Democrats Taking the USA over the Fiscal Cliff

That is certainly one interpretation of events. Of course that interpretation flies in the face of the fact the president has been campaigning every day since the election to garner public support for saving the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, while letting the Bush tax cuts on those making over 250k expire, all without having to make any spending cuts.

He even came up with a catchy twitter campaign @ #my2k to personalize the $2k pain the average American family will feel if the Bush tax cuts (for the wealthy?) expire. This is not negotiation, its demonization and campaigning. It is frankly the only thing this president knows how to do well. Had he been doing any real negotiation, we would not be 2-3 weeks down the road before responding to Boehner's initial offer(made the day after the election) to include revenues. He would also not have responded with an obscene reach away from a balanced approach instead of toward one.

I think Bob Woodward nailed it in his book. This president essentially doesn't like making big decisions, and he doesn't like people. What we are witnessing is a repeat of his failing actions from 2010 on the exact same issue. He won't make the phone calls, he won't reach across the aisle. He thinks he can campaign his way to a solution.

Watching his behavior, there are many who are speculating that he is not interested averting the "Fiscal Cliff". Many on the left have gone on record stating going over the cliff will put the president in a more advantageous political position, regardless of the financial impact to the average Joe.

I personally favor going over "The Cliff" not for political reasons, though I think Republicans can survive and even thrive if we do. I favor it because the retards in Washington, especially our President, have proven completely unable to deal with the looming debt crisis, and regardless of what one thinks of the "Fiscal Cliff", it addresses spending in Washington. It addresses an unsustainable payroll tax cut which will help bankrupt social security. Hell, it sends us back to Clinton era tax rates, something the President has been telling us are a good thing for a very long time.

Do I wish they could work things out and use a scalpel instead of a machete? Sure. I also wish my dog could cook and play chess.

Mark my words, this president will do very little to avert the "Fiscal Cliff".

 

wasn't sure where exactly to put the .......Awwwwwwwwwwwww boohoo. this looks like a good place to acknowledge your whining.

I keep getting the feeling with all your commentary and politicization of the process you probably couldn't close a door, let alone a deal.

Nothing started until some offers cast in concrete were made.

But it doesn't look like that way. The Boehner "offer" suggests $800 bn in revenue increases through closing loopholes.

HEY he didn't mention or specify a loophole. which loopholes???? Where is the beef????

That is like the Romney/Ryan tax plan and revenue neutral promise which amounted to TRUST ME without specifics.

Okay he says something specific about the revenue increases. It was "we'll figure it out next year."

Not very meaty at all.

unless you have redefined how to get a hard proposal DONE, I do believe the ball started rolling with a hard offer on the table. Last I checked it was Obama who got it done. As of right now, the GOP response in writing is "wait til next year"

that is great. That puts you in the same category as Osama bin laden. Nice going o-nation. You want to push for the nation going back into recession.

oh great, someone who wants the nation to go into recession because of politics. Again just like bin laden. That is cute.

 

When the all let the sequester happen and then they have to vote to add all the shit back they really didn't want to cut, or vote to cut the things they did not want to raise. That will be way more interesting.

 

Very representative of Obama's negotiating style.

Had you read the article, the letter, or the news, you would know the specifics. Not only that, the ballpark numbers provide a framework from which to get the deal done, vs Obama's 1.6 trillion in new taxes (specified), trillion dollars in new spending(specified), and 500 billion in proposed cuts (unspecified). Obama's proposal not only included non-existent spending cuts, if one were to imagine the spending cuts were real, it still pans out to a net increase in spending.

Obama's plan is the same plan that got not one vote in both houses when he proposed it in 2010. If he thinks its so great, he should try and put it up for a vote in the Democrat controlled Senate and see if he can get even a single vote for it. I doubt it.

As the article points out, Boehner's plan is modeled off of the Simpson-Bowles bipartisan commission's proposal. This is a proposal put together by Obama's own blue ribbon panel and I have no doubt he will reject it. Again.

From the USA Today:

House Republicans sent a counterproposal to avert the "fiscal cliff" to the White House on Monday outlining a $4.6 trillion deficit reduction proposal without raising tax rates.

President Obama and Senate Democrats have said that without a deal to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans there is no path forward to avert the fiscal cliff at the end of the year when George W. Bush-era tax rates expire and $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years are triggered.​

In other words, no matter how balanced the budget, no matter how many dollars in cuts, this president is willing to send the economy into a recession if the top 2% of income earners don't pay a more progressive tax rate (ignoring the fact that most of the country's biggest earners make their money from capital gains).

Comedy to watch you frame the president's proposal as a "hard offer", while you frame the GOP response is a non-response. You were saying something about politicizing things?

If a short recession is what is required to get government spending cut, it is better than the alternative of Greece like poverty.

Agreed. Those who would send the economy into recession over politics are basically political terrorists. Obama bin Laden.... has a ring to it.

 

Interesting from the perspective that Republicans, if they are doing their job, will be holding tax breaks hostage to cuts in government spending. Who has ever heard of a Republican fighting tax breaks? My concern is that they will wind up trading middle class tax breaks for restoration of military spending.

 

Per O-Nation:

Originally Posted by earlpearl

To which O-Nation responded:
Had you read the article, the letter, or the news, you would know the specifics.

So I went to the Wall Street Journal for the Specifics and the WSJ reported:

from the wall street journal:

The GOP wasn't specific about closing tax loopholes and wasn't specific as to precisely which programs it would cut or tighten up. The GOP called it based on the Erskin Bowles plan. Then Mr. Bowles spoke up and completely disavowed the comparison.

So O-Nation: you said there were specifics and suggested I read the news. I picked a news source that is decidedly Pro GOP, the WSJ , owned by Rupert Murdoch:

and the specifics you promised me.......

Now I get which specifics you mean. They are NONE, ZERO, NIL, and ZILCH.

If you can't tell the truth at all, please don't bother arguing the points.

 

I think based on your economy atm, i'd go for the more tax, less spend option though a larger economy (higher debt) may not be all-bad either. I do think Republicans will sign though because they too would benefit by expanding the economy. More money to go round more people would be politically heaven to all politicians from all persuasions.

I wonder will the military allow such a drastic cut?

I was reminded that America is still the #1 manufacturer in the world. Hard to believe that considering what the right-wingers would have you believe. I thought they all moved to China.

Still, surely it's time to let the monetary system settle on its own steam for a while instead of running the risk of digging a bigger hole. You will likely need money in the bank for if/when the world drops the US dollar standard.

 

There are plenty of specifics on the spending cuts. On the revenues, the proposals have mostly centered around an aggregate cap on deductions. Pretty straight forward really.

So your advice is :

1) Focus on taxes, not cutting spending
2) Do nothing (let the monetary system settle)
3) Plan for the collapse of the dollar.

Very persuasive.

 

1) made up in your head.
2) agreed.
3) agreed.

I learned just yesterday the death of Gaddafi was tied in to #3.

 

As if on queue, Obama's spokesmouth Jay Carney calls it quits in the negotiation in a White House presser:

This is where the hypocritical rubber hits the road, isn't it. Is this where you decry the Obama white house for failing to implement an "amazingly simple real life solution" by putting out a counter offer? Is this where you tell them to quit whining like a bunch of babies and call them Osama bin Laden style terrorists as they gleefully take us over the "Fiscal Cliff" for failure to even negotiate?

Somehow, I'm guessing you will suddenly change your tune and say, "Well, the White House shouldn't have to respond to such a ridiculous counter offer.... blah blah blah blah blah hypocrisy blah blah blah blah".

Sorry Earl, there are no two ways to slice this turd. What I find especially humorous is the political calculation the White House has made based on polling data that says the Republicans will be blamed if we go over the cliff. I guess the flat earth society brain trust occupying the house believes polls never move, even if you fail to show up to negotiations. Perhaps they believe in fairies and leprechauns as well. Have I ever told you the joke about the gay midget with a 10" wiener who would hang out in public restrooms, claiming to be a leprechaun?

 

Apparently you can use that argument whatever side you take.

 

As overused as Hitler analogies.

 

All while ignoring the real problem, which is, slow economic growth and pathetic job creation!! ;-)

We do not need to raise taxes, we need economic growth and new tax payers...

 

No wonder Obama can't make any cuts to government. Any cuts would directly reverse all the wonderful employment improvements he has made over the last few years. Maybe one day, we can ALL work for the government!

 

I hate to point out how much that reminds me of the joke about the town that lost so many jobs when the plant shut down that the only way the people could stay afloat was to take in each other's washing.

 

In other news, while Obama continues his perpetual search for a "Big Package", Michigan joins the ranks of the right to work states, empowering workers with the option not to have a portion of their paycheck automatically contributed to mafia connected Union bosses. It is all part of Obama's mandate, really.

 

Not before the union thugs tried a little fisticuffs in the street of course, and they really cut loose after the bills passed. So much for the liberals being fans of "choice". Unions... an idea so appealing they have to make it mandatory to get members.

 

Very well said. I especially like the "choice" argument!

 

LOL..

 

Is everyone ready for their taxes to go up and to get a big fat goose egg back in tax returns?

Rising taxes, no more house credit, I love where this is heading... GOOD JOB OBAMA!!!!

Considering how things are going right now, I find it fascinating that anyone would trust this administration with another penny.

Let the people stimulate the economy. Put more money in our pockets and let us SPEND MORE!