Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?
September 13th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama's plan to pay for the $447 billion jobs bill with higher taxes is dead on arrival.

Republicans are pushing back - insisting that tax hikes are off the table.

The White House says congress should pay for the jobs bill by putting new limits on itemized deductions for the wealthy... that includes deductions for home-mortgage interest, state and local property taxes and charitable donations.

In this case - "wealthy" means individuals who make more than $200,000 a year and families who earn more than $250,000 a year.

President Obama also wants to end tax breaks for oil companies and corporate jet owners... and cut out a tax break for investment fund managers.

The White House says all these tax changes would raise $467 billion over 10 years.

But Republicans aren't hearing any of it when it comes to higher taxes.

And that's not all they don't like... they've also rejected new stimulus spending on road projects, teacher salaries and school construction. they say anything that smacks of another "stimulus bill" ain't gonna happen.

On the other hand, Republicans like the president's proposal to give more generous tax breaks to small businesses... and the idea of pulling back burdensome government regulations.

So far, President Obama is selling his plan to pay for the jobs bill as a single idea. But realistically, there's no way that will ever get through a divided Congress.

Republicans say certain parts of the plan should be considered individually.

Here’s my question to you:
Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Yes, cancelling the tax breaks on the richer Americans seems like the right thing to do. The job creators have had plenty of time to create jobs with these TAX BREAKS in place, but they aren't doing anything, are they? It's time to try something else. And the rich didn't get rich all by themselves. Quit being so greedy and selfish and help your country get back on its feet.

It should be paid for with cuts to foreign aid and military spending. It's time we changed our priorities.

Tim on Facebook:
No. Unless Obama can figure out that $250,000 a year is not rich. Only if you make over $1 million a year… Then I'm for it!

Steve in Phoenix, Arizona:
No, there shouldn't. This latest stimulus program will produce the exact same results as the last one! Because it takes money AWAY from the ones you're EXPECTING to create those jobs. Not to mention, when it costs $300,000 to create a $17,000 job - that doesn't sound like a sane idea.

Jon in Wantagh, New York:
The plan is specific and is a balance of tax cuts for all and modest increases to the 2% highest income group. It also promotes benefits to those companies who hire American workers. Obama is right and he has a well-balanced, fair plan. Republicans will do all they can to portray this in a negative light and drag this into the 2012 election.

Connie in Chicago:
YES. The elite and super-rich are bloated from stuffing themselves for 10 years with a heavy-laden buffet prepared at the expense of the working poor (middle class). Much to the chagrin of the Republicans/Tea Partyers, It's time to even the playing field and give the middle class a break.

Posted by
Filed under: President Barack Obama • Taxes
soundoff (255 Responses)
  1. Larry -Denver

    OR maybe we need to tax all those people (as the Tea Party would have it) who earn less than $20k and never pay taxes? If this program brings jobs, then its a win win. Cut payroll tax, offer incentives to hire new employees and let it be funded by those who can afford to pony up more money. Do you really think this gets passed? You will still be talking about this come the summer of 2012

    September 13, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
  2. Kevin Farley

    No , just raising taxes on the rich won't solve it cause the rich will find away to recover the money . Cut spending on the government like all the office help the senate and congress has . They need to work a little harder. I know cutting anywhere in any jobs will not help us but by using those cuts to put people to work in other positions to build America . Bring home the soldiers and put them to work here cleaning up from the storms and security on the borders . JUST USE OUR MONEY TO BOOST JOBS ! Kevin

    September 13, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
  3. Eric - Houston

    While a mixture of other cuts and taxes would make sense, offering just taxes, particularly essentially the same ones floated unsuccessfully various times before, just show that this speech was only campaign rhetoric and that the President is not at all serious about creating new jobs

    September 13, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
  4. lou

    I'm all for raising taxes on the rich to help put people back to work in public works jobs. These jobs...teachers, fire fighters, construction workers fixing roads....will benefit all of us. And let's face it, Madonna is still going to be able to afford her Gucci bags. The NFL will still be able to pay football players millions. Romney will still be able to afford to demolish his mansion and rebuild it to quadruple sizes. The rich will still be rich.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
  5. virginia - Atlanta, GA

    Getting people back to work will do as much for the pocket books of the rich as it does for the workers. Everyone should participate in getting people back to work. Shame on those companies holding back looking for a Republican in 2012. We need regulations to protect the middle class and poor from the callous greed of these big Corporations, who are growing so large that the government is becoming helpless to work for the people and not the big businesses.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  6. Jerry

    Jerry from Virginia....

    The Top 5% Taxpayers pay 60% of the total federal revenue collected at an average of 20% of their income. The bottom 50% pay 2.7% of the total reveue at an average of 2.6% of their income. How can Obama claim those paying 20% in taxes are not paying their share while those paying 2.6% are. This is pure politics and class warfare on Obama's part. The answer is to reduce government spending not burden the overtaxed minority any more.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  7. Rex in Portland, Oregon

    The short answer is "yes, obviously and of course". The long answer is more complex. Since everything that is paid for by the government is received by some sort of tax or fee (a tax by any other name) the issue is not "to tax or not to tax" but "tax whom and how much". And since the government is, or at least should be, the people, it is the people whom should be taxed, and only the people. That makes the question "how much?" The answer is "more" until the spending level can be decreased without killing ourselves.

    I have long advocated a single tax: an income tax ONLY on individuals based on a fixed standard deduction and ALL income and benefits received on a graduated scale that is mild enough to not punish incentive and strong enough to cause those who benefit most to pay the most. Imagine, if you will, a corporation with no income tax liability – no deductions for limousines or penthouses or advertisements or oil depletion!

    But until such a tax can be arranged, and for this short term, and for this time only, and for this LAST financial "emergency", let us get money where we can get it and pay our debts and protect our assets and citizens. Please.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:40 pm |
  8. Brian, San Diego

    If they're well thought-out and targetted to the right place, there's no reason why not. After an entire summer of deficit debate, even the Republicans are tacitly accepting that some spending to create jobs is necessary. Well, financial geniuses, if you want to spend more money without increasing the deficit, then you have to increase revenue, even at the expense of your precious "job creators" (read: campaign contributors).

    September 13, 2011 at 1:42 pm |
  9. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    In the history of the U.S. there was one six month period in the Andrew Jackson administration where there was no national debt, other than that we have carried a negative balance and still became the greatest nation in history.

    What I would like to hear and haven't yet, is: what is a comfortable or manageable debt, and if taxes are raised to get us to what ever the productive level is how long until we are able to lower taxes again?

    I'm just a middle class retiree living on social security and a pension, but I wouldn't mind my taxes increased if I knew for how long and to what affect that would really have. If spending is reduced in the same time maybe our tax rate will be lower than it is now.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
  10. Kent - Iowa City, Iowa

    Yes. To take anything off the table is like playing Russian Roulette. We aren't in a position to say that we'll do anything to fix our failing economy, but only as long as it doesn't hurt. That's just shooting ourselves in the head to spite our own faces.

    The Republican Party complains when Obama does nothing and they complain when he tries to do something. I blame the Republican party for being the party of obstructionism that keeps anything from being done to fix out current situation. If only the Democrats would grow a backbone and stand up to the Republicans for once something might actually improve.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:45 pm |
  11. Jk from Minnesota

    Yes they should and when the high unemployment problem eases – those taxes should go toward paying for the 2 wars the Bush Admin and Congress didn't bother to provide funds for.

    September 13, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  12. P. Edward Murray

    Make the rich pay dearly they have gotten off scott-free for too many years!
    There is a reason Jesus said that rich men won't go to heaven...

    Yardley, PA

    September 13, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
  13. Peter

    assuming the people that get new jobs will be paying federal and state income taxes, maybe it could be revenue neutral or at least cost effective. I know, a government program that's cost effective is an oxymoron but couldn't think of another expression.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:03 pm |
  14. David in Tampa

    It's not a tax increase if you call it a fee. Just increase the fees and license requirements. We have had a steady increase in fees over the last few years but our Republican run state government swears they haven't increased taxes. Or maybe we can use funds that go to projects in districts controlled by the Republican/Tea bunch and use those monies constructively elsewhere; my state government didn't want federal funds for a high speed rail system so the money went to other states meaning no jobs here.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  15. Tom in Desoto, TX

    Using tax money for the betterment of our nation as a whole, opposed to squandering billions on concocted wars for years? This cannot be a serious question.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  16. Russ in PA

    Not at all. The best government could do would be to return us to a free market system, where failing companies and banks are left to fail, allowing debt to be liquidated, and resources to be bought up by prosperous companies. Government should then allow competing currencies as proposed by Ron Paul, which would return us to a stronger currency. Finally, government should stop meddling and attempting to centrally plan the economy, which is counter-productive to actual growth. Attempting the same old tax and spend policies only drives the country deeper into debt, and inhibiting any growth.

    Ron Paul in 2012...

    September 13, 2011 at 2:06 pm |
  17. Randy

    Yes. You can start with those 400 wealthiest people that have more money than the bottom 150 million combined. And for my republican friends, notice I said they have more money, not "earned". Nobody can earn a billion dollars unless they've cured cancer, heart disease, and male pattern baldness.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:09 pm |
  18. Ed

    What kind of stupidity is this? Stimulate jobs by reducing taxes, and pay for it with taxes!
    He does not understand basic math. that if there is a finite resource you cannot reduce it and expect it to be enough to give it others.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:11 pm |
  19. Brad, Portland, OR

    I saw Obama's proposal. While I generally lean towards the Democrats, Obama's plan is mostly made up of old Republican chestnuts.

    Probably deliberately so, so he can chastise them when they end up not supporting a plan containing their own ideas.

    Not that they'd support ANY plan that Obama presented to them, because they don't want to give Obama any successes to claim, even if that means not helping the American people.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
  20. barbara in nc

    You betchum Red Rider.

    Why are we paying tax money TO Oil Companies and THEN paying them even more than their products are worth at the pump?

    September 13, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
  21. Mark Ivy, Indiana

    Actual tax increases should not be used to pay for President Barak Obama's The American Jobs Act. Yes, there should be changes to the tax code, closing of loopholes. But to base a plan on increasing taxes at a time that the national debt continues to rise and the American economy is floundering is a mistake. The biggest fallacy is the idea that this plan will change anything immediately for job hungry American workers. While some of the proposed legislation is laudable, it does nothing to address the immediate need for jobs. The uncertainty about what happens beyond 2012 is the biggest impediment to employers hiring again. It is also the biggest obstacle to consumers to go out and begin spending again. You can't have more jobs unless demand justifies the hires. You can't have demand unless there is certainty and stability for the future. Time to be realistic about today. Look forward to tomorrow, but deal first with today and making it through.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:16 pm |

    tampa, fl our countries super rich need an income and asset adjustment., period. we have a minimum wage, so we should have a maximum wage too.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:24 pm |
  23. Jan Davis, Knoxville, TN

    Yes they should have tax increases on those making over $200,000/year. As an average person, I am tired of supporting the rich in this country with all their tax loopholes. They get all the breaks and the rest of us suffer. Warren Buffett is right–put the rich in a higher tax bracket before our country further goes down the tubes. It is terribly difficult for ordinary folks to make it these days; support President Barack Obama who wants to tax the rich at a higher rate! That is the only fair thing to do!

    September 13, 2011 at 2:25 pm |
  24. Bobby E. Lahmon Jackson MS

    First of all I wish the media would be more specific about those tax increases and stop making it seem as if President Obama wants to raise taxes on everyone,if you are fortunate enough to make 250k a year or better of course you're
    not rich,but you're probably doing much better than the guy earning less ,if you make more you should pay more ,that no more than right Warren Buffet should not be paying more taxes than his employes.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
  25. J.D.

    We have 2 choices: borrow money or raise taxes. I vote for raise taxes . . . especially among those who have been making out like bandits during the past decade or so – think Wall Street. Come to think of it, they are bandits.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:31 pm |
  26. Dan Mazur

    President Obama's job bill acknowledges the challenges faced by millions of Americans, and proposes an action plan to improve our current situation. This legislation would be funded by extending some tax cuts, but also by ending subsidies and closing tax loopholes. A small group of Americans have lobbied long and hard crafting legislation to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Let's speak plainly. Haven't we coddled these TAX DODGERS long enough?

    September 13, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
  27. Ron

    It is not right to take from those who will work and give to those who will not.
    Did't Thomas Jefferson have something to say along those line?

    September 13, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
  28. Loren

    Nice thought, but from what I read of the President's plan, he's being very selective about the categories of who is going to pay, and it's not the really rich, just the ones two tiers down from the top. Who thinks this stuff up? It's like they want everybody to pick apart the plan.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:39 pm |
  29. chris

    nope and step one is for congress to read the bill before passing it and let us know what is in it before they pass it and we don't want this not reading an import bill to be done again like how obamacre passed without reading what is in it or let us know what is in it

    September 13, 2011 at 2:46 pm |
  30. J. Keyser

    I think that the tax increases should be used to pay for Obama's jobs program. This is because the tax increases are targeting the rich. The rich can afford these tax increases and i think that they should have no problem with this plan because its being used to help the lesser fortunate people who need jobs. This is a good plan because even though it has a "robin hood" feel to it, Obama is not acutally robbing the rich but he is really helping the poor

    September 13, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
  31. Kevin SD CA

    Tell Obama to have his billionaire friends George Soros and Warren Buffet to pay for his jobs plan!

    September 13, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
  32. steve, in Phoenix

    No, there shouldn't ! This latest STIMULUS program will produce the EXACT same results, as the last one ! A complete failure ! Why ???????....'cause it takes money AWAY from the ones you're EXPECTING to create those jobs !!!! Not to mention, when it costs $ 300,000 to create a $ 17,000 job.......that doesn't sound like a sane idea.....

    September 13, 2011 at 2:50 pm |
  33. Annie, Atlanta

    Is it really too much to ask that the wealthy share in the sacrifice, given that they are wealthy in large part thanks to us, or when you consider we cover their losses when they gamble, as in the recent meltdown, while they keep their winnings? They've enjoyed a trillion dollars in savings over the last decade. I'm just not seeing where this is unreasonable.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
  34. Overby from Melbourne

    Of course not. Obama should not be allowed any more programs. Every time he has a program it tanks. Every time he opens his mouth, which is way too often, the stock market tanks. He talked last Thursday and on Friday the market tanked 300+. Enough is enough. Get someone competent in the White House.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
  35. Michael Bindner, Alexandria, VA

    No. That is merely a suggestion being advanced to make Republicans look bad. Instead, we should sell underwater mortgages held by the government (Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Veterans Administration, Federal Housing Administration) to the Federal Reserve at the value of the underlying asset, so that they can direct servicers to write down balances and reduce payments. That would both raise enough revenue to fund the bill and (along with a gas tax increase) and get consumers to start spending again.

    September 13, 2011 at 2:58 pm |
  36. Roy Birdzell

    Jack, if you mean Obama's re-election campaign fund, the answer is NO!
    Roy, Jax Fl

    September 13, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
  37. Kevin in CA

    The jobs bill should absolutely be paid for by tax increases ... kill the Bush tax break for the ultra rich and eliminate corporate welfare.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
  38. Mark from Voorhees, NJ

    No, Jack. It should be paid for by the savings from removing all our troops from Afghsanistan and Iraq, Europe, and every where else we have no security interest in being. It should come from firing private security troops that we pay 10 times what our troops get in these pointless wars. It should come from repealing massive tax breaks for the big oil companies and the Koch brothers and their poisonous ilk, and it should come from confiscatory taxes and fines on war profiteers like Halliburton, who have no competence, responsibility or patriotism.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
  39. J. Keyser

    I think that the tax increases should be used to pay for Obama's jobs program. This is because the tax increases are targeting the rich specifically and not the poor. The rich can afford these tax increases and i think that they should have no problem with this plan because its being used to help the lesser fortunate people who need jobs. This is a good plan because even though it has a "robin hood" feel to it, Obama is not acutally robbing the rich at all, hes just helping the poor. Obama is just using money they were already going to pay because everybody pays taxes and he just added a little extra on top of it asking for a small increase. Some might say that this plan is bad because its taking from the rich and feeding the poor (robin hood), but this increase should not hurt the rich because they can afford this increase and i dont think they should mind this increase because its going to a greater cause for the country and its economy. With the unemployment rate being so high this could help lower it alittle bit and get some of lower class who are struggling to obtain and maintain jobs on the right track

    September 13, 2011 at 3:07 pm |
  40. C. Martin

    II'd say tax the big corporations who locate overseas to avoid taxes, while creating joblessness back home.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  41. Chuck Reichmuth

    It should be paid for with cuts to foreign aid and military spending. It's time we changed our priorities.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  42. Lance Denney

    Why is this a question? Of COURSE the people/corporations who got RICH off CAUSING this recession, and others, should be taxed to pay for it. We even reimburse them to lobby/BRIBE OUR politicians, who WE ALSO PAY, to vote AGAINST us!

    September 13, 2011 at 3:15 pm |
  43. John LaBare, Wantagh, NY

    The plan is specific and is a balance of tax cuts for all and modest increases to the 2% higher income group and it promotes benefits to those companies who hire american workers. The tax increases in his plan are cutting back incentives for those companies who have gorged themselves on the american dollar. Not the middle income families. He is right and he has a good balanced, fair plan. Republicans will do all they can to portray this in a negative light and drag this on to the 2012 election and take thier chances. I guarantee you, if they get control of the white house they will propose all these ideas and tought them as "Republican ideas".

    September 13, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  44. Luella Lappe

    Jack, Yes if they take it from the top by closing the loop-holes. It's called trickle down. The rich hold on to their money.so if that gets loosened up the lower and middle class will have something to spend, AND they will spend .walla.,problem fixed. Luella,Lake Mills, Iowa

    September 13, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  45. CONNIE G., Chicago, IL

    YES!!! The elite and supe-rich are bloated from "F.F.": "financial flatulence" after stuffing themselves from 10 years of a heavy laden buffet prepared at the expense of the working poor (middle class). Much to the chagrin of the Republicans/Tea Partyers, It's time to even the playing field and give the middle class some fresh, clean financial air.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
  46. Richard Oak Harbor, Wa

    Those who have the level of income which is to be taxed for the most part have earned that priviledge with the help of those who presently need work. To whom should their reliance and loyalty be shared but with their fellow countrymen who made them who they are.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:21 pm |
  47. bonnie from NJ

    How about ending the Bush tax cuts, for everyone. As even Norquist has admitted, that is not an increase. Government is doing nothing to rich American companies that are still shipping jobs overseas every day, how about fining them? I don't understand why they are trying to create jobs but not doing anything to try to save the ones people already have.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  48. Steve

    We call them fair adjustments to the tax code so a rising tide will lift ALL boats!


    September 13, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  49. Paul From Austin Texas

    Taxes for jobs is a much better goal then it sounds. At present just what do we get for our taxes? Not much except war. Why not let taxes go for something productive for a change.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:26 pm |
  50. Wilhelm von Nord Bach

    Yes. the current high end tax rate and outrageous corporate tax loopholes are robbing the federal treasury of the funds to repair the nations infrastructure that is falling apart. unless we start to repair at least our bridges, we are setting ourselves up for another disaster like the I-35W Mississippi River bridge in Minneapolis. it's become a matter of public safety.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  51. Justin

    Yes, cancelling the TAX BREAKS on the richer Americans seems like the right thing to do. The 'job creators have had plenty of time to create jobs with these TAX BREAKS in place, but they aren't doing anything, are they? It's time to try something else. And the rich didn't get rich all by themselves. Quit being so greedy and selfish and help your country get back on it's feet.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:33 pm |
  52. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    That's simple, YES. No jobs created by the wealthy with the Bush tax cuts just more money in their accounts.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:34 pm |
  53. Rick McDaniel

    Not really. Since he has already squandered about 3.5 trillion dollars, and now wants to squander another 1/2 trillion, I think it is time to say.......pay with program cuts, or forget his plan.

    Taxing the rich will accomplish little to solve our problems.........but taxing the 55% of households who now pay zero taxes, would make a huge revenue improvement. Problem with that, is Obama spends so much so fast, it won't keep up with his spending, anyway!

    September 13, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  54. Richard Lucey

    Its other peoples money and thats our problem. We continue to spend money thats not ours. I'm on a fixed income and I adjust my standard of living to match my bottom line. We need to quit trying to get more taxes and try to lower everybodys tax rate. Thats my view from the bottom

    September 13, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  55. Michael "C" Lorton, Virginia

    Jack: Historically, our government robs from the middle class and the poor to give to the rich-it is the have and have nots-and that is always existed during my lifetime. What we need to do is to end the wars--and invest back into our nation. We are never going to deliver the American standards of a democracy in the middle east-–you can try to change behavior--but you are never going to change a culture--and a tax increase--seems to be the universal answer to fix it all--and look at the US deficit today--did tax increase resolve that issue?

    September 13, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
  56. bob z fr ,pa.

    we are 1.2 trillion in deficit this year already and the year is not over obama only knows one thing spend money to fix every thing

    September 13, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
  57. Phyllis G. Williams

    Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?

    The President cannot make "blood out of stone". People should be happy to give Thanks by
    returning as the source from which they got their wealth by taxation to help others, if they
    love their neighbors as themselves, as others had to be taxed to give them theirs.
    "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17: 9)

    September 13, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
  58. Bill of New Mexico

    Now that the Super Committee is controlling the unbudgetted expenses, any expenditure not budgetted is coming out of entitlements!

    Since I have been on social security for nine years, that has biased my attitude tremendously.

    If the tax increases are not assured, then I am totally against Obama's jobs program.

    One half of the first stimulus package's money was wasted on expenditures that could not stimulate jobs or retain jobs.

    With Obama and the Democrats being that negligent with America's money, they should not be trusted again!

    Especially, with the Super Committee forced to either cut entitlements or the military.

    With second thought, why do the taxes, if Obama wastes half of the money in the Obama Jobs Program–as was done with the first stimulus package!

    It is definitely time for change!

    September 13, 2011 at 3:40 pm |
  59. David R Bebeau,Springfield Missouri

    Jack,if you do three simple things we can get back on track.Simplify the tax code,a modest tax increase and above all
    close down waste.If the American preople really knew that truth about waste they would go into the streets.Waste is
    absolutely mind boggling................billions and billions and billions and billions.If we could really dig deep and do those
    three things we'd be fine.But you can do just one,you have to do all three or it will once again leave us hanging out to dry.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:40 pm |
  60. Tom (Atlanta)

    To quote Ronald Reagan in his famous Mondale debate line, "there you go again". OK, OK, a short term tax break is hard to resist, but it's short term so doesn't do anything for the needed confidence in our government my both small and large businesses and that is impeding them from investing in jobs. If you give them a short term tax break they will either add cash to their reserves or pay down some of there debt. That is business 101 that I am afraid you do not learn in community organization 101. We've said no to taxes once, but I am afraid there is something about "no" that this administration just doesn't understand.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
  61. Jeff in Virginia

    Here is my problem with it, Obama wants to spend the money now, and pay for it over 10 years, how is that helping anything?????

    September 13, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
  62. Bob Allen( Paradise, CA)

    Taxes could be used to pay for the program. It would be better than borrowing. If the program works and puts people back to work, it could be lowered again.

    September 13, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
  63. Alex in Bremerton, WA

    If the American Jobs Act is tied to higher taxes it will be dead on arrival in the congress. Speaker "Hell no you can't!" Boehner and Tea Party speaker Cantor will do their best to kill the bill any way without handing them the higher taxes excuse. I'm sure they are sounding conciliatory in public after getting an earful from their constituents during their month-long recess about how they handled the debt crisis but they will revert to form behind closed doors to defeat the bill.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:00 pm |
  64. gary

    hi jack

    why not,Bush gave them a break for 8yrs doing times when they should have been helping to pay for 2 wars and all the Rep were spending on,now it's time to help get us out of this mess.hell they can't take it with them and you never know if Perry win the world might burn up like his state.don't you think that's where he should be spending his time.

    gary clearwater,fl

    September 13, 2011 at 4:00 pm |
  65. Doug

    It doesn't make sense. For every Paul that gets a job, 2 Peters will lose one. Cut spending in half, get rid of the thugs, and crooks, and patronage jobs, and commie government agencies. Then Americans will want to work again. Doug. Pepperell, MA.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:01 pm |
  66. Noel Sivertson Roswell New Mexico.

    Absolutely. Too many people are exempt from the WE in WE all have to sacrifice. The only ones I see sacrificing are those who can afford it the last. Let's spread the sacrifice around. We're all Americans aren't we?

    September 13, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  67. Joe Ft Walton Bch Fl

    Tell him to talk to Buffett, he donated 5 billions for Bank of America to lay off 30.000 workers.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  68. Richard, in Kansas

    Since the rich (oops, I mean "job creators") havent been creating jobs with the tax cuts theyve enjoyed for the past 12 years maybe it's time they went back to paying their fair share of taxes. Of course the republicans will object to that and Obama will cave as usual. Nothing really changes. Luckily for the rich we( I mean they) have the best government money can buy.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
  69. james robert in greenville nc

    Well. first of all it ain't no jobs program in the first place. It's a tax increase disguised in sheep's clothing. The first round of stimulus....excuse me, "investment".....fell right straight into those shovel ready holes. So don't raise taxes and don't increase government spending. Let's just ride it out and wait for the free market to catch up. Give the free market a whiff of some profit and they will do the rest.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
  70. Bill from North Carolina

    Yes...but, only if every single American and business pays the same percentage of income...regardless of how earned. Every person who gets a check either from a job or from social security or welfare should pay the same rate. Every business should pay that same percentage on the income they earn. Also, take away the cap on Social Security wages. Pay the Social Security tax on one's total income. Problem solved!

    September 13, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
  71. Lori - PA


    When Warren Buffet is paying a lower tax rate then his secretary, something's wrong. When Bank of America doesn't pay taxes, and oil companies get tax subsidies (even though they are making record profits), something is wrong. It's time for Congress to right those wrongs. It's time for the Middle Class (are they any of us left?) to stop paying the price because Congress cares more about their own interests, and the interests of their wealthy campaign contributors. It's time for Congress to put the unemployed workers (formerly known as the Middle Class) first. It's time for people like Warren Buffet, companies like Bank of America, and oil companies like BP and Exxon to start paying their fair share of taxes.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
  72. Dave, Orlando, FL

    Yes, but only if the program is an effective one and only if the taxes are on the wealthy and the corporations currently getting welfare. And they should also be used to pay back all the corporate give-aways and tax breaks for the wealthy with no more taxes on the middle class. But since today’s “Republicans” are hell bent on destroying the middle class, they will oppose any tax except on the middle. The fact is that we have been doing all the sacrificing and “shared sacrifice” to me means I’ve done my share, it’s time for the wealthy and the corporations to do their share of the sacrificing. The Republican idea of shared sacrifice is that only the middle class shares all the sacrifice among ourselves.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
  73. Terry- Greensburg, IN "Hoosier Hillbilly"

    It's like a hiring agency, they get a % of what you make for a period of time. So Obama set it up and make it happen. Don't forget to include stopping those [ loop-holes ] in large company tax deductions, it's my guess they can help pay for some of that $447 = billion= WON"T COST "US" A THING jobs bill you want passed & you'll sign right away.
    Not the 'bill' the money (( sign right away )) like much of the other money in stimulus bills ... WHERE"D IT GO???

    September 13, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
  74. Dan-Eustis,Florida

    Darn right they should, where are the Jobs??? the supposed job creators that the republicans continually spout off about
    haven't created job one. They have greedily enjoyed the Bush tax cuts for ten years. My question is why are over fourteen
    million Americans out of work. I say remove all the corporate loop holes and take away some of the money from the
    greedy rich. If the rich keep sticking it to the middle class eventually the middle class will rise up and take care of the greedy
    rich. The mega rich in America are the biggest threat our Country faces.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  75. diane dagenais turbide

    Yes Jack! When you have facts that One out of six lives in poverty, I think the wealthiest would agree to make more sacrifice because they can afford to do so and because they cannot afford to do less and let the country they love and are proud of and confident of their true belief that America is the greatest country on earth become less then what they fought for from all generations!

    September 13, 2011 at 4:18 pm |
  76. Sco

    Taxes will be a hard sell for the President. I don't think he believes it will sell. Besides, Government spending doesn't mean jobs.

    What is a ‘bad’ job? Why is it bad to build an airplane in South Carolina? Why doesn’t the White House say, “I will help Boeing build a factory in South Carolina so they can hire 10,000 workers in South Carolina. I will help folks in West Virginia mine for coal to save jobs. I will help make the coal fired generators in the East be modernized to save jobs. I will help rigs in the Gulf get to work drilling for oil to add jobs. I will get oil flowing from the North slope to add jobs”?

    September 13, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
  77. Mitoosense Fort Lauderdale, Florida

    Gov Perry said it best, it's a half a Stimulus and therfore should produce half the jobs. Half of zero is zero. Jobs saved is another story, if you think these jobs stimulate growth you'd be wrong. Saved government jobs are on the opposite end of the balance sheets. These jobs are burdens to the taxpayers

    September 13, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  78. dave in nashville

    Only people working and paying taxes are qualified to answer this Jack, unfortunately I am not one of them.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  79. Evelyn Berryhill

    I think yes because jobs are a very important part of american. If any one think no than they do not care about american but themselves and they have a job. Let them not have a job than they will want every thing in place to get them a job. It is not a bad ideas to put some of the people in congress out of a job and let them feel what it is like to not have a job and have bills to pay.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  80. ken, atlantic city, nj

    Obama in his speech to the nation said the jobs bill was paid for just like he said obamacare, and the war in libya was pad for. So pay for it obama, eliminate the DOE, end all nasa flights, end the wars in iraq, afghan, pakistan,libya, yemen, and somalia, cut defense, cia, and homeland security 25%. Instead of taxing workers just tax the 700 trillion dollar derivatives market which created this financial mess. We are over taxed now. Obama the corporate war monger is lying again like he has done since he first took office.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  81. Ted from Hershey, PA

    Tax increases SHOULD NOT be used for Obama's Job propgram that will NOT prouduce the jobs that he "wishes" for! We need hard CUTS just like the hard CASH he has gotten before, and wants to pay for them in the future when he is not responsibe or President!!!!!! And he knows this well and is doing everything he can do POLITICALLY – and re-direct blame anywhere but at himself!

    September 13, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  82. AB

    Yes, Jack. Tax increases on wealthy individuals and corporations should fund Obama's Jobs Program. Most if not all of his program will get through Congress. The Republican dominated Congress cannot afford to ignore or dump the job plan. They do so at their peril. The political stakes are very high for the President, members of Congress, and for both parties. The stakes are very high for the country and its economy. The American people will suffer if this jobs package is not passed into law and implemented.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
  83. Janne from NC

    The job program should absolutely be paid for but we are right back to the same ol same ol in Washington. Explain to me the logic behind using permanent tax hikes to pay for temporary jobs. Are we going to keep on paying more in taxes after the potholes are filled? You know the answer is yes so doesn’t that mean this is just a backdoor effort to raise taxes?

    September 13, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  84. Paulette in Dallas

    The Tea Party and the GOP had better decide to make some compromises and pacify the masses or they will be seeing another Revolution like that which took place in France when Marie Antoinette said,"Let them eat cake!" The poor and used to be "middle class" are only going to take so much and then "The Walls will start crumbling down."

    September 13, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  85. Rich McKinney, Texas

    This is a double edged sword kind of question Jack. I suppose it depends on if your one of those people who's taxes will be raised. The last stimulus bill passed cost tax payers over $250,000 for each job created. This lesson should teaches us that our government knows nothing about putting people to work or about economics. Part of Obama's plan is to extend unemployment benefits another year so instead of the 2 years people have already received they will get another year to sit back and do nothing. Paying people not to work is ridicules There are companies hiring in America even though the work may not be the same that a person was doing before. The logical thing for Obama to do is just put those unemployed for over 2 years on welfare and call it what it is.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  86. terence

    There is not enough taxes to raise to keep up with Obamas spending. He has turned our country into an "obamanation" .
    Terence, NJ

    September 13, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
  87. Tom Bulger, Canandaigua

    Absolutely. Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, and even the European strategists have joined in saying that we will get out of this recession in the way FDR got us out of the Great Depression, through the stimulus of job creation. Government funded the jobs that built our infrastructure through borrowing and taxes. Republican brakes on the economy, ending bridge and road maintenance, our national infrastructure, is exactly the wrong thing to do.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
  88. Jenna Roseville CA

    Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?

    Of course it should include tax increases.

    We can start with repealing the tax breaks for the wealthy that once again haven't created any jobs.

    We can repeal the tax breaks to BIG OIL since all it does is lines their shareholders pockets and we still get gouged.

    We can raise the tax rates on those that make 1 MILLION and above to Reagan era tax rates.

    We can stop funding Israel since they alone receive more than half of ALL foreign aide that we give to the entire rest of the world.

    We can pull out of Iraq a few months early.

    We can close all those corporate loopholes.

    We can require countries that want us to buy their products to manufacture those products here using US workers, like they require American companies to do in their nations.

    There is much that we can do to raise revenue to get Americans back to work, fix our crumbling infrastructure and make us great again.

    Shouldn't Americans put Americans first?

    Who again stands in our way? Oh thats right, the Republicans.

    Roseville CA

    September 13, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  89. Kathy lamoreax

    I think that the minimum tax on "rich" people ought to be 10% with no exemptions, the level for that rich category would be the issue.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  90. Donna, Wisconsin

    This is a no-brainer! Read your own surveys! Americans back increasing taxes on the wealthy by a wopping margin! Only Republicans don't pay attention to us! Cut and Tax –balance–is what we want. So YES, tax those who have gotten those breaks for years under Republicans! Middle class is tired of paying.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  91. Bob from Melbourne

    No Jack! Just look at the Presidents track record of asking for money to create jobs. His last jobs bill (stimulus) was a trillion dollar package and it did nothing to create jobs. Now he want a half trillion dollars thinking it will create jobs. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. It all breaks down to throwing good money (which we don’t have) after bad. The President was an Academic and knows nothing about creating private sector jobs.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  92. Ron WPAFB

    Yes, plain and simple, but the Republicans would let people starve first! And they are! The American People are to blame! Something like 35%b of eligible voters actually vote in a Presidential election and less than that in a non Pesidential year! That's how you get the likes of the Tea Party, the rich kids who have never worked a hard day in their lives, in public office and think they know better!!!! We are doomed to repeat mistakes of the past because the American People are not paying attention. It will come to civil war before this problem gets fixed!

    We enjoy the lowest taxes in the world, and the world is beating us in every categorie, Education, Math, Science, and so-on. Where will it stop? Not with the Republicans, they want the poor and out of work Americans to just go away so the Rich can be richer!

    September 13, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  93. ImALibertarian

    "Should tax increases be used to pay for President Obama's jobs program?"

    Only if you believe a bunch of politicians who don't know you, or what your plans entail can determine better than you where your money should be spent. If that's the case, maybe you should invest in Amtrak, or the USPS, or FEMA, or one of their other bankrupt jobs projects.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  94. Denny from Tacoma

    Yes, because it is the only way that the Democrats can create more jobs, but unfortunately with a divided Congress it probably won't happen, at least maybe until the Democrats regain control. It is well know that big business controls our government through their lobbyists and also that the majority of big business is Republican. In order to regain control, Republicans would rather outsource jobs to other countries than to create more in our own country which would improve our economy and make a Democratic president look good. Unfortunately if Republicans do regain total control they will continue down the path of the George W. Bush era, which would further disrupt our economy and reduce our middle class. If the lobbyists have also bought off the Democrats and I suspect that they have, we are really in trouble; I say this because the Republican party started our economical decline and the Democrats appear "unable" to do anything about it. If our society is too survive, we need to become more collectivists than indiividualists.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  95. andyz Lynn, MA

    Yes. Tax increases across the board. Get people back to work!

    September 13, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  96. Fred In LA

    This President is nothing more than a broken record. (The way we used to listen to music for all you young uns. ) Again nothing new from this well worn out wind bag. I'm all for cutting out loopholes and tax breaks for all Americans. That includes the rich and the poor. (everyone pays their fair share) I'm all for exempting the tax breaks that allow corporations to relocate to foreign countries. I'm all for cutting subsidies to Agriculture, GE, Oil and Green technologies. I'm all for less regulation and more production. No more benefits to illegals. If treated medically or educated in this country, we hold them and bill their homeland for payment. Why the extension of Unemployment benefits? It only adds to the problem.

    September 13, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  97. Danielle (Windsor CT)

    Why put this on only Mr. Obama? When the GOP defaults to "tax cuts for job creators" line, they are driving the deficit higher. We saw that with the Bush tax cuts with borrowed Chinese money. So, if we are above board, the question for Cantor, Boehner & McConnell becomes; "OK, so what do you want to cut to pay for that tax break that you want to give those job creators".

    September 13, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  98. Gordon NJ

    We don't have to raise taxes. All we have to do is eliminate the hundreds of billions of Dollars in corporate welfare payments to well-connected businesses and individuals. We are out here working and paying taxes while these new welfare kings and queens are driving around in Porsches and buying factories overseas. How could any Republican in congress oppose such "welfare reform"?

    September 13, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  99. Jim in Alabama

    Yes Jack, tax rates are the lowest they've been in 60 years and the wealthy are doing quite well through tax loopholes and write offs. It's time they chipped in and helped their country out of the deep hole that many of them put us in by taking their jobs overseas and hiding their assets there to avoid taxes. I do think that the $200,000 rane incomes should not be taxed at the rate od multi-millionaires and billionaires. It's not fair.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  100. curtis in philadelphia

    Yes. Jack, exactly when is it okay, in Republican eyes, to raise taxes? The Third World War? The next global plague? When aliens land? Won't it then be too late? We've been cutting taxes on the wealthy since Reagan and look where its gotten us, do ya think that maybe its time for a new approach? Hey Jack, did you see that Tax Break put out that fire last night? Did you see that other Tax Break teach those kids in public school? Better question, when was the last time you saw a rich person put out a fire? Because our economic house is burning down and the Republicans just don't seem to care.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  101. Ken from Pinon Hills, California

    All programs should be paid by "taxes" as you go. There would be no 14 trillion dollar debt today if that weird concept was applied. The only thing that can plug the holes in the sinking good ship United States, is taxes.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  102. HJ - Saint Paul, MN

    Yes. The government uses tax revenue to pay for things. Unless you're Republican, then you believe decreasing revenues will get you more money. We need to stop asking rich people to help the unfortunate, and start telling them.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  103. Kathie

    Absolutely. the rich and corporations do not need tax breaks for their jets/cars/boats/etc–we don't get tax breaks on our vehicles. record profit making oil companies can pay for their own R&D without taxpayer subsidize. there is no reason why the super rich and corporations cannot pay their fair share of the tax burden and since they only bank their money this increased revenue would help put Americans back to work.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
  104. Pete in Georgia

    Tax the RICH !!
    Sounds great until someone decides to tell the truth.....................meaning the top 5% of income earners pay 95% 0f all income taxes collected while 51% of the so called workers pay ZERO................NOTHING...............ZIP.
    You want truth about paying "Fair Share", how bout starting there.
    Hey, I just wrote a poem !!

    September 13, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  105. Ken in NC

    This is complicated Jack but I will try to make it like a KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) ..........YES.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:10 pm |

    Staunton VA. Yes Jack, eliminating the tax breaks for the upper class, is a great way to pay for the jobs bill. Actually I think the president should inform the Republicans that if they insist in not eliminating these special interest deductions, he will veto any extension of the Bush Tax cuts and let them expire. That will definitely pay for the jobs bill, and help eliminate a good portion of the deficit.
    Enjoy the rest of your day Jck

    Kevin Ryan Staunton Va

    September 13, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  107. Gary H. Boyd

    What Obama's proposing is like taking money from one pocket and putting it in another. The guy needs his head examined.

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    September 13, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  108. leemarie50

    We are raising taxes on the same people we are giving tax credits too. Does this make sense. How many times are we going to raise taxes to pay for short comings? Are we thinking through our issues or do we just use the mantra "Raise taxes on the rich"?

    The attitude of people who pay no tax, telling others they have to pay more scares me. When is enough enough. Pouring money into a sink hole is not the answer. Tax overhall may be the better solution for all involved.

    And I haven't even mention de-regulation. Just stop adding new regualation to the pile.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  109. Gigi Oregon

    The job's will pay for themselves. What Taxes we need...is for big business and the rich schemers to pay up and off the Bush war debt. And stop calling it the Obama's debt. President Obama did not go to war in the wrong country, he did not charge it to our grand children. The war debt is still growing interest daily to China. President Obama gave to us a Health care that "we the people" can not afford to pay or have on our own, due to the high cost of health care. Our Insurance payments are higher than our mortgage payments. Most American can not afford to go to the doctor because of the high cost even after our insurance pays some. Or as in my case being a senior citizen, my doctor says medicare doesn't pay for that....FDR gave the senior some security in their old age. Pres. Obama worked to give us a better and healthier life. Now who wants to take take health care away from us?...

    September 13, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  110. Kim , Dodge City, Kansas

    Sure, as long as those increases are healthy ones levied against companies who off-shore their profits and labor. Its one thing to get our economic butts kicked by countries with better products, but it is just self-abuse when American companies are kicking us in the teeth at every opportunity. Here is a good way to raise revenue, a 100% tax on campaign funds and contributions from lobbyists.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
  111. Dan in Aluququerque

    i don't piyy anyone having a net income of $200,000. Maybe they'll have to consider owning 2 cars instead of 3, trading their expensive bass boat for something smaller, not going on a cruise and taking simpler vacations, spending less on eating out, spending thousands on seaason tickets, reserved seats for concerts or sports events. Most Americans don't have that and many can't hope for it. So, don't cry about;paying a little more in taxes to save the country.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  112. Ken in MD

    Whenever anyone in Congress says that an issue is "off the table", they're failing to do their jobs. NOTHING should ever be off the table in any negotiation.

    But to answer your question, Jack, yes, taxes on the wealthy should be used to pay for this plan. The wealthy benefited the most from the economic disaster that was the Bush Administration, and they can pay a little more now. Even with a higher tax rate, they'd never give back all of the benefits they've received over the past 10 years.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  113. Bob H. from Orlando

    Dear Jack:

    The rules put forth to President Obama state that the only way spending can occur is if there are equal cuts elsewhere. The main dilemma is that our economy is like that of a train at a station-all of the working men and women and those who seek to join those ranks are ready, willing and able. Some sort of fuel is needed for this train to leave the station. n investment is needed such as closing tax loopholes that exist for major companies. If the passengers on this train did this; it has a name and that is tax evasion. So the battle of who will be the engineer is up to the White House and the Congress.The problem is that the House seeks to derail the train before it ever takes off and for good reason – it would hurt the ones they represent and I don't mean the voters. Politics need to be put aside because the problems we face with unemployment is no less greater than the destruction caused by 9/11 ten years ago. Congress rallied our President then and should do so now. If Congress truly cares about those who put them in office, now is the time to act and not watch a disaster. I'm fearful that the Republicans will cry the same words as Urkel said on " Family Matters " – " Did I do that ? "

    September 13, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  114. becky - Las Vegas

    Of course they should be used to pay for the plan. Cuts alone won't do it and those receiving the tax breaks (which is what will really be going away) have been in place for far too long. Also, I think that the Congress and the President should show a little good faith and fork all but one dollar of their paychecks.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  115. Dan

    Even though this move would make the "Super Comittee's" task harder, I think it's high time that the "Job Creators" parted with some of their record profits, Record cash reserves and their record executive compensation for the good of our nation. They've taken a short sighted path to increase profits by downsizing and shipping manufacturing overseas. Thay have weakened our nations core capabilities, all the while using PACs, lobbiests and good old boy networks to get breaks that average Americans are not entitled to. Now all they want to do is whine and use the TEA party and GOP to try to dupe us again. It's time to wake up and pay the piper before they wreck the entire world economy.

    Stewartstown, PA

    September 13, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  116. Bruce of DE

    The money can be taken out of foreign (corporation) aid, military expansionism, the corrupt ethanol program, and profits from the CIA drug trade in Afghanistan.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  117. Joe

    Joe from IL

    A $450 Billion Jobs bill hoping to create 2 million jobs is over $200,000 a job. Something needs to be done, but that doesn't seem like a lot of bang for the buck. The worst part is that only 9% will come from corporations, and a huge chunk (about 44%) will come from those makng $200K – $500K/ year. A great living, but certianly not the Corporations and "Milllionaires and Billionaires" that Obama likes to villify.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  118. Jim

    No. Obama should end all taxes and then see how Conservatives find a way around that. Watching Conservatives calling for an end to "no taxes" and trying to explain why they are necessary would be a riot.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  119. winn in Maine


    September 13, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  120. Jason in New York

    Yes. More jobs means more spending. More spending means more tax collection. More tax collection means more jobs like teachers, police, firefighters, and so on. They then spend more money and the cycle continues which means more demand which means more jobs. This is very cyclical. It is called broadening the tax base. What part of this do people do not understand?

    Jason in Manhattan

    September 13, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  121. Glenton from Los Angeles

    In a time when 1 in 6 Americans are living in poverty, I don't see how Republicans can continue to defend loopholes such as tax breaks for corporate jet owners. Republicans may try to paint it as class warfare, but with the way things are going now, we won't have a middle class for much longer...just the rich and the poor. Perhaps the GOP should pick up a history book and see how well that type of society worked out for the France in the late 1700's.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  122. charles leduc

    Absolutely.Approx. 47% of the population pay little or no taxes.The whole tax system including the loopholes which favour the rich needs to be revised but the right will have none of it as they continue to protect the rich and their sole objective is to get rid of the democrats despite the harm they are causing to the American economy

    September 13, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  123. Ralph Spyer from Chicago Illinois

    50 % of Americans pay no federal income tax, 20 million illegals pay no federal income taxes, their children go to public schools, They drive on public roads they are propected by our arm forces. Our government has no money for a job program. The problem is not that we are not tax enought the problem is the government spend more than it take in.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  124. Kirk (Apple Valley, MN)

    We paid for Bush's wars with tax cuts so why should we pay for Obama's jobs with tax increases? Besides all those "job creators/producers" really, REALLY need their money to create/produce all those invisible jobs.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  125. Paul P

    Not exclusively no, during the debt debate he kept talking about a balanced approach, now he is only about tax increases. This smacks a bit of the beginning of a campaign platform. He should have maintained his balanced approach through to its cost, now he comes off looking a bit inconsistent and partisan. Sadly this is likely a consequence from the debt ceiling debacle.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  126. Ken Victoria BC

    YES, YES and another YES. Baby Bush sold the ranch to high income people. Did the Hero Ronald Regan not increase taxes? Did the Father Bush not read lips and state no increase in Taxes. This Canadian would certainly like to see a more just USA. Reelect, my Hero Barrack

    September 13, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  127. roger from phoenix

    Rock and roll Jack, lets just add another 448 billion on to the debt , what the heck is the difference 16 trillion or 16 and 1/2 triliion in debt, it will never be paid for anyway. All these idiots in congress repealed glass stegall act caused the second depression , spend trillions on fighting wars that will never end , give tax breaks to there wealthy friends , etc. maybe just maybe they could create a job or two for the shinking middle class probably not.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  128. Bob Gibson

    The whole problem is an antiquated tax code. The argument will continue untill this country comes up with a fair taxsation system like a value added tax VAT . Then we mmust decide what gov plans we wnat to keep and what we need to discard then revise what we keep to meet the modern situation.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  129. Susan Cannon-Carlson

    Obama promised that only the rich corporate private jet owners will pay for his economic policies, including his recent jobs plan. So apparently, families and small businesses making over 250K have jets hiding in their suburban garages. Because they will be paying for $400 billion of the newest Obama bill. And the real jet owners will only be paying $4 billion.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  130. Alex in Wisconsin

    Tax rates should not go up. However, Tax loopholes need to be closed and this bill needs to be paid for in full. Millionaires and Billionaires, you know, "the job creators' haven't exactly been creating jobs. Infrastructure spending is necessary and Americans need to be willing to fork over the money needed to keep bridges from falling, its called living in society. Don't like it, Central Africa is primed for those who don't want government, law or infrastructure.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  131. Out of work yacht Captain in Florida

    ABSOULUTELY for the wealthy!!! I have worked on the yachts of these very wealth Americans and it is sinful what they get away with. Not only do these yacht owners use LOOP HOLES in the registration system wherby they end up not paying US taxes on the purchase or sale of these yachts, on top of that 98% of the crew ARE NOT American! WHY? Because they form foreign corporations to own the yachts, like in the Cayman Islands, and it lets them get away with dodging the US captial gains tax system. The yachts are then in a "grey area of the law" concerning employment labor law. So they hire whom ever they please, often foreigners because they can get away with not dealing with the US constitutionable rights we have as US citizens – thus qualifed US crew are out of work in droves! There is more to it then this, believe me! So TAX them and clean up the LOOP HOLES!!!! This subject would be a major news item for an eye opening CNN special investigative report.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  132. Dave in Cincinnati

    It is not a jobs program any more than the first stimulus was. It is purely political and should not be funded by the taxpayers.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  133. Dee in New Paris Ohio

    Yes, and ESPECIALLY tax increases on the rich!!!

    THEY have alkl the money.

    It should not take a genius to figure this one out.

    What is really needed is a LEADER who can galvanize the millions in our country who have no jobs, no money, and just about no hope. The one thing that has not been taken from them so far is their right to VOTE. And if only there was a leader at whose back all those millions (along with the working poor) would march, we could really fix some of our problems.

    However, there is no leader, and the media seems hell-bent on scaring the people about one crisis or another, which fragments the electorate.

    September 13, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  134. Susan

    If the taxes for the rich would actually be collected it sounds like a good idea. Caroline Kennedy's legacy is not to pay her fair share of the taxes so why is it different for the rest of the rich? The way it works in this country is the poor pay for the rich-Robin Hood in reverse. In unemployment if you do not make enough in the charge period you cannot collect. The poor just gave money for those doing better to collect and have more. All very FDR andJFK rich men helping out their class.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
  135. Mary Steele

    No Jack,

    Funding billions more is irresponsible no matter where it comes from!!! It takes than 1 million, not billions to put 8 million unemployed legal immigrants and citizens back to work!!! In fact, it saves billions across the country, reduces states unemployment costs when they go back to work, and they can use that savings to do more contracting which helps businesses grow and hire more workers!


    September 13, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
  136. will, Colorado Springs, Co

    For every one whom work for a living in America pays federal income taxes; so the more American people work the more tax revenue the federal government collects. Aren’t that how wall streets operate; spending money now and look for a return later in interest and dividends. For business, money that comes in is called revenue, for an individual that has money coming in that is called income, and for federal, state, and local government it is called taxes. So if Obama is pushing for the investment in the American people what is wrong with that; isn’t that what the President of the United States should do?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
  137. Don, Toledo Ohio

    Ok let me see if I have this right. In 2008, the housing marking and the financial market crashed and hundreds of thousands of Americans lost jobs. Fast forward to today and the housing market is still in the toilet, even thousands more Americans are out of work, But, the financial market has bounced back from the low in 2008 to what it is now. Someone is making money and it sure is not me, I just lost my job of 13 years because the plant closed. Absolutely tax the rich, they are the only ones that can afford it. My only gripe is it took this long to think of it.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  138. Ralph Nelson

    Absolutely. The economy runs on money like a car runs on gas. You spend it and it tickles up into the pockets of the rich. If you do not tax them properly and transfer (42% of federal government spending is transfers) the money back down, like rain to fed the crops, money in the economy naturely accumulates at the top and the economy stops working properly (and the rich actually get poorer for it because the economy slows). Tax the rich, get the economy going and like the Clinton years, the rich well benefit the most from an expanding economy and the money trickling up to them.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  139. Ann from Charleston SC

    Absolutely! A balance of new revenue and spending cuts is needed, but more importantly, tax reform is needed. The Republicans know that . All of their objections are aimed at bringing Obama down. They know that if his jobs bill brings the unemployment rate down, Obama is likely to win in 2012. Preventing Obama's reelection is more important to the Republicans than doing the right thing for the country.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:12 pm |
  140. Ros.....Illinois

    Yes, tax increases etc. on the wealthy should be used to pay for the jobs program. The rich cats have received tax breaks for several years and do not use it for jobs. They use it to pay off the Republicans so they can get more tax cuts etc. I don't see how they can sleep knowing there are so many that need a job while they stuff their deep pockets.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
  141. Ethan, Florida

    The US needs to lower taxes on middle and working class families whereas at the same time to raise taxes on corporations (since according the SCOTUS they are people) as well as very wealthy people. It seems though like the Republicans solely want to pander to their corporate masters and special interest groups like the Tea Party. The US is the richest nation in world, but has the largest number of poor people and that is very sad to say the least.
    Unfortunately, I do not know if any of this would be useful at all now considering Republican obstructionism and the fact that the US is essentially dying from within because of so many economic issues.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
  142. RickFromDetroit

    YES, But tax the wealthy. If you give the wealthy tax breaks they will bury the money in tax deferred investment accounts and the government will have to borrow more money to keep the government open. This is what happened to most of the Obama stimulus money two years ago. We need money circulating though the economy to create jobs. This is called "Consumer Spending" and Consumer Spending is 70% of the economy.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  143. LA Belle

    If tax increases are off the table, so are adjustments to Social Security.

    Yes, tax increases are necessary to cover the bungled up mess by all these so-called wise people in Congress. We don't believe in anything they spew at us any longer. It appears they are only staying in their priviledged positions to collect their salaries and retirement benefits. If Congress members are too confused to fix the mess they made in this country, they need go on permanent vacation.

    Mega taxes on businesses that operate offshore until they bring their businesses back on U.S. soil is what will solve the unemploymnet problem. These greedy managers played the dirty game of out-sourcing, and now it's time for them to pay the price. Leave the working taxpayer out of it; we don't exist to them anyway.
    Ruby (Louisiana)

    September 13, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  144. Jason Berger

    yes yes yes

    September 13, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  145. Steve San Antonio Texas


    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  146. Ayo, Texas

    Many people scream loudest for small government but want Big government benefits. if you think government should get out of the way then stop asking Obama were are the jobs. if he is expected to create jobs he can't pay for it out of his pocket. it might be good if we all chip in with a little tax raise....i'm talking to you billionaires

    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  147. tonie

    Yes, taxes should be raised it is past time because the tax cuts from the Bush Administraiton is harming htis country just as Reagan's Budget Director said. They are the problem and the money is there. The so called job creators won't create jobs unless demand is here and will continue to get worse if we keep on with the Bush policies.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  148. SoCal

    I don't know how many ways I can possibly say "YES"

    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  149. wvleo

    No more taxes !

    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  150. Edw Collins

    You bet yeah. My parents paid 90 percent tax during the rebuilding after world war two. Let get it done

    September 13, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  151. Sharon Garren, Molalla OR

    YES-YES-YES. I'm sorry Jack but you and GE should pay more taxes.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  152. Jim (Las Vegas)

    In a perfect world it would be paid for with tariffs, but the WTO prevents that. So yes, how else would you pay for it? DUH!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  153. Jeff in LA

    YES YES YES!! The republican's will ONLY agree on those parts of the Jobs Plan that do NOT encroach on the rich, because they ARE the rich, AND the friends and families OF the rich – If you don't see that you are not paying attention.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  154. Jack

    Yes, absolutely increase taxes on the wealthy who have enjoyed low taxes for a decade while the nation is at war and now in recession.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  155. Joe Pavone

    This is the President's strategy – make them an offer they can't accept. They can work with him as he said "let me know what you don;t like about it" or they can just NO it to death like everything else he brings to the table. Either way President Obama knows what side the people are on when it comes to oil companies and tax breaks for the rich. This could be the tea party congress's Waterloo.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  156. joshua

    let's see, this is Obama's third jobs program and we are worse off today than we were when he took office except that we are 3 trillion dollars deeper in debt. Here's a little bit of wisdom for all you tax and spend liberals, businesses don't pay taxes. That's right, they don't pay taxes. They do one of two things, 1, they raise their prices and pass the tax onto the consumer, and 2, they cut jobs and pass the tax burden onto the workers. That's what happens in the real world. Unfortunately, Obama doesn't have a clue about the real world. He's lived in some liberal fantasy world where governments can keep "spreading the wealth around" until all the wealth is gone.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  157. Philip TN

    Of course. Where else do you think the money is going to come from? The Social Security Trust Fund? What a dumb question Jack!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  158. Pete in Milton, FL

    Let's be clear here – they are NOT tax INCREASES, they are reductions or eliminations of tax BREAKS. And yes, they should be eliminated in order to pay for a LOT of things this country needs. These are the people that have benefited the most from opportunites and tax breaks, and it is past time for them to ante up.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  159. johnnie K - San Francisco, CA

    When doing the math on this one doesn't realy money used by a viable sourcing mechanism ore realistic then giving tax cuts and hoping for a trickle down. – Given the mess we are in don't we need the most certain cost accounting on this one?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  160. Reginald in Philadelphia

    Pass the Jobs Bill or spend the next 14 months making the Republicans explain to the American people how they have jobs, so don't really care if 9% of the country doesn't!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  161. Katrina

    Big corporations and the rich have been excluded too long from contributing to getting this country back on its feet. In response to whether or not we should tax them to pay for the jobs plan, I ask this question: Aren't they Americans too? It's time they contributed to our country instead of just benefiting from it.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  162. Mel Farris

    YES, YES, Yes. And did I tell you "yes" Jack?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  163. JCrowe

    No way. Obama and the lefties have had enough of my money to give to the welfare lines.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  164. Jeff Schaefer

    Yes we should tax the rich and eliminate tax loopholes for companies like GE that ship jobs overseas and then pay NO income tax here at home.
    "Trickle-down economics does not work and it is small businesses in America that created new jobs. Just look at Bank of Ametica, Cisco, HSBC, and Goldman Sachs.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  165. Mary Hanson

    Yes, this makes sense. It's important to put people back to work, and there is work to be done. We've just learned today how many bridges are unsafe, for example. Those who have benefited the most from the current tax structure could afford some limits on their deductions. When so many people can't earn enough to meet their basic needs, does it really make sense to subsidize eight-figure mortgages?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  166. Laureen

    Of course, Jack! How did we fix these issues in the past? Tax increases on some MUST be considered. And since the private sector is too afraid to provide new jobs, the government should step in and help jump start the process. By updating obsolete infrastructure and helping out teachers, we can innovate and build our way back to greatness... the same way we did in the 1940s-1960s. We didn't get to the moon by cutting corporate taxes, and we didn't end the depression by letting millionaires get richer. Republicans need to start thinking of Americans, not themselves and their rich friends.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  167. Anthony in Massachusetts

    Not only should this plan be paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy – a level of income I'd be fine with being set anywhere between $200K and $1 – but President Obama and the Democrats should insist that the American Jobs Act be passed as a single bill. The Republican Party has not done one thing to help this country move in a positive direction and the voters need to see that they have no interest in doing so now. The need to "pass this bill – right away"!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  168. Abby in Florida

    Absolutely. Congress acts like their main goal is to preserve the comfort level of the wealthy. It is about time the wealthy paid their share since they benefit most from this countries policies. The time for corporate welfare is over. If they don't stop keeping the wealthy in their comfortable little bubble, this country will become like a third world country that has poor or wealthy with nothing in between.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  169. Nancy

    Of Course if the increases are focused on those who can well afford it. People who are wealthy always want more money - so no tax relief ever means anything to most of them. The "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" is what the wealthy care about. They are ignorant of the plights of the poor and seep with false "pride" over their accomplishment of wealth. Most really do not care about the unemployed. President Obama is on the right track and we should all be supporting his efforts in every way we can.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  170. Sharon Garren, Molalla OR

    ARRRGH. 45 million people living in poverty and 50 million without health insurance? And companies making billions and paying no taxes? What's wrong with this picture? Mexico is looking pretty good to me.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  171. Anthony in Massachusetts

    Not only should this plan be paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy – a level of income I'd be fine with being set anywhere between $200K and $1 million – but President Obama and the Democrats should insist that the American Jobs Act be passed as a single bill. The Republican Party has not done one thing to help this country move in a positive direction and the voters need to see that they have no interest in doing so now. The need to "pass this bill – right away"!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  172. Andrew (Tampa)

    I do not see any better plan on the table. How do the republicans propose we create jobs? They won't be happy until there are zero taxes, they don't like the idea of cutting defense spending, the only real spending they have left to cut to pay for anything would reduce government jobs (which is antithetical to any job creation effort) or reduce spending for Social Security or Medicaid. At some point they will need to wake up and realize we can't operate and solely fund any initiatives through spending cuts. The Dems gave us a surplus that the Republican's squandered. I say give the plan a shot.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  173. Joe in Connecticut

    Look, there is no clear cut way to get out of this mess. Whether the rich like it or not, the gov't has to temporarily raise taxes, but there are spending cuts that are needed like Defense. Getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan would be step 1. There is a lot more but there isn't enough time to go through it all. Congress needs to wake up!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  174. Rocky in LA

    Absolutely. It is time for EVERYBODY to step up to the plate and do what is necessary to save our American way of life.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  175. Ron

    Absolutely; Trickle down, or "voodoo economics" is a failed economic theory. Demand creates jobs – demand from small businesses. Decreasing government regulations and creating more of a balanced tax structure will create jobs.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  176. Rick Schmidt

    Yes. Absolutely. But the depressing thing is that the Republican leadership is so canny about their misstatements and outright lies that I'm not sure that the country can be persuaded - especially when you hear the desperate rantings of tea party-ites.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  177. Glenn

    yes. The old saying that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer is so true. There is no middle class anymore. What's so ironic about these so-called "Christian Conservatives" is that they convenienantly forget about what Jesus says in Matthew 25:40.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  178. Sue in Virginia

    Absolutely, yes! We've been financing wars for 10 years with no tax increase, so that's one of the reasons we have a debt problem. We can't make anything better without asking some sacrifice from our citizens, especially the ones who can best afford it.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  179. Nikki

    Now THAT'S an easy one... "YES".

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  180. Glen

    An Obama Jobs Act is not even relevant as it will never get through the house in any form. Why bother even discussing it? It is amazing with the unemployment, poverty, and tax cuts and breaks for the rich that democrats can't take the house and senate. It is a catch-22 as democrats can't win without union support, and things can't be fixed without changes to entitlements and collective bargaining.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  181. Carol - MN

    Yes, Yes, and YES. We are still living under the Bush plan and look where that has gotten us. The government can put people back to work – infrastructure, education, new energy ideas,.. all things that will make us competitive in the world. OR, we can continue to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, as the Republicans would like us to do. They are obstructionists and should be thrown out...

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  182. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    The Republicans need to consult with Grover Norquist and see if he will let them raise taxes this one time. How in he hell can they say anything about how to solve the jobs situation when the lousy jerks sold their vote to a damn lobbyist. That to me is on the edge of being against the law. When all they can say is NO to everything then there is chance of anything being done, if the people that elected these lousy individuals don't vote them out of office then they are as guilty as the ones they elected.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  183. Joan from Talllahassee

    Why not? We've got to resolve this mess of high unemployment. The Republicans are showing us they do not truly care and that their reelection is more important than anything. Where are some true statesmen when we need them?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  184. Eileen, Virginia

    Of course taxes on the wealthy should be used to promote jobs for the middle class. I am shocked that this is even a question. Why are Republicans defending big tax breaks for millionaires and working people continue to vote for them?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  185. bob

    I believe a better way to pay for the so-called 'jobs' bill would be to use funds reaped from the savings after cutting out 50% of Federal and State agencies that are truly and totally unnecessary. We would have ample funds for the government and state jobs and agencies that really ARE necessary. If either a Fair Tax or a Flat Tax were implemented, we would no longer have need of the IRS. There's a HUGE savings right there. And there are many more agencies that could likewise eliminated.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  186. Dale

    Washington D.C. Needs to do something about Wall Street CEO’s, The real traitors of the American people (( The top 200 U.S. companies )) that's why there is no WORK or tax REVENUE in the United States.

    The top U.S. 200 companies get all of their money back into the United States tax-free through tax loopholes and tax backdoors.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  187. david williams

    ABSOLUTELY! I am so tired of people whinnig about their taxes being too high. Since when don't we pay for things that need to be done? Look around, you know we have lots of stuff that needs to be done. Shut up and vote the money we need to do them! Cut, cut, cut is all this generation knows how to say. Ask their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents what they did. They used higher taxes to pay for things that needed to be done.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  188. jean2009

    Yes, Jack they should. I say no to the Republicans wanting to pick and choose what they want is all tax cuts for millionaires and nothing for everyone else. Pass the whole bill. Eliminate the tax cuts for the wealthy and use that money to put Americans back to work. However, again I think you have overstated where the line to start those taxes begins. I doubt the figure the president is proposing is $200,000.00.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  189. Cal, Los Angeles

    What most people forget is that only those slobs paying the lowest tax rates, those people sitting around the pool waiting for the dividend checks to com in, are going to see a tax increase. It's time those who have benefited the most pay their fair share. And that includes the corporations that use a huge amount of resources and infrastructure and never pay for it.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  190. Barbara Hill - Eustis, Florida

    I am a retired senior making less than $200,000, but I would be willing to pay my pre-Bush taxes if it would help bring jobs to the most needy. Why can't the Republicans (and exspecially the Tea Party) understand that many of us are willing to go to the mat to get this country back on its feet. It's pathetic that the greatest country in the world has homeless children going to schooll wth empty stomachs. Shame on us.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  191. George

    Indeed taxes should be increased on those making over $250,000 to help fund job programs. The increase in economic activity will eventual help all - upper and lower income citizens alike - to take advantage of future income levels resulting from taxes to creat jobs now.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  192. David

    Yes.... It is amazing that the Republican Party says that rasing taxes would hurt business companies in hiring employees for employment. Question: When was the last time taxes were raised? 4-8 years ag? Then where are the jobs Republicans. Economics 101 states that business is based on supply and demand. If we have nothing to offer them over the last two years, then why haven't you allowed President Obama to implement his concept of infractucture in the USA. He has offered 3 jobs bills over the last 3 years and the Republican party has offered Zero!!!!! What does your first admendment say?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  193. Oscar Dunla

    If the wewalthy wish to stay wealthy they would support such a Bill. Afterall do they not enjoy the same Infrastructure that this Bill would improve? If this Bill puts an American to work, would said Wealthy American not posper? The Americans that this Bill would employ would what? Spend money. Thereby making money for these Fat Cats!.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  194. jeff in hawaii

    Yes! I am sick and tired of the GOP peeing down my back and telling me it's raining when it comes to deregulation. We deregulated banks in the '80s. Total fiasco. We deregulated airlines, fares went up. We deregulateted Wall Street and we know where that got us. It is time for the wealthy to pay thier fair share so that the middle class can return to stable ground. Remeber the days when corporations were just as beholden to thier employees as much as thier stockholders? It's time somebody slapped these knuckleheads espousing no taxes, no regulation. It just doesn't work.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  195. Patrick

    We are the world's largest economy. We need to use this leverage and implement trade reform to level the playing field with China. That's the only way to rebuild the U.S. manufacturing base. We are fools to allow them to manipulate their currency and maintain favored trade status.

    Patrick in Oviedo, FL

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  196. Rick

    So, let me get this straight. The federal government wants to raise taxes after decades of waste. Okay, I'll trade one more tax hike in exchange for a balanced budget deal. No more tricks, time for politicians to live within our means.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  197. Barbara

    Yes! Absolutely yes, tax increases should be used to pay for President Obama's jobs programs. Why are people so afraid to pay their fair share in taxes? The only spending left to cut is military spending, yet those who push to cut social security or medicaire all of a sudden cry foul at the thought of it. If military spending can't be cut, then our only choice is to raise taxes. For the first time in history, we have fought in wars that no extra taxes were raised to pay for. We talk about returning to our roots, how about we return to the roots of actually paying for our wars while we're fighting them, and for that matter, for paying taxes as part of our patriotic duty.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  198. MikeM in Ohio

    If we want to kickstart this economy, the money needs to come from somewhere. It's like the bank robber of yore said. You rob banks because that's where the money is. Well, the country needs money to get out of this pickle, brought on by high-rollers who ruined our 401ks and killed our jobs. So, let them pay to help get us out of the mess. Why tax them? They have money.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  199. Lee-Texas

    Absolutely not! How about we pay for it by getting out of the "money pit" called Iraq and Afghanistan.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  200. Yvan

    A healthy economy is one where money circulates, a small minority at the top of the social latter in this economy has most of the money, the only way that money will trickle back downwards is either through living wages or through taxes. The rich refuse to hire so tax them.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  201. Michael

    "raising taxes" is a bit of an incomplete statement. Raise taxes on who? Everybody? The Rich? The middle Class? Its too bad common sense AIN'T common. Common sense says that in order to come out from a deficit (of any type), you have to do more than what you did to get out of it than what you did to get in. Yes taxes needs to be raised on the people who can afford it. Cut spending where we can afford it. I'm sure we don't need a billion dollar embassy in the middle east but we could use some repaired roads and bridges right here in the U. S.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  202. Bernie of Lowell.

    Couple this debate with the reality that we've got the Heritage Foundation – perhaps the best example we've got of greed – telling us the 46 million living in poverty are lazy "welfare queens". Tax increase threats have been the Republican party's ammunition. Where are all the jobs George W.Bush promised ten years ago? Better yet, where are all the jobs that pay a LIVING wage?

    There will be enough anger to see the castles of the wealthy attacked in riots like they recently had in Israel and London. It's WAR!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  203. Terry in Ohio

    Yes. I'd like to see all deductions eliminated. The wealthy take many more deductions so eliminating deductions would have everyone paying their fair share. Corporations and businesses should also have only limited deductions. Businesses that deduct the purchase of a plane for the owner or CEO are not paying their fair share. Deductions must be reduced for businesses at the same time or the personal deductions will simply be paid by the company to allow the deductions.. The rich get richer on the backs of the middle class. Why people in the middle class feel sorry for them is beyond me. I guess they enjoy being taken advantage of.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  204. Joe Patty

    Jack is that question an oxymoron. Tax me to pay for my tax money that the president wants to spend. Not all of us just got off the banana boat.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  205. Rebecca Miller

    With a record number of people at poverty level or below, it is unconscionable that Congress does not pass the entire jobs bill. The President has offered a very reasonable moderate plan backed by his Economics Council of high level business people and yet we just get more of the same obstructionism from the Republicans. It seems they are dying for a double dip recession to blame on Obama. But that won't work.

    Rebecca Miller, South Bend, IN

    September 13, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  206. Elaine Miranda

    Yes! Why are the American rich in such need of protection from taxes? It is nothing less than immoral for a society to favor the rich at the expense of the poor and middle class. Where is our sense of fairness? Where is our common sense? We must get the unemployed back to work before our economy – and our country – is be damaged beyond repair.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  207. Don B

    Yes. They've gotten all the breaks for years while the rest of us have been loosing, they've been gaining thanks to policies that favor the rich. It is a sham to say that this will hurt jobs – corporations are sitting on record cash reserves – they have enough money to fund jobs – they just won't. Also raise the cap on FICA contributions to fix social security.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  208. Emmanuel in Philadelphia

    I dont understand why this is an issue, Of course we should pay for the jobs bill with tax increases on the wealthy. The wealthy have avoided paying there fair share for the entire Bush administration and more than half of Obama administration. Why are we so committed to coddling the rich while and denying the average citizen the opportunity to support themselves with a decent job?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  209. Linda Smith

    When President Bush created the tax cuts, our economy needed them....it was after 2001 and Wall Street was in a severe decline. But even President Bush realized that a ten-year limit was long enough. Well ten years has passed, and it is now time to bring back the tax structure of the Clinton era. We need to raise the taxes for the wealthy. But the question is, "what is wealthy?" Coming from a high tax state like New York, $200,000 is more accurately called upper middle class, not rich. So let's tax the truly wealthy.....those is the million dollar plus category.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  210. D.H.

    Lower taxes for the rich never ever helped the economy. They actually destroyed it. Some statistics first:

    When we built the highway network which we are incapable to maintain it today: 92%
    When we put a man on the moon: 90%
    When we invented the internet: 70%

    Before today's Great Recession: 35%
    Before Great Depression: 25%

    The reason why low taxes on top wealthy is so toxic to the economy is simple: Wall Street speculation. Let analyse what will happen if we maintain low taxes for rich and cut gov. spending as Conservatives want ?

    The rich use the large majority of their money to gamble on Wall Street.
    The unemployed use all of their income to buy necessities produced by companies
    traded on Wall Street.
    1. More money chase the same stocks => stocks rise without demand backing it
    2. With the rise in stocks investors expectations for ROI rise
    3. But due to decrease of demand ,due to less consumer spending, companies earn less
    4. Investors panic and get out of the market
    5. CEO's all over the US get the message that the investors are in panic retreat and start firing workers to cut costs

    Welcome to Great Depression 2.0

    September 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  211. Marsha

    Why is everyone talking about "raising" taxes? We Americans have a short attention span. If we reflect for a moment, we can recall that before the Bush "tax cuts", the rich WERE paying taxes. So rather than calling this "raising" taxes, why not call it tax "restoration" so folks can remember that the rich once did pay taxes and need to do their fair share again.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  212. Libe

    ANYTHING that will help create jobs is worth a try.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  213. Paul Carter

    Of course. Everyone knows the best taxes are those the other guy or gal pays. No wonder the majority of Americans are in favor of greater taxation on those who already bear the largest tax burden.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  214. Dana H. from Bay Area

    Of course taxes should be raised and loopholes closed to support Obama's Jobs bill. We need the work done and the investment. Where else are we going to get the money, from the Chinese? Jack, the whole point in closing loopholes and raising taxes is so we don't have to borrow. I think Republican put themselves into a paper box in the middle of the ocean with no options but to hope someone up high will save them and if one of them becomes President, we will all be in that box.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  215. Cary Oliver

    The Republicans keep saying that a tax increase on the very wealthy is a job killer. They have their tax breaks now, so where are the jobs ?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  216. Deborah Alfano

    The game is on, we all know that raising the taxes on the rich is not going to put a dent in solving the government debt or in creating jobs. Tough decisions need to be made to stop big government spending, close the loop on those who abuse the systems, close the big government Departments like the Department of Education and the EPA. I am not rich and even I know that this proposed Obama scam is a way to create a sense among people who are not rich that they deserve more and that the rich are the ones to hate, to tax and to hold resentments that are very dangerous. I was once very poor while I was trying to work my way through college and it "never" crossed my mind to ask for free food, free housing, free medical care and etc. Why do people think they deserve things they do not earn?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  217. Peter, Tarrytown, N.Y.

    I can certainly understand republicans opposing money being spent on teachers and schools.
    An educated citizeny is anetheima to their current and future plans to totally destroy the middle class.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  218. Bob from Columbia MO

    Jack, the GOP loves the way you phrased the question. You make it sound as if the President wants to raise taxes on everyone. The President is asking for the people who have exploited tax loopholes, to pay their fair share. Also the top one percent can afford to skip purchasing that extra home or yacht and help out the country who afforded them the opportunity to become wealthy.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  219. Chris

    From Ohio.

    Yes. Everbody gets scared when then hear about taxes getting increased but most of those don't make over $200,000 year. The rich have a responsibliy to help out the country the made them rich. There are is still going to be well off even if they pay more taxes. Hell, I don't make anything near that and I would even pay more taxes as long as the lawmakers did the right things with it. Problem is Jack, that Our country had a nack for doing stupid things with our money.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  220. Adnan from Connecticut

    Sure that would be great. But if that is still not enough to pay for the Jobs Act, then we should remove every foreign military base from the world. Then Americans will be liked more and we will have more money to pay for things. Now if only the republicans can see that America winning is better than opponents losing.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  221. Marcus F.

    Jack of course tax increase to the wealthy should be used. I gross 35,880 a year and my taxes increased with my home and at work since I my raise. I have a wife that works part time and two Son's. So yeah increase taxes to the wealthy

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  222. Karen, Idaho

    What happened to intro to Economics 101...did all our Congresspeople flunk?

    Income must equal outgo.

    Income is your taxes and outgo is what you want to purchase.

    Come on people how hard can that be to comprehend?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  223. Doug Price

    It seems apparent that the members of the "Wealthy Class" own the actions that drove our nation into the current decline.
    As such, it also seems obvious that they should contribute their FAIR share towards the actions necessary to help those most impacted. Greed drove us here so let them pay.

    I have yet to hear a rational explanation from the Republican/Tea Party contingent as to why those less fortunate should be required to pull the train up this hill all by themselves.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  224. Chidi- London

    Tax increases for those that have benefitted most from the nation would be a sensible thing to do. However, it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than to pass this message across to this brand of Republicans.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  225. Linda, MN

    I would think a tiered tax raise, say 1% for those making up to $250,000; 2% for those up to $1,000,000 & 3 % for the upper-crust, would be a fair way for us all to help dig our country out of this economic crisis. I would be proud to give a little to help this country which has given me so much.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  226. Wayne

    Yes! These are not true tax increases. They are tax cuts which were scheduled to expire. Given the national situation and the disparity between the plight of the jobless and success of the wealthy, it is unconsionable to continue these cuts. Raise taxes now Mr. John Boener; or, we will raise taxes when we have won back our nation and YOU are out of work.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  227. Padric-NC

    Calling these "tax increases" is like saying that when a product is taken off sale is a price hike! YES.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  228. Mike Barnes

    Darn right the taxes should be raised. Clinton did it and it didn't hurt a thing. As a business owner for 15 years I can tell you that tax cuts on businesses will create zero jobs and it is just a red herring to get taxes lower and they don't care about the unemployed.

    Mike Phoenix

    September 13, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  229. Marie from New Jersey

    Yes, otherwise we are going to have higher unemployment. There is a big problem in this country with no health insurance and massive poverty.The Oil companies tax breaks must stop. Companies who have transferred their corporate headquarters to foregn countries should pay imporrt tax.The people who have benefitted from the tax cuts of the past 10 years need to help our country's unemployed. Pass the jobs bill right away!

    September 13, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  230. Joe O., East Chicago, IN.

    Why not? The wealthy have been receiving tax breaks and subsidies at the cost of the hard working Americans without any type of benefits and the only thing they have to look foreword to are terminations, layoffs and reduced wages. This just does not seem to be a fair situation and to justify the bottom line which will get smaller with less of a workforce.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  231. Bill Dunbar in Helena, Montana

    Jack: This country NEEDS a balanced budget. Those of us still working and retired with pentions etc. need to step up and pay more so we stop this continuous spending MORE than we take in. Cuts need to be made too but we can't just keep borrowing from China. Good questions. Bill

    September 13, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  232. Justin

    The biggest trick the Devil ever played was convincing the world he didn't exist. Lowering taxes on the top wealthy in this country is a myth. If it was true unemployment wouldn't be at 9.2 %. 8 yrs under Bush and those wealthy only created around 3 million jobs while the middle class income has dropped and the poor have been forgotten about. Taxes need to go up on the wealthy if that 's what it takes to get this country back to work. Republicans see the polls and know if the country continues to struggle then the President will be defeated. If the President fails then the country fails. Justin Frankfort,Ky

    September 13, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  233. On the edge

    Enough is enough I live in the DC Metro area and $200,000 is not rich or wealthy. The only deductions I have are charitable and when you add the state, county, and other taxes I pay it is well over 50% of what I earn. I cannot take anymore taxes. I feel like I am being punished for saving money for my retirement and as the capital gains tax rates go up I will get punished even more. Why in a capitalist country do we punish those who work hard every day and reward those who make bad choices.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  234. Chuck Franzetta

    Of course tax hikes should be used. We had balanced budgets and were buildind and repairing prior to the Bush cuts. Those cuts got us into this mess. Jack,there is n free lunch.

    You want jobs and infrastructure that will support a vibrant economy, it requires revenue be raised. Those of us who garner the greatest economic benefits are the only realistic source of that revenue.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  235. Donna

    What about a one cent tariff on every thing imported in our country? That should male the tea party happy.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
  236. pat in michigan

    I have an idea. let the corporations bring back their money tax free untill it gets in american banks then sieze it all just like we do terrorists funding. they are no less terrorists they just use our jobs to terrorize helpless americans.that should pay for his programs.. what does he care he is a one term president anyway.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
  237. Judy in Florida

    Whatever has happened to the American values of e pluribus unum, being your brother's keeper, and shared sacrifice? Of course, the corporations, and the rich should also have their taxes raised. The country has had to mainly tax the middle class and borrowed from other nations to make up for the short fall caused by their tax loop holes for years. We independents should speak with a loud voice in this next election, no matter how many TV ads are made to distort reality.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  238. bailouts

    hey jack,

    you want to fix the economy....

    lower ALL home mortgage interest rates down to 2% for 2-3 years as our reward for bailing out wall st., banks, GM etc.
    this difference in the new lower monthly payment would give families that extra money to become consumers once again and BUY products from merchants, restaurants, applances .etc and that creates a NEED for jobs not a forced spending of our money to keep public workers employed... and keep needless program alive

    September 13, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  239. Norman

    I guess those who are against taxes think that they are entitled to get something for nothing. Although I am against increasing the taxes for low to middle income families, I see no reason why the wealthy should not pay their fair share of taxes as well as getting rid of the tax loopholes. You just can't keep cutting out government programs to balance the Budget.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:39 pm |
  240. Shane Newnan, GA

    Absolutely not. The Government has no business trying to create jobs. What actually happens is the Government actually kills jobs with there High Corporate taxes and there mandates and tedious regulations. Government can not truly ever create jobs that are permanent. They first have to take money from tax payers and then distribute the funds to create jobs which are government jobs. They are just temporary like construction jobs which once the job is complete there goes the jobs. Small Businesses are the back bone of this country. Job creation starts and ends with them. We need to as a government stand a side and let the markets work. Stop propping up area's where there is no demand, which over inflates the market. They also make it hard for competition with there regulations.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:39 pm |
  241. Dan from Florida

    Jack, When will anyone call out the Republicans on thier tax cut only plan. They keep saying the Stimulus failed. Well unemployment hasn't changed and they have had thier tax cuts for the past 10 years. Seems to me that thier plan is no better. Big business has always swooped in and benefited from infrastructure upgrades and have never paid for them. Should taxs be raised to pay for jobs such as this, HELL YES.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
  242. Dennis

    YES! YES! YES! YES! Tax loopholes, and tax giveaways to the wealthy, and big corporations should be ended – and instead – teachers for America's childrens should be hired, police officers to protect American neighbourhood, should be hired, repair to our nations schools should be pursued, as well as repair other vital infrastructure that the citizens of the USA use every single day, like roads, bridges, dams, leeves, sewer systems.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  243. Vanessa in Michigan

    Yes, a tax increase should be used to support President Obama's Jobs Bill. Here in Michigan, Gov. Snider passed a bill to tax retiree pensions while reducing the tax rate that corporations pay, all in order to create an environment for job growth. Michigan was one of the few states that did not tax retiree pensions. It seems that it's OK when Republicans suggest and implement a tax increase but it's not OK when a Democratic president suggests the same. The Republican Party should stop being so schizophrenic.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  244. rob carter

    No, No more government bailouts. Lets raise taxes on the rich and corporations and pay down the debt.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  245. Jesse from Texas

    The quality of life in our nation has been enhanced as a result of taxes. Our infrastructure, nations defense system, schools, etc. we need to understand it has made a difference. Yes the time has come for more accountability and this needs to take place to improve the performance of our government. In the meantime, we cannot ignore the challenges left to our generation by previous governments. The fix is long term. It's time that we start replacing those politicians that do not do what is in the best interest of all americans.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
  246. Libe

    YES, YES, YES. Anyone who says no has a job. They should try to live without one and believe me they would change their mind.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
  247. Joe O., East Chicago, IN.

    Why not? The wealthy have been receiving tax breaks and subsidies at the cost of the hard working Americans without any type of benefits and the only thing they have to look foreword to are terminations, layoffs and reduced wages. This just does not seem to be a fair situation and to justify the bottom line which will get smaller with less of a workforce. Cuts in entitlements, closing tax loopholes and having everybody pay their fair share will pay for this job proposal.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
  248. Ola

    YES tax increases should be used to pay for job programs. We have to remember that the tax increase on the richest Americans is not really an increase but removing a tax BREAK. Why should the top 2% pay a less percentage on their taxes than the rest of us? This should have been removed a long time ago but most definitely now, more than ever.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:45 pm |
  249. Mary

    It is not that the wealthy pay more in taxes, it is that the wealthy earn more money to pay taxes on .The middle class pay their fair share of taxes on their money earned. The middle class, just make less money to pay taxes on. If all citizens were required to pay 10% on all money earned, all would be paying the same amount of taxes on money earned. It is not about increasing taxes on the wealthy, it is about making the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes owed on money earned.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
  250. mario

    Bush tax break was put in place to buy the silent of american for the war in Irak

    September 13, 2011 at 6:49 pm |
  251. Donna-Illinois

    Put a penny tariff on every single import. Quit taxing income.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  252. Ceemak. La.

    I think that we are going to have to raise taxes on everyone.........one way or another........If people like me who are living on a very modest income, can find it within themselves to pony up a little......if it will help people to find work.....Why for Gods sake cant these Republicans work with the President and Dems to create a good bill? I think we all know the answer to that....

    September 13, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  253. robert

    Yes, the rich have had it easy since the Reagan eras trickle down economics. Do the Republicans want to bring back the days of the Lords, Ladies and servants? Will that wake the public up ?

    September 13, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  254. John from Detroit

    Should tax increases be used... Depends on what taxes are increased.

    Taxes on goods imported from China, (And some other countries) where a dollar a day is a big wage, YES.

    Taxes on services imported (Cuss-some-more non service is more like it) from countries such as the above, Again yes.

    Taxes on those who make more than say 1,000,000/year, I have no objection there eiher.

    Taxes on those who earn less than 100,000. NO, They should be cut.

    And all the loopholes those "Filthy rich" use to avoid paying taxes.. Heck, even some of the billionairs out there are upset that they pay less income tax than their secrataries.... And I happen to agree with them.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
  255. John from Detroit

    Oh, one more tax... Congress critters often take very expensive "Vacations" where they spend perhaps an hour doing real congressional work and 2 weeks enjoying sun and fun at what eventually is our expense.. I'd put a 100% tax on those benefits.

    September 13, 2011 at 6:54 pm |