Gene Sperling: White House 'fine' with no new revenue until 2013

[flpoljunkie]

July 31, 2011

W.H. 'fine' with no new revenues until 2013

Gene Sperling, director of President Barack Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, said Sunday the White House is "fine" with the idea that the initial deficit reduction package will contain "only spending cuts."

A bleary-eyed Sperling, who has been at the center of talks between the White House and congressional Republicans, said that Obama wouldn't seek new revenues over the next 18 months anyway and will still push for a payroll tax cut.

The key sticking point would be the trigger mechanism for the second tranche of deficit reduction, Sperling confirmed during an interview on CNN's "State of the Union."

"Both sides need to fear the enforcement mechanism," he said - meaning that tax cuts and entitlement reform need to be part of the equation.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0711/WH_fine_with_no_new_revenues_til_2013.html

[Autumn]

1. But of course they are

fine with it.

[chill_wind]

9. And they're not sweating the high rate of unemployment in the mix

either. At least not as far as votes. So there's that, as well, thank goodness.

:sarcasm:

Plouffe, just three weeks ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-07/unemployment-rate-won-t-hobble-re-election-david-plouffe-says.html

[Autumn]

37. hey they have jobs

what do you want, another damn handout? Now go eat your peas.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

2. I thought the Bush Tax Cuts expired in 2012? nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

3. from bloomberg

Yet Democrats will have their turn. On Dec. 31, 2012, three weeks before the end of President Barack Obama’s current term in office, the Bush tax cuts expire. Income tax rates will return to their Clinton-era levels. That amounts to a $3.6 trillion tax increase over 10 years, three or four times the $800 billion to $1.2 trillion in revenue increases that Obama and Speaker John Boehner were kicking around. And all Democrats need to do to secure that deal is -- nothing.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-28/democrats-can-lose-on-debt-win-on-bush-tax-cuts-commentary-by-ezra-klein.html

[Autumn]

6. Last time they were set to expire, same thing

all Democrats need to do to secure that they expired -- nothing oops, guess they did something (hostage shit and all that)and you can bet the farm on Dec. 31, 2012. they will do something again.

[Tennessee Gal]

7. Do you really think that Republicans will allow that to happen?

I don't. They will start working to avoid that as soon as this deal on the deficit ceiling is passed. And they will be vicious in their tactics.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

8. how will they do it? it is almost like they were stupid - they should

have agreed to a lesser revenue hike now that would supercede the Bush tax cut expiration amount.

On 12/31/12, sure, they can put a bill forward to extend the cuts, but it wouldn't fly in the senate.

In less, of course, we are in a depression by then. If we are, no one will let them expire.

[Tennessee Gal]

15. Too early to tell how they will do it, but I am certain they will

not let those tax cuts expire.

[Tennessee Gal]

4. This is disgusting.

As Warren Buffett said: "It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be. I've worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate's distribution of long straws is wildly capricious."

[Laura PourMeADrink]

12. yup....Income of the wealthy was 9% of all income in the 70s. It

is now 25%.

If only the US still actually made things again - where the middle class could earn a decent
wage. Now, you either are in the upper class or the service class.

[MrTriumph]

16. China's middle class is growing.

x

[DCBob]

5. I think Sperling was great on Fox News Sunday today.

He explains things very clearly and calmly. He is very good spokesman for the WH on these kind of issues.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. It was certainly Fox News Classic Style...

I've never seen anything on FoxNews I'd call 'great' that's for sure. In fact, I've not seen anything on FoxNews in a couple of years. The message there is shaped for the right wing, and I'm not the right wing, so it all sounds like nonsense to me. Right wing spin. Graphics for the focus impaired, look at all the magic colors! Wow!

[derby378]

11. The White House might be fine with it, but we're not

If Obama really does back a package with no tax increases on the wealthiest Americans, if he really intends to put the entire burden on the shoulders of the poor and the working class, he might as well hang a "Primary Me" sign around his neck.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

13. think you have to factor in the dismal economy and the effect of

a tax hike at this time. Especially since they will expire 12/2012 anyway.

[Tennessee Gal]

14. Republicans will never let those tax cuts expire.

And tax increases in the 90's spurred a dismal economy into a robust economy.

Clinton’s major contribution was pushing through the 1993 budget bill, which began to reduce what had become a chronic string of federal deficits. Republicans denounced it as the "largest tax increase in history," though in fact it was not a record and also contained some cuts in projected spending. Republican Rep. Newt Gingrich predicted: "The tax increase will kill jobs and lead to a recession, and the recession will force people off of work and onto unemployment and will actually increase the deficit." But just the opposite happened. Fears of inflation waned and interest rates fell, making money cheaper to borrow for homes, cars and investment. What had been a slow economic recovery turned into a roaring boom, bringing in so much unanticipated tax revenue from rising incomes and stock-market gains that the government actually was running record surpluses by the time Clinton left office.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

17. I understand -- just wondering how they could do it - only

controlling one branch. IMHO, they lost their chance by not agreeing to a lesser increase now.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. haha. we've got the same posts, posted double. Ok...maybe

they will come up with some way to block it...you are probably right. Maybe they will somehow
tie it to a bill saying the Navy Seals are heroes.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

19. good article

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-28/democrats-can-lose-on-debt-win-on-bush-tax-cuts-commentary-by-ezra-klein.html

[jefferson_dem]

27. It really doesn't matter what they want when it comes to the tax cuts.

They will automatically expire at the end of 2012 UNLESS they are extended, which would require support from a Democratic Congress...and (provided that Obama is re-elected) a Democratic President. Of course, if President Bachmann is inaugurated, all bets are off.

[TheKentuckian]

31. They do it just like before, they grab a hostage and get what they want in exchange for

a lot less than they give.

It also does not matter about President (insert boogieman here) because it will still come up before the end of the present term.

Shit, we did it last time for like 60 billion in unemployment benefits, there all kinds of hostages that are bigger than that. Hell, they can probably work in another debt ceiling fiasco by then.

Pretending this is a sure bet seems goofy to me. We should have rescinded these cuts as our first priority, they are pure shrink the pig and drown it policy and roadblock sensible economics. They are anti-competitive, wage destroying, pro-trade deficit, and anti-employment. They are handcuffs for government and when added to wars, the general military budget, and maintaining the police state there aren't resources for much else. Throw in a healthy helping of corporate welfare and you have no tax base and endless debt for no actual benefit for the average citizen.

Taxes are at like 16% of GDP. No bucks, no Buck Rogers and now a 12 year hole to fill in and climb out of with at most a willingness to stop digging...maybe...when things turn around.
There is a price to paid for the 12 years that ending the wars and going back to the pre-cut rates doesn't cover. Just servicing that debt has to come from somewhere that we have no revenue stream for. Plus, everyone wants to keep the below 250k cuts without any offsets which is another huge bite from somewhere along with the ever rising service on that debt.

Throw in the decline of the infrastructure with no serious plan to address it ever (and it becomes more expensive in the future, of course) and only the laughably inadequate 50 billion dollar "infrastructure bank". A mockery in the era of the multi-trillion dollar infrastructure deficit just to get out of date stuff to code and in a world where our outmoded power distribution, water, sewer, roads, bridges, mass transit, and internet adds up to a dismal 38th and we expect to compete to "grow the pie" to compensate for some of this happy horseshit.

The Bush/Obama tax cuts are completely unacceptable.

[Mass]

21. Because spending cuts will not do that? Seriously?

And they will hurt the poorest among us, for the most part.

[Mass]

20. Is there a transcript of what Sterling actually said?

[high density]

22. That's what Obama was saying to begin with

None of the "tax reform" that has been proposed went into effect before 2013. It's because we're debating on Republicans terms which insist tax increases kill jobs. It is apparently assumed that by 2013 the economy will be booming again so it won't matter.

I guess? The core issue is the White House accepting the GOP frame on everything, which I can't understand.

[flpoljunkie]

25. The media never bothered to report Obama never proposed tax increases to go into effect before 2013.

Republicans have tried to pretend otherwise and the media never called them out.

[Autumn]

26. I'm just curious as to how in the hell

they think the economy will be booming in 2013. I think they are crazy.

[tavalon]

23. Then they are fine with a Depression

Good information to know.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

24. Absolutely bassackwards.

"entitlement" reforms and tax cuts? What is required are tax increases and NO "entitlement" reforms.

As per usual, the f,cking politicians fail to listen to economists and instead enact a damaging, boneheaded plan that is the polar opposite of what is needed.

[TwilightGardener]

28. There was no way he'd get them anyway, so it's moot.

"Them" being tax increases.

[ClarkUSA]

29. Yup. That's because there's no way of getting any revenue as long as the House is in GOP hands.

The WH is waiting for 2102 to win back the House.

[phleshdef]

30. If we actually get it in 2013, I'm fine with that too.

In the grand scheme of things, it won't make any significant difference whether tax increases happen next year or in 2013. But they need to happen at some point within the next few years.

[Lorien]

32. Why would anything be any different then?

We had all three branches and Obama still couldn't control his own Blue dogs until RW legislation was proposed.

[phleshdef]

34. The unemployment situation is everything.

The only reason a deal was made on the Bush tax cuts, in the first place, was because of high unemployment. The President and most Democratic leaders did not want to risk a middle class tax hike and no unemployment extension while unemployment was still hovering around 9-10%. You can argue that they should have said screw it and let them expire and not got any unemployment benefit extensions and just let everyone's tax burden, across the board, become higher than it was in recent previous years. Regardless, if the unemployment situation is better by the end of 2012, then Dem leaders will be more likely to just let all the cuts expire. And even if it isn't, I think the likelihood is still a lot greater when you consider that a Presidential election will have just ended, President Obama will either be starting a second term or moving out of the White House. And it will be 2 years removed from the next mid-term. It would be the prime opportunity to let all the tax cuts expire for everyone with the least amount of immediate political consequences to worry about.

[jenmito]

33. That has been the plan all along, but is being mis-reported by the media to look like a loss

for Obama and Dems. in Congress.

[flpoljunkie]

35. Our media never fails to play right into the hands of the Republicans

[Jack Rabbit]

36. OK, where's Robin Hood when you need him?

??

[KoKo]

38. Probably many here don't know who Robin Hood Legend was....they

think if it wasn't a Musical, Druggie, Celebrity or "other" then they don't know and don't care.

Sorry...I'm being cynical...and the majority of DU'ers definitely know...but sometimes there's an element that one wonders if they even have reading comprehension skills past trashing a poster they don't like or reading a subject line and hitting the "UnRec Button."

Most folks are rational...I'm only talking about the ones the Mods haven't caught yet.

Don't mind me....I'm just overloaded from reading too much on internet and watching to much of the "Debt" :ROFL" Debate on Tee VEE.

I'm gonna take a break... :-)

Harry Potter movie last night and the "Legends of Robin Hood"...stuff of inspiration.