When is a tax hike not a tax hike? (Reagan, Clinton, Obama)

[lifelongMOgal]

If a tax policy has been in place for 10 years is then not extending that policy but rather raising taxes exactly that: raising taxes?

Why after 10 years would a policy in place for a decade be considered "extending cuts" rather than "raising taxes" if the objective is to raise taxes.

Is this just rhetoric from the left to continue the finger pointing at former President GW Bush?

Is this just more rhetoric to make Obama look as though he is not breaking another promise?

Is a tax hike not a tax hike when the left can spin the rhetoric into something else instead?

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal

If a tax policy has been in place for 10 years is then not extending that policy but rather raising taxes exactly that: raising taxes?

Why after 10 years would a policy in place for a decade be considered "extending cuts" rather than "raising taxes" if the objective is to raise taxes.

Is this just rhetoric from the left to continue the finger pointing at former President GW Bush?

Is this just more rhetoric to make Obama look as though he is not breaking another promise?

Is a tax hike not a tax hike when the left can spin the rhetoric into something else instead?

Probably the same way a "commuter fee" can be implemented by the city I work in. I live just outside the city limits but drive into the city. They won't call it a "tax"...but they still charge it.

[PCincorrect]

It really depends on which political party’s loud mouth is spewing the lies.
A tax break is a play of words to get undereducated people to feel they are getting a goodie when in fact they are being played like a fiddle.
You/we are either getting taxed are we aren’t; we are either getting taxed more or less. If you feel like our lawmakers are doing you a favor it’s because they expect one in return, to them we are fools. (and a large portion are!)

[texdav]

It politcal terms its when you can do it indirect to those who will pay the ultimate cost don't realise it. You raise fees on business then they either raise cost of what they produce or eliminate cost and labor is 70-75% of cost.

[ovcatto]

When a sale at a store is over, was the price raised or is the sale just over?

[lifelongMOgal]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

When a sale at a store is over, was the price raised or is the sale just over?

If prices have been in place consistently for a decade it is not a "sale".

However, your post does FAIL!

[SLCPUNK]

Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal

If a tax policy has been in place for 10 years is then not extending that policy but rather raising taxes exactly that: raising taxes?

Why after 10 years would a policy in place for a decade be considered "extending cuts" rather than "raising taxes" if the objective is to raise taxes.

Is this just rhetoric from the left to continue the finger pointing at former President GW Bush?

Is this just more rhetoric to make Obama look as though he is not breaking another promise?

Is a tax hike not a tax hike when the left can spin the rhetoric into something else instead?

He never said he wouldn't "raise" it on that particular group. So your premise is flawed to begin with.

The tax rate would return to how it was under Clinton, Daddy Bush and Reagan. A couple of points isn't the end of the world. You've got to hand it to the GOP propaganda machine. No where else in the world would the middle class to the proletariat march in the street to protest the upper echelon's tax increase. I don't think you'll ever realize how absurdly funny you guys all appear. Not to mention talking out of both sides of your mouth (ie we must pay down this deficit/we must not allow the tax cuts to expire.)

[Frankie117]

If the left wing can call cancellation of a scheduled tax cut before it takes effect a "massive tax increase" then for the sake of fairness the expiring Bush cuts can most certainly be called a tax hike.

Given that the Bush tax cuts are nearly a decade old, they have become the norm. In fact, the rate set by the "tax cuts" have actually been in effect longer than the rates they were originally cutting.

[lifelongMOgal]

Originally Posted by SLCPUNK

He never said he wouldn't "raise" it on that particular group. So your premise is flawed to begin with.

The tax rate would return to how it was under Clinton, Daddy Bush and Reagan. A couple of points isn't the end of the world. You've got to hand it to the GOP propaganda machine. No where else in the world would the middle class to the proletariat march in the street to protest the upper echelon's tax increase. I don't think you'll ever realize how absurdly funny you guys all appear. Not to mention talking out of both sides of your mouth (ie we must pay down this deficit/we must not allow the tax cuts to expire.)

What particular group? The American taxpayer?

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal

What particular group? The American taxpayer?

Those making over $250,000, which actually winds up being closer to those making $300,000 or more once you take into consideration the extended 28% bracket, the AMT patch, property tax, mortgage interest deductions, etc.