I’m beginning to resonate more and more with this, so, for this sake, I’ll stipulate.
We need to raise revenues.
Now that we’ve agreed we’re gonna raise more money than we otherwise used to, I think it’s responsible to earnestly look at methods that make sense. That is, create the correct incentives, don’t damage any economic stability we currently have. I’m not sure I have the answers, but I think I know what the answer would look like [at the risk of summoning “You know porn when you see it”].
Further, in this effort, I would be careful NOT to offend the folks on the other side of the table that are reluctant partners in our “raise taxes” debate.
For example, I would not say:
If we choose to keep those tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, if we choose to keep a tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and natural gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars,” Obama said this week, “then that means we’ve got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship, that means we’ve got to stop funding certain grants for medical research, that means that food safety may be compromised, that means that Medicare has to bear a greater part of the burden.
I for sure wouldn’t create the wedge in class that Obama just did.
President Barack Obama’s proposal to end a tax break for corporate jet owners, a repeated refrain in his news conference yesterday, would achieve less than one-tenth of 1 percent of his target for reducing the federal deficit.
Such a change would put $3 billion into the Treasury over a decade…
This isn’t serious offer. This is just more political shenanigans. And quite frankly, why no one ever believe the Democrats really wnna compromise. They just wanna figure out what they have to give the Republicans inorder to get to spend more money on their own pet projects.