NBC's Mitchell to Republican: How Do You Justify a Tax Cut for Those Who Don't Need It?
On Tuesday's Andrea Mitchell Reports, Republican Senator Judd Gregg had to remind Andrea Mitchell that hardworking Americans' money belongs to them and not the government, after the NBC reporter pressed him to "justify" a "larger tax cut for those who really don't need it."
On to discuss the tax cut deal in Congress, Gregg explained to Mitchell that the "problem we have as a government today isn't that we're an under-taxed people. It's that we're an overspending government." However an undeterred Mitchell then went on to cite billionaires Bill Gates and Warren Buffett as saying "at a time of deficit crisis that they don't need these tax breaks," to which Gregg zinged back: "If Warren Buffett and Bill Gates want to send us money, we'll take it."
The following exchange was aired on the December 7 edition of Andrea Mitchell Reports:
ANDREA MITCHELL: And New Hampshire Republican Senator Judd Gregg is ranking member of the budget committee. He also served on the President's deficit commission and joins us now. Well Republicans and some centrist Democrats are more at peace with what the President has done, but he has completely alienated his liberal base. Can, how does he sustain this?
SEN. JUDD GREGG: Well, to begin with, it's a compromise. And there are a lot of us on our side who are having a significant amount of angst about parts of it too. The fact that the unemployment extension is for 13 months and unpaid for is a very expensive item. The holiday on the FICA tax is also extremely expensive and will aggravate the Social Security trust fund problems which already exist. Both of those are being done because of the economic slowdown. As is the extension of the tax rates. I mean, I don't quite understand the philosophy that says we should raise taxes in the middle of a recession and expect that this recession or slowdown is going to improve when you do that. It's going to have the opposite effect. So if you're interested in getting Americans back to work, if you're interested in being concerned about the prosperity of this country, I think you gotta acknowledge a tax increase at this time would be a huge mistake.
MITCHELL: Well we talk about things that aren't paid for. According to the National Journal's edition, if they had gone with the original White House proposal to limit the tax cut to people $250,000 and under, it would have cost - it's now going to cost $300 billion more than that original White House proposal. So this is not paid for, adding to the federal debt. So how do you, as a deficit hawk, justify going along with a larger tax cut, for those who really don't need it? And it's been argued it's not stimulative. The upper income people, it really doesn't add to the stimulus that you get from the lower income people.
GREGG: Well, my view is it's their money. I mean I don't happen to think that when you have a tax increase that you're basically reducing the deficit by cutting spending. My view is that the way you reduce the deficit is by cutting spending. The problem we have as a government today isn't that we're an under-taxed people. It's that we're an overspending government. The government has gone from 20 percent of GDP in spending to 24 percent of GDP in spending, it's headed towards 28 percent of GDP in spending. Tax revenues on the other hand are headed back up. They're excepted to exceed the historical norm which is about 18.2 percent, next year, and probably hit around 19 percent or 20 percent within the next the years. So I don't think we're under-taxed. And I don't think when you - I think there's an attitude in Washington that, that "all money is our money here in Washington." That's not my view and I don't think it's the Republican view basically. We don't believe that if you go out and earn a living that, that money, that you earn is our money. We believe it's your money. And we believe that we should be responsible in managing it by having our spending be responsible.
MITCHELL: Yeah but, but I mean the issue is, what is the rate of the tax going to be? And you've had Warren Buffett and Bill Gates and other high earners, to say the least, saying at a time of deficit crisis that they don't need these tax breaks. With that said, you also argued about simplifying-
GREGG: Well if they want to send money into us, we'll take it. If Warren Buffett and Bill Gates want to send us money, we'll take it.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the Senior News Analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here- Geoffrey Dickens's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
personification of discrimination
Submitted by Cactus Kurt on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:05pm.
You'd think Obama would have learned something about discrimination by now. From the "Beer Summit" to his "enemies sitting in the back" of the bus to taxing only wealthy Americans, Obama is the personification of discrimination.
Andrea,Mr. tingled, Maddow and fellow democrats
Submitted by dirtydan64 on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:13pm.
Should recite after Judd Gregg send in your extra Tax Payment the Republicans will accept it !!!!It's their money
Submitted by jon_torlin on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:13pm.
Hey Andrea B!tchell.....
Did you hear what Gregg said? IT'S THEIR MONEY! Who the hell are you to decide who makes enough? Who the hell is your Chairman to decide who makes enough?
if you want to be a communist, go to a country that has communists, but get the hell out of here!
You too, Chairman Maobama!
-Jon
How do you justify a tax
Submitted by ninerdog on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:14pm.
How do you justify a tax increase for those who don’t deserve it?
For Andrea Mitchell: Another tax question --
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 9:39pm.
How do you justify that 48% of American taxpayers paid NO --- ZERO --- Federal income taxes in 2009. (I wasn't one of them).
If you can justify that, I can justify the tax cuts for the rich issue.
Zero tax is not just the only
Submitted by TheHistorian on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 7:18am.
Zero tax is not just the only issue. The Earned Income Tax Credit (where you are paid money you never paid in by the US Treasury; primarily for families with children) was paid for about 26 million recipients in 2009, which is 20% of the 138 million taxpayers in the US in 2009. So, not only do 48% not pay taxes, but 20% actually get money from the IRS which they never paid in.
Dennis Prager
This begs a question I keep
Submitted by ThatDude on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 7:55am.
This begs a question I keep forgetting to ask. What does the 48-50% figure for people who don't pay taxes really mean? Does it mean that the IRS gives back all payroll deductions, or that those same people just don't have to pay more than the deductions?
What I do know is that I'm in poverty and the government still confiscates 15% of my earnings. This would be completely fine with me if there were a flat tax and no deductions, but things don't work nearly that well. I also know that I'd be much happier off keeping the extra 5% of each check the gov. takes rather than getting it refunded in April. I can think of much better things to do with my money than allow it to depreciate as the fed inflates it out of usefulness.
The "taxes" of many colors
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 4:59pm.
Don't mix your payroll contributions to Social Security and Medicare -- the Ponzi schemes -- with $$$ withheld for income tax. Technically, they are not a "tax." Clinton would call them "investments."
Income tax withholdings count toward your tax obligation. Once you calculate how much tax you owe, for may qualify for a refund of some or all of the tax withholdings, or you may have to pay additional tax.
So, when we say 48% of taxpayers paid no income tax, that means that they got a refund from the IRS on all of the $$$ withheld, and some may have qualified for an additional check via Earned Income Tax Credit.
If they had any tax obligation at all, they paid tax. So, the 52% that paid income tax includes those who had part but not all of the $$$ withheld refunded, as well as those who paid additional tax on top of the withheld $$$.
Well if income earners are
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:20pm.
Well if income earners are 'obligated' to pay taxes as part of a responsible debt to society, what are people who don't pay taxes 'obligated' to do? Perhaps every taxpayer should get a list of nearby non-taxpaying citizens who they can get to rake leaves, clean bathrooms, wash windows, wax cars, etc. as their 'obligation' to America.
It's not a tax cuts it is tax rates being discussed.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:21pm.
Keep up the spin Andrea and end up talking to yourself. You are almost there.
It doesn't matter if she DOES
Submitted by Van Halen on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:32pm.
It doesn't matter if she DOES wind up talking to herself. Obama's Fed gave GE and NBC BILLIONS of our dollars in 'loans' so now no matter how many viewers they lose, they still win.
Yeah. Doesn't that suck...
Submitted by Red Jeep on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:43pm.
...big time?
BTW
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 8:42am.
Did you see the head of GE by Obama's side during his India trip?
This is why we need Huckabee's "tax me more" fund on a national
Submitted by lsudolemite on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:29pm.
level. Time for liberals to put their money where their mouths are. You make over $250K a year and feel you aren't paying nearly enough? Then pay your taxes at the old Clinton rates so that the all-wise, all-compassionate government doesn't let children, elderly, and the "working poor" die in the streets. Same applies to libs who lecture all of us on how wonderful the public education system is while sending their precious little darlings to the best private schools money can buy.
What, no takers? Shocking.
If Republicans had any balls,
Submitted by Van Halen on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:30pm.
If Republicans had any balls, which this current crop do not, then when that old crone or any other Leftist asks about justifying a tax cut, they would ask back "If you're so worried about it, how much do you plan to voluntarily contribute and will you make the tax form available as proof that you did?"
That must be a rhetorical question.
Submitted by CobraMan on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:34pm.
"So how do you, as a deficit hawk, justify going along with a larger tax cut, for those who really don't need it?"
That must be a rhetorical question as NO ONE is receiving a "larger" tax cut than anyone else. SSI payroll tax rates will be reduced from 6.1 to 4.2 percent, but that is an across the board cut, so everyone is effected equally, except for those who's income isn't payroll based, like those "super rich" people you claim are getting a larger tax cut. They, the super rich, won't see ANY tax cuts whatsoever as they file SSI taxes separately than the rest of us so the payroll rate reductions will not affect them.
In other words, Obama, as promissed, managed to cut "middle income" taxes significantly and avoided doing the same for the Super Rich. Isn't that what you wanted?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Just once....
Submitted by Mike in AZ on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:36pm.
Once. Just once, I'd like to hear a republican respond to a question like that with, "What are you? Some kind of communist? Last time I checked, America is supposed to be a free country! If someone wants to amass a vast sum of wealth, they don't need anyone's permission. We already have a graduated tax policy."
Push it right back in their lying fascist faces!
Beware of prophets seeking profit.
- Dennis Miller
LOL. Shouldn't Andrea at least ask them if they don't need it?
Submitted by krendler on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:37pm.
...versus Andrea (and the rest of the libtards) TELLING them they don't need it.
The stupidity of some of the comments by these people is absolutely staggering.
And, yes, it's amazing to see them bend over backwards, day in, day out, to avoid the word "SPENDING."
Stupid blabs on
Submitted by TheHistorian on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:38pm.
There is NO TAX CUT other than what Obama has them sticking in. There is a 2-year extension of CURRENT RATES. The media is so stupid, I am surprised they can find their chair in the big, confusing, media room.
There SHOULD have been a further reduction in the rates, down to what Reagan did in 1986. Let's get rid of the Clinton "tax-cut" where he increased taxes for the middle class and above.
Finally, who says they don't NEED it. On the basis of welfare NEED, you have people with two cars, multiple TVs, air conditioning, etc being paid welfare. Where is their NEED? You lame-brain media members have been trying to divide classes for so long, that you don't even know what NEED is. Get a life somewhere, just not anywhere that I have to watch your mouth move.
Dennis Prager
Poor Andrea
Submitted by jdlybrand on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:46pm.
Dumb as a box of 'Joe Bidens'.
"What a revoltin' development this is!"
Chester Riley
Did Mitchell or the leftists
Submitted by rbosque on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:48pm.
Did Mitchell or the leftists at NBC REALLY NEED taxpayer's money "bailout" considering the obsene paychecks THEY get? I don't know about anyone else here on NBs but I don't make millions, especially if Mitchell's husband has made a living helping to destroy the economy.
What an arrogant bitch!
Excellent point
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 9:42pm.
And Alan Greenspan admitted, "We got it wrong."
But not before he and his friends made a fortune.
Rhetorical question for the haughty Mitchell
Submitted by ChrisNH on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 6:49pm.
Here's how I'd turn the tables on the haughty Lib media elite Mitchell: "How do you justify raises and guaranteed jobs for government workers who don't deserve them or don't perform satisfactorily?"
It is OUR money the fat,
Submitted by jkwtrading on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 7:00pm.
It is OUR money the fat, spendrift piece of garbage known as the US Government or your favorite people is spending.
We are sick and tired of OUR money spent like those in charge are WHORES.
Hey Andrea
Submitted by NDanielson on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 7:42pm.
how about tax cuts for all the middle class on social security and unemployment??? Andrea, should social security and unemployment benefits be taxed???
I want to see the FairTax pass just so I can watch comrade...
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 8:08pm.
...B!tchell's head explode.
:-)
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Hey. It worked great for Fritz Mondale.
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 8:45pm.
Now President Obama has to run on the promise of raising taxes in four years. Brilliant!
Uhhh...don't the dems still
Submitted by liberalsarefunny on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 8:46pm.
Uhhh...don't the dems still have a majority in congress? Until the new guys come in next year?
That's right folks
Submitted by obageegee on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 9:03pm.
She sleeps with Alan Greenspan!
No, I think they have his-n-hers sarcophaguses now
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 9:14pm.
Or is it sarcophagi?
I dunno, my Middle Kingdom Egyptian is getting rusty. Like On-dree-ah.
Anyway, I saw her on "Pimp My Tomb" about six months ago and that was the deal.
:From each according to his
Submitted by Cowboy on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 11:22pm.
Democrats and communists...
"From each according to his ability, To each according to his needs...
Well folks, there you have
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Tue, 12/07/2010 - 11:49pm.
Well folks, there you have it. You are now persecuted if you are relatively successful. If you don't want to be ridiculed or punished by the State, you will try to make a little less money.
Thank God for the Chairman!
Submitted by jon_torlin on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 12:32am.
He can tell us if we have made enough money at some point in our life, right? What could we EVER do without him to tell us these things?
-Jon
As my little mind understands
Submitted by Chris Norman on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 12:01am.
As my little mind understands it, the primary pupose for lower tax rates for anybody is not for financial relief or as a reward, but for getting more money flowing through the private sector - whether it be as retail spending, saving in banks, paying down credit, or investing. No matter what it's used for, It's all money that will prime the economy - unless someone stuffs it under a mattress. Yet, the media persists in pushing the notion that it's all kind of a welfare program that is deserved by some and undeserved by others..
How about this compromise?
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 1:02am.
How about this compromise? We'll had a "Sloth Tax" on top of our existing income tax for those who get filthy stinkin' rich for doing absolutely nothing. In this category we'll impose an additional 30% income tax for anyone who is an actor, comedian, musician, or professional athlete. Awl, so some actors aren't rich? Awl, that's too bad - um, who did they vote for again in 2008? Yea, probably Obama.
Oh yea, and we'll add Bill Gates and Warren Buffet the list. I'd love to see Republicans WISE up and start mouthing off against those two. I want to see their tax returns: did they take any deductions? Ever? What amount are they planning to add to their tax bill next April since they don't need a tax cut? $50 million? $100 million? Tell those two ***** to put up or shut up. The GOP ought to make it a point to expose those two as the massive hypocrites that they are.
Oh, and Microsoft? It can go to hell for all I care. Talk about a business that gives capitalism a bad name. Their shoddy products have horrible quality, are expensive, and their employees are so worthless you'd think they were union. Microsoft has all the problems of a government run and unionized organization without actually being one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
NEVER EVER
Submitted by gfrrman on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 2:07am.
assume, ANDREA MITCHELL, how much ANYONE NEEDS. STFU you elitist parasite. You'd have NOTHING without your husband. Please feel free to write that check for $$$$$$ to the Feds so you won't feel guilty.
G
Ooopsy
Submitted by amyshulk on Wed, 12/08/2010 - 4:31am.
You almost told the truth there:
"it would have cost - it's now going to cost $300 billion more than that original White House proposal"Ronald Reagan