s the negotiators that are to blame here!
Pardon my snark. I just get a little shocked sometimes by how far you can stretch reality to fit your view.
Once again, we see how Adam stretches his view to try to get around the reality of the situation.
If Bari had listened to the TEA Party folks, we wouldn’t have had a downgrade, but as the Residential retard here, he just can’t wrap his mind around reality- if it doesn’t fit his pre-conceived notions, he simply rejects it out of hand.
He is egotistical enough to think that he can bend reality to suit his preferences and that is not happening.
Obama and his regime had complete control of all three branches before 2010. They could have passed a budget way before this whole thing. They could have done what was right for this country. But they did not.
S&P said that 4 trillion woul dbe needed to keep AAA rating.
The report indicates that 2.1 trillion is a start but debt will likely grow:
“We view the act’s measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation.
However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves
open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and
Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even
assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act
envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general
government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid
financial assets) will likely continue to grow. Under our revised base case
fiscal scenario–which we consider to be consistent with a ‘AA+’ long-term
rating and a negative outlook–we now project that net general government debt
would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and
85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high
in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise
under the act’s revised policy settings.”
Now if they said we needed 4 T to keep AAA and we did not hit 4T and they downgraded, what is the reason? Well the report says that it is unlikely we will hit the cuts in the plan and that our debt will continue to rise (it even mentions the fact that we did not address entitlements but you won’t hear libs discuss that).
It is the Obama Downgrade and tax cut. Must suck to have to defend such an incompetent boob every day.
And Obama had months to introduce his own plan. He did not and neither did the Dems.
And maybe if the Dems had actually given us a budget over the last 3 years we might have been able to rein in spending (doubtful since they have trillions in deficit spending in any budget ideas).
It’s one thing to say 4 trillion would have prevented the downgrade. It’s another to say that failure to get 4 trillion is the “main” reason for the downgrade. It’s not. S&P says so in the document you just cited. You’re confusing the two.
It would be like saying 4 extra water trucks could have stopped the fire so the lack of extra water trucks is the primary reason the house burned down. No, I think the people playing with matches inside probably share a bit more blame. S&P sees big problems in the economy (and rightfully so) and was looking for a Congress willing to work for a solution. What it saw was a broken Congress run by failing GOP leadership in the House.
Boehner said he got about 98% of what he wanted in the deal. I guess he’s at 100% now that Aaa is gone and you guys are pointing fingers at everybody but yourselves.
No, what it saw was a progressive tendency in the Senate and Presidency that logic in the House could not overcome at this time- so it saw gridlock, because if any asshat liberal thinks for a minute that the TEA Party is going to buckle now that we see what “compromise” has gotten our nation, due ENTIRELY to progressives who do not care a bit about our nation, NEVER AGAIN.
Yes, I’m sure S&P agrees with you. Everything would be just fine if Obama and the Democrats would just get used to bending over and kissing the ass of the TEA Party minority and giving it every single irrational and harmful thing it demands.
No, S&P simply said that we needed 4T in debt reduction and it had no opinion on whether that was accomplished via cuts, tax increases or both. So it had nothing to do with kissing anything. It had to do with not getting to 4T.
None of the plans that included tax increases got us there. Only one plan did…
Sorry but S&P said that 4 trillion would keep it from happening. That is the main reason and the document says so in a round about way. It says they did not cut enough and it is doubtful the cuts will actually take place.
Your analogy makes no sense because having water does not prevent a fire but less spending reduces debt.
If your mother told you that you had to get a B in class or you would not get any desert for a month and you got a C and she stopped giving you desert then the cause is the fact you did not get the B.
S&P said there needed to be 4 T in cuts, there was not 4T in cuts so we were downgraded. If we had 4T in cuts they would not have downgraded.
If 4T was the first and most important reason they would have stated it first in their rationale.
What do they list first reason? The problems in Congress. Second? The size of the package. The size does matter. Had the GOP Congress not brought us to the brink of a default and had S&P not made an error in their calculations it’s quite possible there would have been no downgrade.
You cannot shake off the fact that the S&P downgrade is primarily the fault of actions in Congress and has little to do with Obama’s actions, either way. Who the public actually blames for this is left to be seen but so far views have not been kind to the GOP while leaving Obama unscathed up to now.
Actually, you can’t get over that they told us what would happen unless and then did it. Their rationale takes a long way around saying it and it also addresses entitlement reform. It does not say we should have raised taxes. It says that we did not cut enough, they don’t think that we will stick to the cuts and that entitlements were not touched.
The GOP had nothing to do with it. You guys manufactured the crisis and then refused to follow the mandate of the people. Elections have consequences. The TP ran on no tax increase and cutting budget. Then they won and did what they said.
When Obama won and did something you said well he said he was going to. You expect the TP to bow down to the Dems but they stood firm.
We lost the rating because Democrats refused to allow entitlement reform or meaningful cuts.
I know it is hard fo ryou as the boy wonder continues to screw up and demonstrate why he will be a one termer but you have to face reality one day.
And the Senate has a lot of Dems up for reelection next year….
The “problem in Congress” as you call it, is not Congress Men Being Too Conservative.
It is Congressmen being too liberal. Too irresponsible, Not willing to cut wasteful spending, especially on core waste programs that are associated with liberal social agendas like welfare, subsidies, bailouts and complementary blue hats for brainless liberal mouth-pieces.
“Elections have consequences.”
I couldn’t agree more. Sometimes we elect qualified, smart leaders for Congress. Other times we elect the TEA Party.
Yeah, sometimes we elect smart qualified people who were there before the TEA Party. Oh wait, those smart qualified people are the ones who got us into this mess. These smart qualified folks from both parties played politics as usual and got us in financial trouble.
Funny what you consider smart and qualified.
But then again, sometimes we elect a smart qualified person to be president and then we elect Obama who is unqualified, inexperienced, ignorant and unable to lead.