Obama to propose "Grand Bargain"

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,350
Reputation
3,848
Daps
107,192
Reppin
Detroit
Obama to propose 'grand bargain'

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama will propose a "grand bargain for middle-class jobs" on Tuesday that would cut the U.S. corporate tax rate and use billions of dollars in revenues generated by a business tax overhaul to fund projects aimed at creating jobs.

His goal, to be outlined in a speech at an Amazon.com Inc facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee, is to break through congressional gridlock by trying to find a formula that satisfies both Republicans and Democrats.

Efforts to reach a bipartisan "grand bargain" on deficit reduction have been at an impasse for months.

Senior administration officials said Obama is not giving up on a big deficit-cutting package, but given that no agreement appears on the horizon, he is offering a new idea to try to follow through on his 2012 campaign promises to help the middle class.

"As part of his efforts to focus Washington on the middle class, today in Tennessee the president will call on Washington to work on a grand bargain focused on middle-class jobs by pairing reform of the business tax code with a significant investment in middle-class jobs," said Obama's senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer.

A spokesman for John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, criticized the idea even before the release of the plan's details, saying it further backs Obama's policies on taxes and spending "while leaving small businesses and American families behind."

Obama wants to cut the corporate tax rate of 35 percent down to 28 percent and give manufacturers a preferred rate of 25 percent. He also wants a minimum tax on foreign earnings as a tool against corporate tax evasion and increased use of tax havens.

The new twist is that in exchange for his support for a corporate tax reduction, he wants money generated by the tax overhaul to be used on a mix of proposals such as funding infrastructure projects like repairing roads and bridges, improving education at community colleges, and promoting manufacturing, senior administration officials said.

Obama's proposal would generate a one-time source of revenue, for example, by reforming depreciation or putting a fee on accumulated foreign earnings.

Officials gave no specific figure on how much money would be raised, but Obama called for $50 billion for infrastructure spending in his State of the Union speech in February.

The White House hopes the idea will gain some traction in Congress because Republicans want corporate tax reform and Democrats want spending for infrastructure, so this offers something for both sides.

Administration officials said they recognize, however, that the climate is difficult in Congress with Republicans adamantly refusing anything that is seen as increasing spending and Democrats in no mood to cut taxes and get nothing for it.

Bob Corker, a Republican from Tennessee on the Senate Banking Committee, sounded a skeptical note, but said he has yet to see the proposal's details.

"It would have to be a massive deal, I think, for any kind of Republican to look at revenues as part of this," Corker said on MSNBC. He said it would have to include "transformative structural changes" for programs such as Medicare for the elderly and the Social Security retirement system.

Obama's speech in Chattanooga is the latest in a series of speeches aimed at making good on his promises to boost the U.S. economy in ways that help the middle class. He is looking to breathe new life into his second term, which has so far found successes to be fleeting.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-propose-grand-bargain-corporate-tax-rate-infrastructure-100321284.html

I don't even see the point of this...Obama would have to be stupid to think that Republicans will cooperate on this, so it won't pass, and I don't see what Obama would gain politically. :snoop:


Most likely this ends one of two ways:

1. Obama gives Republicans 90% of what they want in the name of "bipartisianship"

2. Obama gives Republicans 90% of what they want in the name of "bipartisianship", and they filibuster it anyway
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,640
Reputation
4,859
Daps
68,530
The biggest failure of the Democrats was playing around when they took the House in 2008. The problem was that they had a bunch of center-left Clinton Democrats in there who were hesitant. I wonder when true progressives will be able to win in the South again like they used to. Basically, Obama is trying anything to not be a lame duck, but Congress is basically prepared to wait him out. I'm still perplexed as to why there weren't constitutional challenges to the Republican brand of redistricting in 2010. I'll have to ask one of my profs about that. I would've suspected that one would've come by now.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,350
Reputation
3,848
Daps
107,192
Reppin
Detroit
The biggest failure of the Democrats was playing around when they took the House in 2008. The problem was that they had a bunch of center-left Clinton Democrats in there who were hesitant. I wonder when true progressives will be able to win in the South again like they used to. Basically, Obama is trying anything to not be a lame duck, but Congress is basically prepared to wait him out. I'm still perplexed as to why there weren't constitutional challenges to the Republican brand of redistricting in 2010. I'll have to ask one of my profs about that. I would've suspected that one would've come by now.

I'm not sure there's any reason other than "Democrats are spineless cowards and are scared of Republicans".

Dudes had the House, Senate, and Presidency and were still letting the Republicans boss them around. :mindblown:
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,640
Reputation
4,859
Daps
68,530
I'm not sure there's any reason other than "Democrats are spineless cowards and are scared of Republicans".

Dudes had the House, Senate, and Presidency and were still letting the Republicans boss them around. :mindblown:

That was pitiful, but at the same time, I was out there. Those Blue Dog Democrats were just as bad. I mean the REAL Blue Dogs. All those guys Rahm recruited that were basically moderate republicans by today's standards. Democrats are so afraid of offending middle america and that Fox News crowd that they turn p*ssy and wait for the perfect time or break apart in their own ranks who have many members that cater to them. There are so many progressive bills that my staffer friends were working on that got pushed to the back of the line (while being completed) when Dems were in power and then got tossed in the bushes once Republicans took over. But I still don't understand the lack of the constitutional challenge.
 

Domingo Halliburton

Handmade in USA
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
12,616
Reputation
1,370
Daps
15,451
Reppin
Brooklyn Without Limits
Why lower the rates when corps find ways around NOT paying the taxes on hand??

I'm pretty sure the proposal would eliminate a lot of write-offs and loopholes therefore theoretically raising revenues.

We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and we wonder why no corporation keeps their money in the US.
 

ltheghost

Payin Debts.... N40
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
6,503
Reputation
480
Daps
7,434
Reppin
Japan, but from the 989
I like this plan. I'm not sure about the taxes on foreign earnings part, but that will get cut out of the final bill when it reaches the house. Cutting the Corporate Tax will start growth....well for those who have corporations they might want to hire more people. Or they can be greedy fukks and take the tax cut and not hire any one. It's not going to be passed anyway because the House will never allow Obama to have a win. Even if Ronald Reagan came back from the dead and endorsed the idea, these cacs in the House will never let it happen.

After Obama leaves office I'm willing to put up some money they will find a way to have him thrown in prison..just because that is the type of a$$holes we are dealing with in this country.
 

acri1

The Chosen 1
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
24,350
Reputation
3,848
Daps
107,192
Reppin
Detroit
I'm pretty sure the proposal would eliminate a lot of write-offs and loopholes therefore theoretically raising revenues.

We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and we wonder why no corporation keeps their money in the US.

This is a half-truth at best.

We have the highest nominal corporate tax rate for a developed country, but the effective corporate tax rate (what corporations actually pay) is the lowest it's been in 40 years - 12.1%. It's dishonest to blame our economic problems on corporations paying too much money in taxes.

http://business.time.com/2012/02/06...ecades-is-big-business-paying-its-fair-share/
 

Richard Wright

Living Legend
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
3,402
Reputation
690
Daps
6,384
The corporate tax should be 0 because they dont pay anyway, they get rebates. Gotta play the field of the global economy.
 

Domingo Halliburton

Handmade in USA
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
12,616
Reputation
1,370
Daps
15,451
Reppin
Brooklyn Without Limits
This is a half-truth at best.

We have the highest nominal corporate tax rate for a developed country, but the effective corporate tax rate (what corporations actually pay) is the lowest it's been in 40 years - 12.1%. It's dishonest to blame our economic problems on corporations paying too much money in taxes.

http://business.time.com/2012/02/06...ecades-is-big-business-paying-its-fair-share/
I'm not blaming taxes on growth. We need demand to pick up for growth regardless of the tax environment. We all try to pay as little in taxes as we can and corps owe it to their shareholders to do it as well.
 

MostReal

Bandage Hand Steph
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
25,343
Reputation
3,362
Daps
57,265
they still won't pass it. These Republicans are the worst...don't care about the country at all.

All they are obsessed with is hurting Obama :snoop:


I just hate that the Demos wasted all that time they had when they could have pushed anything they wanted through...and now they are still paying the price for being scared to take responsibility & ownership of their legislation.
 
Top