CNN Regards Tax Hikes as Inevitable for Deficit Reduction – But Ignore Possible Damage to Economy
CNN's Ed Henry and Ali Velshi both think taxes should be raised in order to help reduce the deficit. However, neither gave any credence to the notion that raising taxes is detrimental in the current economic conditions on Thursday's "American Morning."
CNN's senior White House correspondent Ed Henry, reporting on the President's deficit-cutting proposals, remarked that in order to trim the deficit, both spending must be cut and taxes increased. This would mean that both Democrats and Republicans would be forced to vote for measures they wouldn't normally support.
Co-host Ali Velshi also agreed that higher taxes are necessary, and that since President Obama has had to "compromise," so to will Republicans and Democrats have to compromise on fiscal issues. "Just as [Obama] has come around despite what happened the last election, despite the end of the year deals, despite his own debt commission and despite the showdown, the President has come around," Velshi said.
Velshi didn't just predict tax hikes for millionaires, but for those making over $250,000 as well – which could mean tax hikes on many small business owners. "What's starting to happen is people who absolutely objected to ending those Bush-era tax cuts on people earning more than $250,000 are also going to have to come around," he remarked.
The CNN anchor added that the Republican proposal "takes an ax to taxes" in cutting them by $800 billion.
In the next hour of the show, Henry reported that in President Obama's budget proposal there is one dollar in tax increases for every four dollars in cuts. Velshi chimed in that "which, economically speaking, is probably the formula that we're going to have to go with."
A transcript of the segment, which aired on April 14 at 6:06 a.m. EDT, is as follows:
ED HENRY: Absolutely. And now, actually, it's going to be hard for him to raise taxes even on the rich. When you look at the Senate, the Democrats lost seats. You've got a lot of conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Joe Manchin of West Virginia up for election in 2012. They don't want to raise taxes. So it's unclear that he's gotten anywhere close to 60 votes to cut off a filibuster and get some sort of tax increase through. This is why everyone is going to have to take a step back.
ALI VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: And do some things that they don't want to do. Republicans, conservative Democrats may have to raise some taxes they don't want to do.
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: Liberals who were screaming about spending cuts, they're going to have to step up. This is a unique opportunity for the Commander-in-Chief to step in and say, look, folks, we've got to do something that not everyone wants to --
VELSHI: Just like he has come around despite what happened the last election, despite the end of the year deals, despite his own debt commission and despite the shutdown, the President has come around. What's starting to happen is people who absolutely objected to ending those Bush era tax cuts on people earning more than $250,000 are also going to have to come around. The reality is you cannot -- you can't have both ways. Taxes are likely to go up in this country.
HENRY: And what's interesting is the President now deputized Vice President Biden to go out there early May, start meeting behind closed doors with Republicans and Democrats on the Hill. The president has set a deadline by the end of June to get a deal. That sounds really ambitious. I mean, you guys know they are far apart right now.
(...)
VELSHI: The other way to overcome deficits is by increasing revenue or taxes. Let me show you what the plans call for on that front. A core to fiscal conservative beliefs is that if you cut taxes, people spend more. So the Republican plan really takes it -- takes an ax to taxes, cutting them by $800 billion and, by the way, keeping those Bush-era tax cuts for people making $250,000 or more.
(...)
CHRISTINE ROMANS: We keep saying $4 trillion in cuts but it's actually for every $3 in cuts he wants $1 in tax increases. So it's cuts and tax increases, it's getting new revenue, and cutting what we've already been spending --
VELSHI: Which economically speaking is probably the formula that we're going to have to go with to be sound.
ROMANS: That's why they say balanced. They say the Republicans just want to cut spending. That's the ideological battle here. You've got – one side wants to have tax increases included in their solution, and the Republicans want to cut spending.
HENRY: And you don't have enough money to put a dent in the deficit if you only do one or the other.
ROMANS: The national debt, no matter what, just keeps going up. We're talking about cutting deficits. But we're still adding to the debt all along the way.
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
Let's stop the talk. Tax us at 100%. Send us an allowance.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 6:58pm.
Expect a revolt.
I believe that's what their
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:15pm.
I believe that's what their ultimate goal would be. They are just doing it incrementally, so we (hopefully) don't realize it.
Just ask Christina Romer.. Tax inc. will damage economic growth
Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:05pm.
For the record:
(;~/ gary
Math is not their best suit
Submitted by octavioj on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:05pm.
How do they balance a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit with only 70 billion dollars in taxes? Dr. Walter Williams says in an editorial that increasing taxes will not solve the problem or even begin to solve it.
http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2011/04/13/eat_the_rich/p...
They don't care if it
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:13pm.
They don't care if it works.
Just like Obama said he didn't care if raising the capital gains tax actually reduced revenues; it was about "fairness."
Exactly,
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:37pm.
Obama's mission is to grow the government and shrink the citizen.
Permanent Structural Deformation
Submitted by rogue operator on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 10:04pm.
If capitalism won't fit neatly in the statist box, then the left (and the pretend right) will crush it with unsustainable debt. When the whole thing collapses, people will still want to keep the entitlements. Well, we can keep the entitlements, government will say, we will just have to turn over control of our money. Game. Set. Match. Flame.
Unreality check
Submitted by russedav on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:35pm.
As is typical for deranged immoral degenerate baby butchering narcissist fascist-commies (commies are fascists too, with only fake vs actual concern for "spreading it around," rather just exploitively keeping it for "me and my elites" and not just letting the poor go to ruin but insuring they do for the sake of said narcissistic exploitation, e.g. depraved Stalin's vile forced starvation of Ukraine and the one's profiting by butchering nigger babies and bringing about $5 gas through effectively banning drilling while lying about doing so), it's all about narcissism: masturbation and power for ME, screw everyone else, vs reality. One of the few good things about such narcissism is that it's so delusionally inward focused that it can't even be bothered to defend itself against attack by those who aren't so inwardly narcissist and actually have time to think about actual reality, i.e. being apart from the suffocation of self. Ironically even Hitler wasn't as bad and so in the near term was far more dangerous, though since levels of narcissism vary, just because the white house 0 spends all his time on self-adulation and has no time to run or even plunder the country himself, doesn't mean delegated underlings can't themselves create and carry out plunder plans somewhat, like besotted Sottomayor and cagey Kagan.
one biscuit short of a seabiscuit
Submitted by MidAmerica on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:37pm.
Their horse has died and they are strategizing what the jockey can do to win the next race.
Another reason why I don't watch CNN. Thank God...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 7:58pm.
for Fox News so that I don't have to.
They are so willfully ignorant.
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 8:42pm.
They are so willfully ignorant. Obama's "plan" as he stated less than a moth ago, is to run deficits forever. He's planning to "limit" deficit spending to, if I remember correctly, 12 percent of GDP, and that is after another 10 years of trillion dollar plus deficit spending. Not even his "latest" plan changes that stated goal. No matter how many times you "cut" it, perpetual deficits as a set percentage of GDP, no matter how much tax revenue is collected, is NOT a reduction.
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.
CNN - the most unwatched cable news around ACA
Submitted by acaiguana on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 8:47pm.
Well, it has begun in earnest now. The Democrat strategy from the beginning has been based on their tax and spend model from the past, well just from forever.
The difference is they spent it first this time around and assume that everyone will 'come around' to the idea that the only solution to their artificial problem of spending is raising taxes.
Color me surprised.
No one is 'coming around'. And by the way, the real term is 'coming about'.
But what the hell do I know, I'm just an educated idiot sitting out here in my ol' pickup on blocks with the mean dog under the porch hollorin' for more ice for the cooler and another brew.
Obama hasn't proposed any compromise. He's proposed insults to our intelligence; he has insulted our morality and our integrity and he is by standing out in front of the issue, insulting by himself.
He is so far out in lefty-ville he can't see his right side nor would he acknowledge one if he could see it.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
The same old media song and dance
Submitted by Chris Norman on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 9:42pm.
"but it's actually for every $3 in cuts he wants $1 in tax increases.
Oh, the taxes would go up, but, somehow, the cuts will never materialize, or if they do, won't be anywhere near what they say or stay around long before the spending increases again. Spending is what government does. Who do these guys think they're kidding, other than a lot of CNN viewers?
Stealing from Others is a "Right"
Submitted by rogue operator on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 10:00pm.
Didn't you know that producers are being "selfish" for wanting to keep the fruits of their own labor?
The wrong argument...
Submitted by commentkazi on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 11:40pm.
...I wish more would argue that tax increases are immoral instead of arguing that tax reduction spurs economic growth. While economic growth may be a nice side benefit, the true argument is that the government has way overstepped its' bounds by taking the individual's earned money.
Obama now calls tax cuts "tax code spending". The insinuation is that all the $ is the government's, and the government "spends" money by giving it back to the people. The extreme nature of this claim has escaped most people, which is truly frightening.
For the mathematically challenged lib:
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Thu, 04/14/2011 - 11:42pm.
Eat The Rich
How about killing the rich?
Submitted by Villabolo on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 2:20am.
CNN Regards Tax Hikes as Inevitable for Deficit Reduction – But Ignore Possible Damage to Economy
Oh, yes; Massive economic damage to the yacht building industry; the caviar and champagne food industries; the limousine business; the McMansion building industry; etc..
Think of all their money that trickles down to the ungrateful American masses.
Those who work on yacht piers will be unemployed.
Supermarket cashiers and grocery baggers will have no caviar and champagne and caviar to check and bag. Imagine the profit loss to the Supermarket industry and the subsequent layoffs.
Don't forget those poor limousine drivers who'll be kicked to the curb. Also, less gasoline consumption with gasoline station attendants having to be laid off.
Bottom line, we can kill the rich and no one would notice the difference except their pets. he money those vampires used to suck out from the truly productive will fall right back into the real economy.
Good riddance!
Villabolo
Wow, what stupidity!
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 2:24am.
I really doubt you have a job but we can pretend for a moment. Who do you work for? Is that person poor? I doubt it. If you kill the rich, who will pay you to troll the interwebs? Once all the rich are dead, and their businesses with them, will you be starting a new business? So I assume that if that business is successful and you then become rich, you will do your duty and off yourself right?
Work for?
Submitted by Boudin on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 8:58am.
More like sitting in the big Gov building waiting for lunch. This guy screams handouts, if he had ever held a respectable job in his life, no way he would feel like this. Folks who EARN their money, dont ridicule success. They try to emulate it!
Boudin
Submitted by sentry_99 on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 9:02am.
Couldn't agree more.
More new civility
Submitted by Radical1979 on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 8:48am.
Do you have any idea what happened years ago when a high tax was put on luxury boats? Middle class workers suffered massively. The industry came to a standstill. People were out of work and lost their homes. Who do you think buys things or invests capital to employ people?
Get a clue before you spout off.
They just don't get it,
Submitted by NC Cop on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 8:54am.
They just don't get it, Radical. They don't get it. No matter how many times you tell them, or show them, how it hasn't worked, they just don't get it. The rich are their convenient boogeyman.
We've got to get these idiots out of positions of power before it's too late.
Everyone here is assuming
Submitted by Smartypants on Fri, 04/15/2011 - 9:30am.
Everyone here is assuming this troll is over the age of 13. Really, is there any evidence of that?
Aside from that, the liberal agenda, as well as all of its indoctrination strategy, is all about stirring emotions to garner political power. The rich vs. poor canard is the most effective strategy they have to build momentum for elections. They bring this up repeatedly; whether it has any basis in reality doesn't matter. In the end, liberal politicans are all about growing their base and cementing their power. Class warfare appeals to their base, which is comprised largely of those who are either extremely naive with good intentions or lazy dregs who feel the world owes them a favor. Obama's speech and stick it to the rich mantra is something he believes for sure, but it also is an effective weapon in getting his followers energized.
Well, Villabolo - France did that - check out France - wheeeee
Submitted by acaiguana on Sun, 04/17/2011 - 7:48am.
Now son, this is what we out here in the old Hinterland call taking class warfare to its limits.
Are you related to Joseph Ignace Guillotine, who wanted to invent a more 'humane' method of death.
What he could never quite get right was what to do with all those rivers of blood that flooded the streets of Paris.
Ah how you must yearn for the good old days.
Listen up, Mr. Intelligent, there was only one lesson worth learning from the fall of the USSR, you probably don't remember it as it fell before you were born, but the lesson is:
You. Can. Steal. Everything. Only. Once.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)