Promises, promises: Here come the back-door tax hikes
Remember the economic analysts who insisted that President Obama couldn't possibly balance all of his big-government agenda by increasingly taxing only “millionaires and billionaires”? Well, the chickens have come home — not to roost but to “deposit” on those who bought his empty promise.
No less than the liberal-inclined Tax Policy Center says Mr. Obama's budget adds up to a substantial tax hit. You see, Obama wants to move the goal posts to sack the middle class.
How? By changing the way the government gauges inflation, moving from the consumer price index (CPI) — used to make cost-of-living adjustments in entitlements like Social Security — to what's called a “chained CPI,” which, in effect, lowers those adjustments.
The upshot “would push middle-class families into higher tax brackets more quickly,” opines Investor's Business Daily. The Tax Policy Center's Joseph Rosenberg projects a tax hike of $100 billion over the next 10 years.
“On the tax side it's effectively an increase in the tax rates in a sort of backdoor way, and on the benefit side, it's a cut in Social Security.”
Never mind the smack for middle-income earners from ObamaCare.
The president probably would get his surreptitious tax increase, too, if it didn't cut into Social Security. Some Democrats already are complaining about that. But rest assured, as Obama's re-election demonstrates, there's more than one way to dupe, then pocket-dive, the middle class.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The silent treatment in Ford City: Forgotten words
- A green-tip assault: ATF’s end run
- Saturday essay: Deer of fools
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- Seeds of a new endeavor: Connellsville Area Garden Club’s latest plans
- SCI Greensburg: A dubious deal
- Union ‘ambush’: Not so fast
- The Thursday wrap
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances
- Another StingRay case: Get a warrant!
- The Pennsylvania Legislature’s slush fund