"By a two-to-one margin, Americans believe that President Barack Obama’s plan to raise taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year would help the economy and make the tax system more fair, according to a Pew Research Center poll."
What's interesting is dividing the support by party. Democrats overwhelmingly support it, but Republicans don't oppose it in equal numbers:
"Democrats are more united in their view than Republicans: 64 percent of Democrats say the move will help the economy, and only 11 percent say it will hurt. Among the GOP, 41 percent say it will hurt the economy while 27 percent say it will help and 24 percent say it will make no difference."
"Fifty-five percent of Republicans believe tax hikes would either make the system more fair or have no impact, compared with 36 percent who believe it will become less fair, the poll, released Monday, showed. Sixty-five percent of Democrats say the system would be fairer, and 10 percent say it would be less fair."
So even the majority of Republicans don't oppose it. The independents are also on board:
"The views of independents track the views of the country as a whole. Forty-one percent believe tax hikes on the wealthy will help, 18 percent believe they will hurt and 30 percent say they’ll have no impact on the economy. Forty-four percent believe the hikes would make the tax system more fair, and 21 percent believe they would make the system less fair; those numbers match the country as a whole exactly."
Despite the feverish Wall St. Journal op-eds, most support the stance of the Congressional Democrats in not giving way on the defense spending sequester without a GOP concession on raising revenue:
"Support for tax hikes on those making more than $250,000 is a boon for Democrats, who on Monday renewed a vow not to undo defense cuts included in the sequester unless increased revenues were included in the deal. Obama has pledged not to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for incomes above $250,000 for a second time when they expire at the end of the year."
So voters are not as worried about the "fiscal cliff" as the WSJ editorial page. The only reason they're worried is the tax hikes for the rich. Indeed, there was a piece yesterday that was entirely confused at the WSJ. They are demanding the Bush tax cuts are extended and at the same time the deficit is cut. The argument in a WSJ op-ed was that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire while at the same time not doing any further deficit reduction is kind of a "double whammy."
Can there be any more fiscal confusion than this? Indeed, it was such a bad piece that Right wing radio host Howie Carr was quoting from it, he actually read it on the air word for word. Demanding tax cuts and spending cuts is at best a wash. This won't cut the deficit. In fact while we can debate the fiscal impact of the Bush tax cuts expiring, no one can deny that letting them expire would actually markedly cut down the deficit.
So claiming that for the cuts to expire along with no deficit reduction is a double whammy, as letting the cuts expire is itself deficit reduction.
So the American people like the President's tax plan. And they want Mitt Romney to release his tax returns. As he should.
So even the majority of Republicans don't oppose it. The independents are also on board:
"The views of independents track the views of the country as a whole. Forty-one percent believe tax hikes on the wealthy will help, 18 percent believe they will hurt and 30 percent say they’ll have no impact on the economy. Forty-four percent believe the hikes would make the tax system more fair, and 21 percent believe they would make the system less fair; those numbers match the country as a whole exactly."
Despite the feverish Wall St. Journal op-eds, most support the stance of the Congressional Democrats in not giving way on the defense spending sequester without a GOP concession on raising revenue:
"Support for tax hikes on those making more than $250,000 is a boon for Democrats, who on Monday renewed a vow not to undo defense cuts included in the sequester unless increased revenues were included in the deal. Obama has pledged not to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for incomes above $250,000 for a second time when they expire at the end of the year."
So voters are not as worried about the "fiscal cliff" as the WSJ editorial page. The only reason they're worried is the tax hikes for the rich. Indeed, there was a piece yesterday that was entirely confused at the WSJ. They are demanding the Bush tax cuts are extended and at the same time the deficit is cut. The argument in a WSJ op-ed was that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire while at the same time not doing any further deficit reduction is kind of a "double whammy."
Can there be any more fiscal confusion than this? Indeed, it was such a bad piece that Right wing radio host Howie Carr was quoting from it, he actually read it on the air word for word. Demanding tax cuts and spending cuts is at best a wash. This won't cut the deficit. In fact while we can debate the fiscal impact of the Bush tax cuts expiring, no one can deny that letting them expire would actually markedly cut down the deficit.
So claiming that for the cuts to expire along with no deficit reduction is a double whammy, as letting the cuts expire is itself deficit reduction.
So the American people like the President's tax plan. And they want Mitt Romney to release his tax returns. As he should.
No comments:
Post a Comment