Careo Boricua
Registrate para comentar.
Register to post.

Unirse al foro, es rápido y fácil

Careo Boricua
Registrate para comentar.
Register to post.
Careo Boricua
¿Quieres reaccionar a este mensaje? Regístrate en el foro con unos pocos clics o inicia sesión para continuar.
Buscar
 
 

Resultados por:
 


Rechercher Búsqueda avanzada


Interesante columna del liberal NYT sobe el porque los impuestos deben de subir... Y los salarios?

Ir abajo

Interesante columna del liberal NYT sobe el porque los impuestos deben de subir...  Y los salarios? Empty Interesante columna del liberal NYT sobe el porque los impuestos deben de subir... Y los salarios?

Mensaje por Charlie319 Vie Feb 22, 2013 10:31 am

Interesante comentario que esencialmente dice que la razon por la cual debemos incrementar impuestos a los ricos es precisamente para facilitar el incremento en impuestos a la clase media... Perdido en esta cantinflada esta el bajo nivel al que crecen los salarios de los cuales se nutre el fisco. Suban los salarios y subiran las recudaciones.

Why Taxes Have to Go Up

Democrats and Republicans remain at odds on how to avoid a round of budget cuts so deep and arbitrary that to allow them now could push the economy back into recession. The cuts, known as a sequester, will kick in March 1 unless Republicans agree to President Obama’s demand to a legislative package that combines spending reductions and tax increases. As of Thursday, with the deadline a week off, Republicans seemed determined to say no to any new tax increases.

“Spending is the problem,” declared the House speaker, John Boehner. “Spending must be the focus.” Reflecting the views of many of her Republican colleagues, Representative Martha Roby said Wednesday that Mr. Obama “already got his tax increase” as part of the January agreement over the “fiscal cliff” and that no further increases were necessary.

Both are wrong. To reduce the deficit in a weak economy, new taxes on high-income Americans are a matter of necessity and fairness; they are also a necessary precondition to what in time will have to be tax increases on the middle class. Contrary to Mr. Boehner’s “spending problem” claim, much of the deficit in the next 10 years can be chalked up to chronic revenue shortfalls from the Bush-era tax cuts, which were only partly undone in the fiscal-cliff deal earlier this year. (Wars and a recession also contributed.) It stands to reason that a deficit caused partly by inadequate revenue must be corrected in part by new taxes. And the only way to raise taxes now without harming the recovery is to impose them on high-income filers, for whom a tax increase is unlikely to cut into spending.

As it happens, those taxpayers are the same ones who benefited most from Bush-era tax breaks and who continue to pay low taxes. Even with recent increases, the new top rate of 39.6 percent is historically low; investment income is still taxed at special low rates; and the heirs of multimillion-dollar estates face lower taxes than at almost any time in modern memory.

On the spending side, Republicans are resisting cuts to defense. That implies brutalizing cuts in nondefense discretionary areas, like education and environment, which are already set to fall to their lowest level as a share of the economy since the 1950s.

As for entitlements, Republicans mainly want to cut those that mostly go to the middle class and the poor, while ignoring nearly $1.1 trillion in annual deductions, credits and other tax breaks that flow disproportionately to the highest income Americans and that cost more, each year, than Medicare and Medicaid combined. Clearly then, there is both ample room and justification to reduce the deficit by curbing tax breaks at the high end, as Mr. Obama has proposed and Republicans have rejected.

Raising taxes at the top is neither punitive nor gratuitous. It is a needed step, both to achieve near-term budget goals and to lay the foundation for a healthy budget in the future. As the economy strengthens and the population ages, more taxes will be needed from further down the income scale, both to meet foreseeable commitments, especially health care, as well as unforeseeable developments, from wars to technological challenges. But there will never be a consensus for more taxes from the middle class without imposing higher taxes on wealthy Americans, who have enjoyed low taxes for a long time.
Charlie319
Charlie319
Admin

Posts : 1615
Join date : 10/08/2012
Location : En el medio del Imperio

https://careoboricua.foroactivo.com

Volver arriba Ir abajo

Volver arriba

- Temas similares

 
Permisos de este foro:
No puedes responder a temas en este foro.