Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And rising Democrat congressman Peter Welch of -- joins us now from Washington DC -- always a pleasure thank you for being -- so.
There is a fallacy here that the president simply wants to raise taxes on income.
Let me spell out all the taxes he wants to raise which he's -- clan he wants to raise taxes on income.
Interest dividends profits Biotech companies medical device companies health insurance health insurance policies and the Medicare tax.
He's gonna raise a mole.
May I ask you the same question but I've asked all the Democrats on this program.
Tell me how raising all of these taxes creates jobs.
Well -- actually -- Speak your premise here in of the taxes have gone down the payroll tax was a significant tax -- for most American families.
In the beaten -- -- what did the debate we're having right now.
Is whether we continue the tax cuts for the bush from the bush years.
Or limit them to up to 250000.
Dollars if we extend them beyond the 215.
That's gonna add a trillion dollars to the debt so there is imbalance issue here.
We don't want to raise taxes on working families that are haven't really it's a hard time paying their bills still be a tax cut for everybody.
If you make two at 300000 dollars on the first 250 you're gonna get a tax break as well -- -- -- 101000 dollar -- the question stands.
You all hockey -- to clamp policy to raise taxes all of the taxes that I just outlined and simply asking an economics question.
Tell me how raising these taxes on those taxes will be raised tell me how you create jobs by doing.
But you're gonna lower debt.
You know eight I actually think the debt is a real problem in the dead as a combination of the balancing revenues that are raised in expenditures that are spent.
And -- balanced approach would be to address the outstanding we've got to make some cuts in spending I support that suit that was addressed your argument is.
That you raise taxes.
-- you bring in more revenue baffle you lower the deficits.
That fool you create jobs is that the arguments of it's you know it's -- part of having a stable economy is having aren't a balanced budget you know we had a balanced budget.
In the Clinton years -- we had the Clinton higher tax rates but we created twenty million jobs.
So there's not and direct link that can always be made you've got to make judgments on this as a golf but during the Clinton years.
We had twenty million new jobs we -- higher tax rates on everybody so obviously then.
The tax policy was a contributor to the explosion of growth and you pollution in jobless.
With 8% unemployment.
And a growth -- a -- colony of below 2%.
Do you reject the view that raising taxes now in this economic environment would actually slow the economy even more and apple raise the deficit.
Do you flat out reject that argument.
I doubt and that's why I support continuing the lower tax rates the bush tax rates for everybody up to 250000.
Dollar tax cut -- on -- continuing this tax regime that we've gone now except it was some people who will pay more in tax.
Well it is because when the Republicans pass that tax that.
-- 2000 when tax that it was set to expire in ten years so the rates go back in if we lower them.
As -- expect we well in January.
Back to the -- -- push rates that's it that's.
We're heaven and artificial argument here that their rates right now are set to go back to the Clinton here which is -- -- -- that I don't think we I think.
-- I don't think it's fallacious argument.
I I think we're having a genuine debate.
-- saying that you raise taxes you create jobs.
I'm so I don't you raise taxes you destroy jobs that's it I -- But if you're you're raising taxes on families that are making 5060000.
Dollars that's gonna really hurt the economy.
You go back to the Clinton rates on people making a million or two million dollars -- have funny discretionary income where it's not to make a difference in what their lifestyle -- -- even their investment decisions.
In that money goes to pin down the debt my view that helps the economy it's a combination GeMS getting spending right and it's in in taxes right.
Good I don't -- -- Charles -- Why why do Democrats always say it's on people making more than a million and then -- in the name Warren Buffett when indeed it's households making 250000.
These -- people who have done everything right to the president description they play by the rules they worked hard they've they've got a degree of success.
But not so much that they should be lumped in with the Warren Buffett certainly not enough that they should be.
-- -- -- -- Well I mean you've got a point but you've got to pick a number that's reasonable it because you've got two competing interest here.
One issue -- -- have taxes be as low as they can possibly be.
But they have to provide for the revenues that are essential to run legitimate government functions whether it's defense.
Whether it's economic development and whether -- paying for research and development so.
Obviously if you could eliminate taxes altogether that would be -- but that can't be done we're having an argument about what's the practical approach.
With a balanced and spending and a balance on ravenous in my view quite strongly.
Is that we do need to cut the debt.
That means -- revenues have to contribute to that effort we bring that debt down I think it's gonna create a more visit us stable business and farm.
Congressman it's a good debates -- I'd love to continue it at some -- time perhaps but it was a good debate we thank you for having with us thank you so.
Filter by section