Presidential Weekly Address for April 10, 2010



West Wing Week in review

Quote :

"All across America are good, decent folks who meet their obligations each and every day. They work hard. They support their families. They try to make an honest living the best they can. And this weekend, many are sitting down to pay the taxes they owe – not because it’s fun, but because it’s a fundamental responsibility of our citizenship. But in tough times, when many families are having trouble just making it all work, Tax Day can seem even more daunting. This year, however, many Americans are seeing some welcome relief. So far, Americans who have filed their taxes have discovered that the average refund is up nearly ten percent this year – to an all-time high of about $3,000. This is due in large part to the Recovery Act. In fact, one-third of the Recovery Act was made up of tax cuts – tax cuts that have already provided more than $160 billion in relief for families and businesses, and nearly $100 billion of that directly into the pockets of working Americans. No one I’ve met is looking for a handout. And that’s not what these tax cuts are. Instead, they’re targeted relief to help middle class families weather the storm, to jumpstart our economy, and to bring the fundamentals of the American Dream – making an honest living, earning an education, owning a home, and raising a family – back within reach for millions of Americans. First, because folks who work hard should be able to make a decent living, I kept a promise I made when I campaigned for this office and cut taxes for 95 percent of working Americans. For most Americans, this Making Work Pay tax credit began showing up in your paychecks last April. And it continues this year, for a total of $400 per individual and $800 per couple, per year. Second, because a college education is critical to the success of our workers and our economy, we’re helping to make it more affordable for millions of Americans. Millions of students and parents paying for college tuition are now eligible for up to $2,500 under the American Opportunity Credit. Along with a host of other steps we’ve taken, this will help us reach our goal of once again having the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. Third, we’re restoring the home as a source of stability and an anchor of the American Dream. If you’ve bought a home for the first time, you’re eligible for a credit of up to $8,000. And if you bought a new car last year, you can deduct the state and local sales taxes you paid on that car. Fourth, whether you bought a home for the first time or you’ve owned one for a long time, if you invested in making your home more energy-efficient with certain improvements like new insulation or windows, or plan to this year, you’re eligible for up to $1,500 in new tax credits. This does more than just put money back in your pocket; it’s helping create new clean energy, manufacturing, and construction jobs at small businesses across the country. Fifth, to help working families with children through difficult times, we increased the Earned Income Tax Credit and allowed more families to qualify for the Child Tax Credit. Finally, for those who lost their jobs in the recession and need some help getting back on their feet, we provided a 65 percent tax credit to help cover the cost of health care and made sure the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits is tax-free. These are among the tax breaks and savings that are available to over one hundred million Americans right now. It’s also important to note that the new health reform law includes the largest middle class tax cut for health care in history, and once it’s implemented; millions of Americans will finally be able to purchase quality, affordable care and the security and peace of mind that comes with it. And one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000. That’s another promise we’ve kept. We’ve also made it easy to find out what’s owed to you and your family. After all, the big guys know how to find their tax breaks; it’s time you did, too. Just visit WhiteHouse.gov and click on the Tax Savings Tool. It’s already been accessed more than 100,000 times by folks who want to see what savings they’re owed and how to collect them. If you’ve already filed your taxes and missed some of the savings available to you, don’t worry – you can still amend your returns after April 15th to save hundreds or even thousands of dollars. And just as each of us meets our responsibilities as citizens, we expect our businesses and our government to meet theirs in return. That’s why I’ve asked Congress to close some of the biggest tax loopholes exploited by some of our most profitable corporations to avoid paying their fair share – or, in some cases, paying taxes at all. That’s why we’re tightening Washington’s belt by cutting programs that don’t work, contracts that aren’t fair, and spending we don’t need. And that’s why I’ve proposed a freeze on discretionary spending, signed a law that restores the pay-as-you-go principle that helped produce the surpluses of the 1990s, and created a bipartisan, independent commission to help solve our fiscal crisis and close the deficits that have been growing for a decade. Because I refuse to leave our problems to the next generation. It’s been a tough couple years for America. But the economy is growing again. Companies are beginning to hire again. We are rewarding work and helping more of our people reach for the American Dream again. And while there’s no doubt we still face a long journey together, with more steps to take, more obstacles to overcome, and more challenges to face along the way; if there is one thing of which the people of this great country have convinced me, it’s that the United States of America will recover, stronger than before. Thanks for listening, and have a great weekend."

[Edited on April 10, 2010 at 11:32 PM. Reason : added transcript as requested]

4/10/2010 11:18:17 PM

who gives a fuck - no one watches this crap anyway. post a transcript - you can't skim a video like you can text.

4/10/2010 11:23:12 PM

wouldn't a single "official weekly address discussion" thread be more suitable?

4/11/2010 9:55:40 AM

^I've considered that. In fact I've dropped the frequency of these threads to about every other week as a balance between that & this:

Supplanter

Quote :

"The weekly addresses are on a range of topics, and if they continue to follow their current trend they'll drop of the soap box first page after a week or two. There is some utility lost in burying things in 50+ page threads"

sarijoul

Quote :

"or maybe we could just let the guy post the topics he wants and if it fails, it goes off the front page."

EarthDoggv

Quote :

"I think it's fine that Supp posts these. …. And we should be able to post whatever we want, and let the Wolf-Web Free Market decide which threads live or die."

d357r0y3r

Quote :

"I actually prefer smaller threads with more frequency. What purpose does the giant Obama or Healthcare thread serve, really? The same points are rehashed over and over again, so it's not like people are going back and reading the whole thread and then posting."

Indy

Quote :

"Who wants to try to make any sense of such a long thread? I enthusiastically support a reversal on this apparent policy. Long threads fucking suck. I could not agree more. In my opinion, the slowness, the long threads, and the scarcity of new threads are the worst things about The Soap Box."

4/11/2010 11:46:29 AM

yep, he's gonna deliver tax relief. by creating a new tax on energy, the new healthcare and medicare taxes, higher tuition due to the gov't taking over student loans. not to mention the huge taxes that are gonna be necessary to pay off the huge debt he is racking up. it's gonna be great!

4/11/2010 6:57:57 PM

Quote :

"higher tuition due to the gov't taking over student loans"

these two things have nothing to do with each other. thank your state legislators for paying higher tuition, not for the federal government taking over private lending.

4/11/2010 7:10:41 PM

only, the colleges couldn't charge insane tuition if they knew no one could pay for it. Now, since the gov't is subsidizing it, though, they can jack the prices up, cause everyone can get a loan now. durrrr

4/11/2010 7:40:43 PM

dude, there's absolutely no logic in that at all. tuition is going to increase regardless of funding sources. it's been doing that for years.

4/11/2010 8:22:45 PM

seriously, you could blame the government for bad loan terms, or increased taxation due to subsidizing, those would at least be logical

4/11/2010 8:46:35 PM

Quote :

"dude, there's absolutely no logic in that at all. tuition is going to increase regardless of funding sources. it's been doing that for years."

The fact that tuition will increase with an increase in the number of people and the amount that they can afford to pay is mutually exclusive from the fact that tuition will naturally rise. Tuition, in addition to being set based on the actual cost of providing the services, is also set based on what the market will bear. That is, if the people can afford to pay more, the university will charge more (see tuition at UNC vs tuition at NC State vs tuition at UNC Charlotte).

Now, as the number of easy and cheap loans and scholarships increases and therefore the amount of money people can afford to pay increases, so too will tuition increase. For more on this concept see the housing bubble.

4/11/2010 8:50:04 PM

Quote :

"The fact that tuition will increase with an increase in the number of people and the amount that they can afford to pay is mutually exclusive from the fact that tuition will naturally rise."

Wouldn't the natural reaction of the market be to increase supply to attain market price?

Quote :

"That is, if the people can afford to pay more, the university will charge more (see tuition at UNC vs tuition at NC State vs tuition at UNC Charlotte)."

All three of those are UNC system schools, who's tuition is managed by the state.

4/11/2010 8:59:39 PM

Quote :

"Wouldn't the natural reaction of the market be to increase supply to attain market price?"

Only if actual demand is outstripping actual supply and supply can be increased (which at least for the second condition is likely). And that also ignores such things like the value of exclusivity when your product is only affordable by certain segments of the population.

Quote :

"All three of those are UNC system schools, who's tuition is managed by the state. "

Which is precisely why I chose them.

4/11/2010 9:38:41 PM

Quote :

"Only if actual demand is outstripping actual supply and supply can be increased (which at least for the second condition is likely). And that also ignores such things like the value of exclusivity when your product is only affordable by certain segments of the population."

What? All three of those are stupid as hell. The first was implied by your original statement. The second, obviously supply can be increased. And the third would describe any product ever sold.

Quote :

"Which is precisely why I chose them."

You stated that the universities would charge more. Did you mean the state would charge more?

4/11/2010 9:44:55 PM

Quote :

"What? All three of those are stupid as hell. The first was implied by your original statement. The second, obviously supply can be increased. And the third would describe any product ever sold."

Supply may not always be able to be increased. A simple example of this is tickets at a baseball stadium. AS demand increases, it is not always feasible for supply (seats in the stadium) to be increased so the price instead increases, lowering the amount demanded. And by the time supply does increase, it is possible that the price has been higher for so long that the new market price is higher, even with the increased supply.

As for exclusivity, I'm pretty sure Harvard and MIT are more concerned about exclusivity, than say NCCU.

Quote :

"You stated that the universities would charge more. Did you mean the state would charge more? "

The purpose of the example was to illustrate that the charges are based in part on the ability of the people to afford the service. Are you purposefully being dense and pedantic? (You don't have to answer that, we already know the answer)

4/11/2010 10:10:21 PM

Quote :

"And one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000. That’s another promise we’ve kept."

Now that's a little different from the original pledge during the election...

Quote :

"“I can make a firm pledge,” he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”"

Now he didn't promise that he wouldn't create new taxes such as a VAT on the middle class. After all, someone has to pay for all of his generosity.

4/11/2010 10:22:49 PM

Quote :

"Supply may not always be able to be increased."

How in the hell is that relevant? Colleges can be enlarged and additional colleges can be built.

Quote :

"As for exclusivity, I'm pretty sure Harvard and MIT are more concerned about exclusivity, than say NCCU."

Sure, but only proportionally.

Quote :

"The purpose of the example was to illustrate that the charges are based in part on the ability of the people to afford the service."

Well it doesn't really do that. People being able to afford it is the tail wagging the dog. There are several reasons for the charge, but restricting it to the people who can pay is incidental.

Quote :

"Now that's a little different from the original pledge during the election..."

It's not contradictory.

4/11/2010 11:18:26 PM