In a perfect world, Mr. Barro, you would be right. The middle class will have to absorb some of the cuts; it's math. But in this less than perfect world, everything is a negotiation. Obama has already been burned by the Republicans' scorched-earth negotiating strategies; it has been demonstrated many times; in the debates about health care, the Bush tax cuts, and raising the debt ceiling... as soon as the left makes a concession, the right revises its position and moves the goal posts starboard. The right is interested not in getting to yes, but in winning. Mr. Obama, it's okay to point out that the other side refuses to play by the rules.

I think Barro makes some good points. My key "takeaway" is that the President has not yet presented a holistic, credible long-range financial blueprint for the country. I agree with that point. (I don't think Governor Romney has either.) [NEW PARAGRAPH] A piece in today's on-line SUNDAY GLOBE implied the US has been fortunate that Europe's sovereign debt crisis has momentarily deflected financial markets' attention away from the US's own financial weakness. The article implied further, though, that this is likely to be only temporary. So, at the risk of sounding like the proverbial broken record, I strongly hope the presidential debates put both candidates under the spotlight on their financial plans. The country needs a solid blueprint, not just opportunistic "sound bites."

President Obama can't soak the rich because as the congress will never let him. When members of his own party accept campaign donations from the rich and their corporations, it means that the entire Congress is for sale and many members are bought and paid for. This type of very rich has recently been described by the Globe's columnist Bob Ryan, who has exposed a certain insurance company CEO with his private air force. Once upon a time, when this country was besieged, true patriots in the top income brackets paid confiscatory taxes, sent their sons to die for their country, and went to Washington for a dollar a year to lend their talents. What has become of our country?

The problem with this piece is that it fails to acknowledge the problem we've had for decades of the "rich" not paying enough in taxes, while the middle class gets smaller and smaller. As a member of the middle class, I probably will have to pay more taxes to get all the services I think I should have from the government. However, before that begins, we need to fix the huge disparity in who earns what vs. who makes what. If I had my way, I'd love to make tax increases for the wealthy retroactive to 2001, maybe even 1981. It doesn't surprise me that a man with Bloomberg associated with his name would espouse such a view.

Josh, you are so right. Even if we confiscated all of the incomes of the very rich and there were no bad economic consequences, that would not yield enough extra tax revenue to pay for projected increases in federal social spending. Politicians lie when they promise to keep Medicare and Social Security untouched and not raise taxes on the middle class. Get ready for a value added tax after November.

What does Mr. Barro not understand when 5% of the population has over 70% of the wealth of this country while the bottom half has 1%? Add to this major companies sit on over a trillion dollars to invest in the American workforce for everyone's benefit. It is literally sitting there doing almost nothing. It is producing no wealth or jobs. If it was the investor would get a reasonable return, not the boom and bust cycle that occurs now. If part of that investment was better wages and more people hired there would be little need to reconstruct the tax code. However they don't so the top 3% can kick in more without any change in their lifestyle. In return they get a more solvent government that can promote the general welfare, that includes everyone even those so taxed. One way or the other idle billions must be put to work to produce goods and services. No wealth is produced until some product or service is brought into being by human effort and intellect. Otherwise it is just paper or some number on a balance sheet. A country must work for everyone or it will fail. The Middle Class will pay more when their incomes better reflect their ability to do so. Right now it is a paycheck to paycheck world for too many.

I would only add further that the premise of the title of this article is very much off the beam. No rich person is being soaked. Quite the contrary, a la Mr. Romney, they have enough to support a lavish lifestyle and then some. It is patriotism, not self interest that should drive them. Giving back a pittance only prolongs the status quo and keeps some from starving to death via charitable donations but it does not bring any solutions. People in this country work hard and are the best workers in the world. They just don't get paid as if they do.

Thanks for that...

The president is suffering from the results of his own policies. Tax revenue has been egregiously slow, because the economy has been slogging at 1-2% growth for his entire presidency. That is why the money is not there. Raising tax rates on the wealthy, and the middle class will not change this, and may make it worse. Our tax code is profoundly progressive today, as the top 5% pay about 70% of the taxes. Cries that the rich do not pay their "fair share" are just silly, as the proof is out there. 50% of Americans pay no income tax, obviously, the wealthy pay the majority of the taxes today. NEW PARAGRAPH: It still amazes me how so many people think that raising tax rates will solve the problem. It will not. Any change to the tax structure which harms the economy will guarantee more of the same-slow growth, pitiful tax collections. Only when the president leaves office will the economy begin to grow, so God Willing, January 2013 is when things should improve.

Raising taxes on the rich might not get us all the way there, but it represents a great start. And it has to occur before any other measures. BEFORE ANY OTHER MEASURES. The good news is that there are a lot more of us, so all it will take is the power of our vote. The notion that the rich are being soaked is laughable. This article is propaganda.

The top rate needs to be set back at 50% before our tax structure resembles anything you could label as progressive. You know, like it was under the first six years of Ronald Reagan. The Bush recession combined with the Bush tax cuts have caused the drop in revenue and although the stinky rich have had a good run, the party is over now and they're going to have to face it. And they won't go quietly with their legions of sycophants.

Championing the middle class is easy. Everyone agrees that the ephemeral "rich" so often rightly criticized for not paying a "fair" share are protected by both parties in Congress. When Democrats had control of both houses of Congress with a Democratic president it would have been so easy to change the tax laws without discussion or support of the Republicans. Why didn't they act? They did act, but instead, they passed a new law that increased my taxes massively in porportion to my income. We live on social security income. A Democratic wonder that they deserve credit and honor for. We now pay $104.20 monthly for medicare. In 2014 that increases to $247 per month. No one is talking about the changes that are coming after this election. It is disengenuous to say the least to say that President Obama has the needs of the middle class as his highest priority. It is all smoke and mirrors. After this election, whoever wins, it will be back to business as usual in Washington. The Lincoln bedroom is up for sale today. Lobbyists will continue to write laws and present them to be passed unchanged by "your" representatives. What is really coming is not being talked about -raging inflation. All the easy money being printed by the Fed will have to be paid for and that means the numbers will have to be doctored with cheap bucks. By extension, tax increases will be paid for with cheap bucks and we will have achieved nothing. That is the secret of the status quo mentality. So, talk on and dream of justice and equality for all. It is not going to happen.

Get ready, folks. The Europeans originally imposed a value added (aka sales) tax with rates around ten percent to support social spending. Now the rates are twenty percent or more. The EU knows how to soak the middle class. Obama will do the same if he gets reelected.

This article is light on facts, ignores the reality that the tax rates favor the very rich like Willard who are able to invest in other countries, and projects the writer's tea bag sentiments on real politics. The author did a disservice to himself and the party. This article could only have been bore blovious if it had been penned by a complete looney like ex-one-term senator Johnny Sununu or Scooter Brown.

"they passed a new law that increased my taxes massively in porportion to my income" Seriously? because my taxes haven't gone up...

it has nothing to do with tax policy. it has to do w/ someone who honestly believes wealth is bad and government is the answer to all.

why? they already pay the majority of taxes. maybe get rid of some of the great liberal social policies.

Thank you Josh for having the guts to point this out. Everyone else seems to be afraid to stand up for tax equality that imposes the sharing of the government costs on the whole population, not just 1 percent of it. I have read in very reputable economic newsletters that 48 percent (48% !!) of the US population pays no federal income tax at at (zero, nada, nil, zilch!). Why should half the country be allowed to free-load on the other half. They share the roads, the homeland security, the medical coverage, and of course the enormously valuable benefit of having a bunch of congressmen sit on their rear ends and do nothing but spend money we don't have. The singular focus of politicians doing and saying things only to self-preserve their own jobs is driving our country into a mess that will make Greece look paltry.

The law is simply not fair. If you use your brain or brawn to make money (wait tables, teach children, work in a hospital, etc.), you pay a higher tax rate than if you use your money to make money. Presumably, this promotes investment and job creation. I'm OK with some unfairness if the outcome is good for all. However, when millionaires and billionaires (I'm looking at you, Mitt) pay miniscule rates, then, no--I'm not OK with it any more.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

If you are one of those greedy corporate execs, you are taxed twice, first on the corporate profits and then on your dividends and capital gains. This double taxation is major reason for lowe rates on investment income.

Don't be facetious, Ozark. It is the corporation, not the executive, who is taxed on the corporate profits. Or are corporations not separate entities ('people' as misleader Willard says) than the executives that sit in their offices? And what is the issue with taxing dividends and capital gains? They are not earned money, and they are taxed at lower rates than earned money. Drink some more kool-aid and enjoy the death throes of the Tea Bagger Party

You forgot your meds again, Fehrnstrom.