AN wrote:SK in CV wrote:AN

[SK in CV]

[quote=AN][quote=SK in CV][quote=AN] But its good to see where the president want to get more revenue for his spending.[/quote]

Your framing is revealing. At least so far, this isn’t a proposal to get more revenue or to increase spending. It’s a proposal to redirect tax expenditures.[/quote]hmmm…
Washington Post: “President Obama unveiled an ambitious $3.9 trillion budget blueprint Tuesday that seeks billions of dollars in fresh spending to boost economic growth but also pledges to tame the national debt by raising taxes on the wealthy, slashing payments to health providers and overhauling the nation’s immigration laws.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/03/04/obama-budget-seeks-new-spending-new-taxes-to-boost-economy-tame-debt
Yahoo: “Obama’s 2015 Budget Proposal: More Spending, Less Pretending” http://news.yahoo.com/obama-39-2015-budget-proposal-more-spending-less-141900462.html

I guess you know something they don’t. Now, that’s revealing.[/quote]

No, not something that they know and I don’t. It’s something I know and you don’t. Context is everything. We haven’t been talking about the budget as a whole, we’ve been talking about a single proposal. And this particular proposal is one that would replace one tax expenditure with another. Not new spending.

It’s now a dead deal. It shouldn’t be. But Obama is a realist. He knows how politics work. And this small proposal wasn’t worth the fight. And he knows at this point he’s just as likely to get what he wants with new spending. Though neither are too likely. Republicans in congress never met a tax cut they didn’t like. Unless it benefits low and middle income taxpayers. And this one does.