American Morning

Tune in at 6am Eastern for all the news you need to start your day.
September 13th, 2011
05:33 AM ET

Talk Back: Should Obama's jobs plan be funded by limiting tax deductions?

From CNN's Carol Costello:

President Obama sent his jobs proposal to Congress yesterday, although it is unlikely that the bill will pass in its current form. While Republicans have said that they like parts of the plan, they don't like how the President wants to tax the rich to pay for many of the bill's provisions.

Although Obama has also presented other ideas for funding his jobs bill, like ending tax loopholes for oil and gas companies and letting the Bush tax cuts expire, the biggest chunk of of the financing, $400 billion dollars, will come from limiting tax deductions on Americans making more than $200,000 dollars a year.

AM Talk Back: Should Obama's jobs plan be funded by limiting tax deductions?

Let us know what you think. Your answer may be read on this morning's broadcast.


Filed under: AM Talk Back
soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. Casey

    Yes! Cut the tax breaks for the rich. Take them back to at least the time of Clinton. The rich got rich from this country, it is about time for them to pay their fair percentage. And the term 'job creator' makes me gag.

    September 13, 2011 at 8:27 am |
  2. Marie Minton

    It depends on the distribution of the tax burden amongst those mentioned: Hedge Funds; Oil & Gas Companies; and Households with incomes over $200-250,000. If we just look at the last category, we only have about 2.5 million households at that income level (according to US Census Bureau). So, when I divide $400 billion in costs by 2.5 million households that comes out to be $160,000 per household....so that's probably not the right answer. How much per household will these individuals be bearing of the $400 billion? If we are raising the revenue simply from limiting itemized deductions, take a look at average itemized deductions as reported by CCH for those over $250,000...it's about $104,000...so, if we cut those in half to $72,000...that raises about $30,000 per household. That's a pretty meaningful number if you are making $250,000 per year, but not as meaningful if you make $3,000,000 per year. These are the real details that I would like to hear from SOMEONE for once....the politicians, perhaps the media....anyone, please give us the facts and not the rhetoric. One more fact I'd like to mention that also rarely gets mentioned by politicians and the media relates to one of the comments "It's time (the wealthy) pay their fair share (of taxes)." In 2008 the top-earning 1% of taxpayers earned 20.0% of the income and paid 38.02% of the tax collected — or almost double their share, based upon income earned (according to the summary of the IRS data for 2008, the latest year available). So I'd like to hear some real details from CNN reporters...don't just "Fact Check" what the politicians are saying...give us the whole picture, backed up by real facts, and please, please, please, make it objective.

    September 13, 2011 at 8:21 am |
  3. Kahdir

    With the tax loop holes for LLCs and INCs, I'm not sure anyone that is complaining is actually a business owner... If the (small) business owner is smart enough, the company's profits will be eaten up in salaries, bonuses, operating costs and reinvestment. The President of the company might be effected directly if their salary exceeds the $250k mark, but that is were out of pocket expenses can offset $10k or more...

    September 13, 2011 at 8:19 am |
  4. Panteth

    Anytime you treat one group better (or worse) than another, it's called discrimination. That is, I guess everything but taxes. Here it's spun as "fair share". These people sound like socialists to me, and are blind to the discrimination and vitriol they harbor over perceived "haves" when they see someone has it seemingly better than they. It's a play out of the playbook "Rules for Radicals".

    September 13, 2011 at 7:32 am |
  5. Mark

    Take away disposable income from those most likely to spend consumer dollars now, and give it to a government that might spend it in two to three years for infrasructure projects...yeah that'll work...how dumb is our government anyway?

    September 13, 2011 at 7:23 am |
  6. CC

    Last I heard making 200k a year you were considered middle class. When it comes to taxes you are considered a millionaire. Really? As a small business owner trying to hire locals, the taxes or lack of tax breaks will limit what I can do and tie my hands with trying to put people to work in my community.

    September 13, 2011 at 7:17 am |
  7. Middle of the road Joe

    It's time for a little common sense here. Small business owners make up a small percent of the cases of people making over 200K. So repeal the tax break, but make an exception for small businesses that are hiring people – duh!

    September 13, 2011 at 7:15 am |
  8. mok evelyn

    Under a Republican President, the US economy went into a tailspin all because of a warped preoccupation with making the rich richer without due regard to scruples and the well-being of the rest of Americans. Now that the damage had been done, and a reversal of fortune if at all possible would take many years, the same people is fighting hard to prevent a Democrat President from creating jobs fast enough for unemployed Americans, the ones who suffered the most from the grotesque mishandling of Wall Street that spilt over into the larger economy. And if once again it is because of that irrational yearning, with selfish motivation, to protect the rich and the wealthy that is stopping the quick implementation of the Obama’s jobs plan (although that part of the joblessness that is structural in nature will take more time to be sorted out); then the US cannot hope to get out of the present rut they are in. But it is so sad to have to continue looking at the suffering of so many at the hands of those in Government that is blatantly handicapped by senseless political fighting under the misshapen guise of democracy.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:53 am |
  9. unemployed

    Absolutly if those biznessess hire they get there tax break. And there were more jobs with hire taxes

    September 13, 2011 at 6:36 am |
  10. gerald

    Yes they are the only ones with the money to fund job creation. Where else are we going to get the money from? China?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 am |
  11. Andy

    Yes it is time they paid their fair share, but republicans like my reprasenative Joe Barton who owns two houses less then 60 miles apart will never vote for such a measure. They are too concerned with paying as little tax as possible, while middle class families struggle to pay their bills and keep one home if they're lucky.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 am |
  12. Ken

    Absolutely! Absolutely, Absolutely! Where else will the money come from? That is the only pragmatic way out or else, we are in serious trouble that this clueless uncompromising republicans and George Bush got us into!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 am |
  13. ron keram

    Absolutely. We need to raise revenues and those with incomes greater than $ 200000 ought to help a bit by giving up some deductions.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 am |
  14. Heidi Halsworth

    It is time to tax the "job creators" again. This past decade while they were paying lower taxes the jobs have been disappearing. If Republicans want to paint a picture that the burden of creating jobs at lays at the feet of the extremely wealthy by calling them "job creators" it's time to hold them accountable for having been dismal at it for the past ten years. If Obama's plan results in jobs and is funded by the wealthy they'll have finally earned their job creator affectation.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:04 am |
  15. monica paiva

    absolutely ... the wealthy need to pay their fair share. The middle class has been carrying the entire burden of this dismal economy on its shoulders. We are the ones who are losing jobs, losing homes, etc. We need help out here ...

    September 13, 2011 at 5:56 am |
  16. Taylor Hauxwell

    Clarkston Michigan

    Increasing taxes, or cutting spending are not good for growth, which is what we need in a economically slow period. So no, we need to pick up our economy and work towards a surplus. Don't worry about the bill right now, that is not to say to we can spend or cut like crazy, we have to be smart about this. Cuts free up funds for the people to spend, but that money isn't guaranteed to be put into the economy. Government spending stimulates the economy, but it has a much higher potential to be wasteful or inefficient. We need to make smart cuts, and government needs to spend smartly. Worry about covering the bill when are working with a surplus.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:55 am |
  17. Karen

    Yes. The wealthy and Corporations have had 10 years of these tax cuts and loopholes. It is time they pay their fair share. Congress needs to cut their salaries too and decrease their benefits. Everyone needs to share the sacrifice. Congress needs to practice what they preach.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:41 am |
  18. jim mattes

    Absolutely we should pay for the jobs plan by limiting tax deductions for those earning over 200K. If the idea of shared sacrifice is to truly be utilized, then those who are the higher earning individuals must be asked to participate in the sacrifice that 95% of the country has been forced to through loss of jobs, benefits, higher premiums, higher taxes etc. Let those who have benefitted most during this recession feel the rest of our pain!!

    September 13, 2011 at 5:40 am |