He avoided the hottest part of this hot-button topic: He didn't say whether he'd support tax hikes that may be recommended by a bipartisan fiscal commission he has created. (He has said all options should be "on the table" for the commission to consider.)So, the "no tax increase" policy has...as all other Obamic policies...a very limited shelf life. We knew that. He lied, he lies, he will lie.
But in response to a town-hall questioner, Mr. Obama voiced support for efforts to streamline the tax code, even as he framed the case against a "flat tax" that many Republicans support.
The president spoke at a town hall meeting in Buffalo, N.Y., a day after the federal government reported an unexpectedly high monthly budget deficit. The Treasury Department reported an $82.69 billion deficit for April, the highest ever recorded for that month.
"We're going to have to spend the next couple of years making some very hard decisions," Obama said. "It's not going to be any fun. [But] it's not going to be as painful as it will be if we put it off."
But the real gob-stopper of the day was this:
Obama said he expects his fiscal commission to recommend tax reforms designed to make the tax code simpler. But he argued against going to a flat tax, such as 10 percent of income. He said a flat tax might "take a bigger bite out of the cashier at the supermarket" while it "would mean a huge tax break for Warren Buffett."
As famously reported, Buffett claimed to pay about 17.7% of his fat-cat earnings (fine with me, BTW, whatever he earns), while deploring that his $60k secretary paid 30%. So, if anything, it would mean that Buffet would get LESS a break, and there was no disparity if BOTH paid at 10%.
But here's the kicker; why is ANY citizen in the U.S. paying NO TAX? How is that fair, equitable, and just? Yet, just less than half of us pay NOTHING for their government.