E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSDaily Rundown guest host Luke Russert and NBC's Mark Murray discuss.
Post-election comity will meet its first test Friday as President Barack Obama welcomes congressional leaders from both parties to the White House for initial discussions as to how they might avert the looming “fiscal cliff.”
Related: Obama leaves some wiggle room on fiscal cliff
Capitol Hill’s top Democrats and Republicans will huddle with the president to see whether they can make progress toward a deal on taxes and spending, an accomplishment which eluded them for much of the past two years.
Obama defends his fiscal policy up to this point as well as his extension of the Bush-era tax cuts but says the extension was a "one time proposition" and that "half of the danger" will be removed by eliminating that cut.
Gathered at the White House will be the same cast of characters who were unable to reach a fiscal deal during the last Congress. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., retain their roles, and senators kept Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in theirs as well.
Their talks with Obama, though, assume a new urgency due to the ticking clock that is set to run out in just a few weeks – at the end of this calendar year, when the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts that constitute the fiscal cliff are set to take effect.
Economists warn that the impact of the automatic spending cuts established in the 2011 debt ceiling deal – which fall harshly upon the defense budget – combined with the expiration of the 2001 Bush-era income tax cuts would threaten to plunge the U.S. into recession.
Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., shares his thoughts on the new Congress, avoiding the fiscal cliff and what his colleagues on the Intelligence Committee want to hear from Gen. David Petraeus.
The president enters these conversations, though, having just won re-election after campaigning on the promise of increasing the tax burden for the wealthiest of Americans.
At a press conference Wednesday at the White House, Obama insisted that any deal with Republicans be “balanced” – his shorthand for increasing taxes on those households earning more than $250,000 per year.
“It is simply unacceptable to go back to policies that failed that stuck the middle class with the bill in order to give very expensive tax cuts to the wealthiest in our country. We can't afford it,” White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters traveling Thursday with Obama. “And the president will not sign under any circumstances an extension of tax cuts for the top 2 percent of American earners.”
But any final deal will have to pass through a Republican-held House, where conservatives have rejected any proposal that even smacks of a tax hike.
Related: Bipartisan hopes dampened by angry rhetoric on Hill
In the days since the election, Boehner has led the GOP in offering a more conciliatory tone toward Obama. Boehner has said that Republicans are open to the idea of raising revenue through tax reform, as long as that deal is linked with major reforms to shore up the solvency of entitlements like Medicare and Social Security.
The question of whether and how to allow taxes to rise, though, scuttled an overarching deal between Boehner and Obama in 2011, and could again trip up these negotiations.
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, speaks to reporters after the House Republicans voted for their leadership for the next session of Congress, at the Capitol in Washington on Wednesday.
This time, the stakes are higher.
“We had the same cast of characters before the election, but we have to have a different ending,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican economist and former Congressional Budget Office director. “The capacity of people to look at a deal and not make one is pretty large.”
The immediate challenge facing lawmakers on Friday, he said, involves avoiding the shock to the economy by the sudden onset of the fiscal cliff. That would involve a short-term deal allowing lawmakers time and space to negotiate a full agreement.
Related: CEOs offer Obama support to avoid fiscal cliff
Obama met earlier in the week with leaders in organized labor and business communities to soothe concerns about the coming negotiations, though he faces pressure from progressives to resist the kind of deep budget cuts preferred by Republicans.
“Simply bending revenue and expenditure trajectories closer together should not be the main goal of economic policy,” the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute said in a memo Thursday ahead of the meeting. “Instead, policymakers must seek to boost economic growth and ensure that equitable shares of this growth reach low- and moderate-income households.”
Holtz-Eakin offered some advice, too, as to how to read the tea leaves once the meeting concludes.
“I think the thing to look for is, when they come out, what are they talking about? If they're talking about the big deal and not the cliff, I, personally, think they're a danger to America,” he said, meaning to suggest lawmakers and the president should focus on the more immediate challenge of the fiscal cliff. “If they're talking about replacing the sequester, that's more encouraging.”
Leave a Comment:
The big question is does the republican leaders speak for the rest of the Republicans?
No the BIG Questions is can the Leadership control the Tea Party..... That is the force that will sink America..... Let's label them for what they are Domestic Terrorist.....
No the BIG question is do we have leadership? The RINO's will want to crater, Obama feels the answer is raising taxes ans continued gift giving, Democrats are following the leader. What needs to be done is Conservatives need to continue taking over the Republican party and MAYBE Obama will actually negotiate (nope has never happened and never will) and accept other forms of revenue as well as DECREASED SPENDING. Hey lets take all tax rates to Clinton era as well as spending!
Lets see..., smaller gov. and fiscal responsibility? sounds like terrorist to me.
Ahhh yes the Tea Party Boogie man that wants fiscal responsibility that Democrats are so afraid of.
Sorry girlymen. You can raise taxes on the people that are already paying more than their fair share and you still aren't going to pay down the debt you have created. You are going to have to cut your vote buying social services, like it or not.
I am looking forward to the American Spring and watching you Socialists getting your butts kicked.
And didn't you thugs say the same thing about Romney's going to kick Obama's butt. Wrong!Yours is the party of losers not only in politics but in life also. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.
hawkeye what America do you live in, why do you want to pick on the people that work hard with little pay and no the upper class does not pay their fair share. You r an idiot and a teabagger at that, you guys stick out like a sore thumb that you r.
Get rid of 13 million leeching illegals and their kids, MORON!
...as well as DECREASED SPENDING.
Barney:
Is anybody of any substance actually talking about spending cuts? I hear a lot of talk about " a balanced approach", but that seems to equate to an increase in taxes for those making more than $250K ($200k if you are an individual), and on businesses and investors. I hear absolutely nothing about spending cuts or in what form these would take. You will know we are getting screwed if these cuts are scheduled to kick in the future when the current crop of politicians are long out of office.
SI
Vindicator There is no excuse for you so why don't you take your family back where you came from. I never have seen any Latino not a hard worker, why don't you go pick the veggies and fruits that you eat. You wouldn't hang for one hour.
Wow.. could this be the first sign that both parties are going to work together? Wouldn't it be a novelty if the teaparty put the country before their party for once?
Sounds like we're off to a great start! There will never be any harmony in Washington, but hey, what the hell do they really care, they will get their paychecks and all is well ..... for them.
Well, I see some fun to be had in here. Ok, Class of69'...
what America do you live in, why do you want to pick on the people that work hard with little pay and no the upper class does not pay their fair share
We live in America. We don't punish success here. Besides, if you look at the tax code, those making over $250,000 in payroll taxes already pay around 20% more then those making around $60,000. The problem is not in payroll taxes, the problem is Capital Gains. If the President is only looking for those who make more then $250,000 (and I don't mean in just payroll taxes), then this is a good approach...but I'd stop playing the lottery if I were you.
The problem also is in unprecidented government spending. THIS MUST STOP! I get that there's baby boomers retiring and there's a pretty big burden on Social Security, but these people worked to earn this in the later years of thier lives. Here's an idea for you. Why doesn't the President and Congress volenteer a pay cut until a much better budget can be made? There's a balanced approach for you. The people win and both respective parties get to get some votes next year for the idea. I think a cut in defense is a mistake, considering the impending problems from North Korea, Iran, Pakastan, ect., but I'm not closed off to some minor cuts.
Gotta take the kids to school. I'll work on more later
What people don't seem to understand...you can tax the wealthy all you want - at the end of the day - they will be just fine. But...they will hold on to their money and NOT invest in America as a response. This will affect YOU.
So for every jealous person that cries and whines over what the wealthy has and what they have worked just as hard for - be careful what you wish for.
When the country goes bankrupt and those that get all the "free stuff" no longer get their checks in the mail or their food stamps are reduced - they will take what they can no longer get. And they won't be using pea shooters and sling shots to do it. Just saying...
When my 3 children went to college, we paid part,they took out college loans at 10%,scholarship, and worked.The cost was about 10,000 per child.Colleges have gone up in cost, but all the students who voted for Obama,how many WORK part-time in school?How get summer JOBS?They are part of Fiscal cliff.
SSgirl.....................so why not try something completely new for a change.....................tax the wealthy a "little bit more" as when the economy and investment was doing very well under Clinton.........AND we begin to cut Medicare and Social security COSTS by first really really going after the graft and corruption..............and then if necessary slowing the rise of benefits...........and then, if all that is not enough, increasing retirement age and increasing Medicare costs to recipients.
Would that kind of PROGRESSIVE revenue/taxation program appeal to the Republicans and TPs in DC that seem to only utter the word NO repeatedly??
Ever since he first ran for office, including the just concluded campaign, Obama has said that we will have to make spending cuts but he never proposes any. So the first thing I would say to him is show me the spending cuts. If he is not prepared to do that no deal can happen. Because simply raising taxes and continuing the high level of deficit spending will not get the job done.
For the Repubs another option would be to simply give Obama what he wants and watch the economy fall apart and in the midterm and 2016 tell the voters look we gave him what he wanted and it did not work. Then we can finally rid ourselves of the foolishness that is Obama, Pelosi and Reed and the entitlement mentality.
Good morning, OHGuy, I agree with you:
Tea Potty ... is political WMD (political weapons of mass destruction)
Let's take them out as we took Saddam out.
Vindicator111,
We can if the greedy businesses and corporations giving the illegals jobs knowing they are illegal will stop for more greed and profits. The local foundry has 5 men with the same name and social security numbers working for them. Tell me they don't know! Just stop the business world from giving them jobs. It is so simple, but the greed of business blinds them and you!
King,
He proposed cuts when he met with Bonehead Boehner and the republicans last year. Remember? It was the meeting that Bonehead and the republicans walked out of because he also proposed increasing taxes for those who make more than $5,000 a week! Da!
NC1234....I think most liberals have a skewed look on Republicans. I am like everyone else - during the Clinton administration - life was great. Hey I voted for him. Maybe Republicans have a skewed outlook on liberals as well. At the end of the day - we are all Americans - one nation under God. Period.
I do agree that there needs to be some adjustments to taxes, capital gains, etc. However, the blunt of the conversations on these news comment sites seems to be anger at the wealthy. And I am not wealthy by no means - but I do know who is spending the money in corporations and stocks/investments which helps to promote the national economy.
Romney had a great idea on raising the retirement age - now Obama is rethinking that idea as well. I think cutting medicare cost and "supplemental social security" is a great idea. And by "supplemental" I mean all those that are getting SSI checks for having a sore toe. My personal belief is that by reducing the employee portion of the social security tax down to 4.2% was a bad idea. That has only contributed to the deficit. Stimulus programs don't work. Clearly.
What does work - good old fashioned values of working an honest day for honest wages. Taking what you earn and making it stretch and work for your family. Getting up - going to work and not expecting handouts and free phones. I carry an old flip phone. It works just fine. I don't wear name brand clothing. I don't live above my means. I was raised with values and I hold on to those. If we as Americans go back to the thinking that our grandparents had - then we can pull out of this.
But the anger at each other's party choice - or religious choice - income level - or race - has got to stop - or we will be no better than the 3rd world countries we watch on the six o'clock news. We have all got to pull together and not apart to make this work and it has to start at the top. That is my biggest fear - Obama has done nothing to prove that he is a leader that can unite this country. It is more divided now than ever. And if that doesn't frighten you - it should.
IT'SABOUT TIME, may I ask you a question? Do you know who the members of the teaparty are? Have you met any of them, talked to any of them? I doubt it. I think you are just repeating liberal BS. I am a teaparty member and I put the country first. I know a lot of teaparty members and they all put their country first. They are afraid for their country. We are not the republican party, we are conservatives who want this country to survive for our kids and grandkids. If you are really concerned about this country, open your eyes and look at what is really happening and what is the greater threat, liberalism or conservatism. Stop following blindly and start thinking for yourself. Stop repeating this BS, that the rich are greedy and do nothing for you. Without the "RICH", that is people who make more than $200,000.00 a year, 80% of the population would be without a job. I employ about three dozen people, and it is getting increasingly more difficult to retain them. I am getting by on savings trying to keep things going, but I dont really see a way forward if all the new taxes are going to come my way. And I believe that Obama Care will probably be the final nail in the coffin. But if this country is going to survive, it is going to require the Government to work within a budget, and stop the runaway spending binge we are on.
the idea of socialized health care and free stuff has worked so well for europe theyarenow rioting in the street. when us lower income people say tax the rich more its more from envy and the wealthy must pay my share to make me feel better but its a kids game since the increase will not bring in enough revenue to make a differance. we need to stop foreign aid and cut spending and put politicians back in the hot seat to get rid of their elite perks
Wrong Oh Guy
More like left wing instituted reforms will. The Union at Hostess brands fell on the sword today by rejecting the last contract Proposal offered by Hostess. Instead of sending the products out of the country, Hostess (already was in bankruptcy proceedings) has announced that the company will close forever. 18,000 middle class jobs gone. This has been the pattern of the left and it's number one supporter, the UNIONS, since the 1970's. Bleed whatever organization they get organized in until it is on life support, dies (closes), or leaves the country. The ACA is another great example of bur-headed pushed "reforms".
clwyd
Wake up, don't you know they are not illegals they are undocumented workers. Mr. Obama wants to change that by giving them some documents changing them all into citizens. You can't expect businesses not to hire them, that would be discrimination and Mr Obama would send Eric Holder out to make their life miserable if they didn't hire them. Please get with the program.
h engbers,
Yes, I know that Paul Ryan is one and since I live here in Janesville I have talked with the Neanderthal who doesn't know his math. He has no idea where the $5,000,000,000,000 in cuts are going to be coming from? At his town Meeting here he walked out as he was booed off the stage for no knowledge of math. He usually wins re-election by a 72% margin. This year it was 55%. Yes, there are still that many stupid people in the District!
KingK,
We might as well do what Obama wants as the republicans knowing about what is going on in the business world with Illegals do nothing. Romney's solution was that they self deport themselves. See, Neanderthals runt he republican party! Our economy is now dependent on illegals as without them who would market our goods and produce. for the meager wages they are paid? The foundry I mentioned here could not get workers to work for those wages under those conditions! Get in touch with reality!
DB,
We have a Hostess plant here and the workers have given in to keep the company running for years. Do you know what the corporate bosses make? Look it up and then shut up! It used to be accessible, but with this mess they have probably blocked it by now so you and others won't know!
My sister-in-law is experiencing the first hand example of the forerunner to the ACA called Medicaid. She had a lump that she kept insisting to the doctors for over a year that the lump was probably lymphoma. She had plenty of reason to be concerned because she had a number of relatives. In other words, she knew what it was from experience, but the doctors insisted that Lymphoma "doesn't isn't related to genetics."
She was right, but the time they believed her, and got her tested appropriately she was Stage 3 Lymphoma.
Then yesterday in another fine example of where the ACA will go, a medical board, with no doctors (to prevent bias) recommended that men should not bother getting a PSA test for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer works on the outside of the organ and slowly invades the prostate. There are no symptoms until the cancer has invaded the inner parts of the organ. By the time the symptoms become apparent, the odds of surviving are greatly reduced.
Sound Familiar. The same type of board recommended against Mamograms for women before age 40.
No, this is not the ACA, but that is what unelected boards do. You are depending upon people you don't elect to make decisions about your health and what you should pay for it.
At least under private insurance, you not only can fire the insurer, but you can sue them out of existence too.
ItsAboutTime:
I'm not a Tea Party advocate but after reading your blogs I say; "Wouldn't it be nice if the Democrats put their country before their party for once!" You are no better then the opposition with your negative rhetoric and lack of willingness to compromise. Your obviously a grown man but you act like a child on this blog.
...
clwd
Obama did not propose spending cuts. What he proposed was a reduction in the rate of increase in spending. Those two things are entirely different. Show me his proposed spending cuts
Wouldn't it be nice if the democrats AND republicans put their country before their party?
I LOVE that!!!!
Personally I did not vote for or against any republican or democrat .. I voted against obama, the person, because I think he is a crappy president
I read most all of these posts and continue to be very afraid for our country. The lack of understanding in this country is what has allowed us to get to this point; our country is broke, our parties don't work together, and our fellow citizens are divided.
The lack of understanding displayed by those who can make a comment that one is a terrorist if they follow the constitution surprises me. Or the comment "the Tea Party will sink the country if they control the Republicans." Seems the Tea Party stands for the Constitution which has guided this country for many years. I would guess that if one were to feel this way, they might want to move to another country where they have no rules to direct their government, say Russia, China, etc.
The other comment heard daily from many is "pay their fair share". What does this really mean? Does it mean the people saying it don't work and want the government to mandate that successful people, who work hard, support the less than average, unsuccessful, low income group? Or is there really a magical percent of income one should pay? Or is it just that the president of the US has said it and it sounds goods to the unemployed, under paid, etc? (I will use a capital P in president once Obama is impeached and gone) Please tell what the fair share is so I can understand this seemingly ridiculous concept. Would it not be most fair if everyone paid, lets say, 10% of their income? For those who are demanding the wealthy pay their fair share, this would mean that the wealthy would pay more since their income is greater than yours...... I am exhausted by the statements I hear daily from the socialist in the WH. We are on the wrong path. Congrats the Obama in that he is really the first president (in the USA, done in other countries ie;Germany) who was able to convince a large percent of the population he was looking out for them and that he would give everyone free stuff. Shame on those who buy this. Finance 101 will give you a clear understanding this will not work.
Do not support those that have helped get us to this point: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN. They have not been forthright with the news and their advertisers should not be supported. These channels may start telling the truth if they see their income dropping. Do not support charities as this is now the job of the government. Buy goods from non-union manufactures only or do without. Ford may be the exception here as they have been successful on their own. Obama is taking care of the unions, we don't need to. Send your dollars overseas in hopes of avoiding the melt-down that is certain to occur. Do not do business with those who supported Obama. Buy all the guns you can afford as they will become very valuable and/or rare in the future. Do read up on the UN Gun Control, for those who can read.
Understand that our world is changing and you may not like what is coming. I did not vote for him!
...ok, completing my thoughts,
I completely agree with all that clwyd, KingK, and NC123 have said. It was kinda along my thoughts too.
Here's the quandry: If you tax the hell out of big business, they pack up and go to China where it's cheaper. If you tax the hell out of the super rich, they don't invest as much (the rich are not going to loose money). This is basic economics...how to you keep money? Policies like President Clinton and President Carter are what caused half the mess. Bush isn't immune by any means, but I've put up here that he was an idiot to start with from the get go and I'll get back to that.
The problems in credit, years ago, were from programs that gave "free stuff". Pushing the banks to give "high risk" loans for people who could not pay them is what caused the collapse of Fanny Mae and Ferdie Mack (No, Bush didn't do that). These were policies made under Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. These gave the false sence of economic prosperity in thier respective terms as presidents. However, where we are today is a direct result of these things. Bush's folly was to open up markets with less restriction and acting on congress' HR 4655 like it was an open season on war in Iraq. We had reason for Afganistan, but not Iraq.
And now, here we are. An economy that is barely moving and not picking up much steam because we are still paying the bills from the last 2 presidents. However, President Obama seems to want to open up more "free stuff" when there are still bills to be paid. The government spending in these areas MUST STOP! If it does not, then I fear we will hit a depression by his mid term. Once "The Affordable Health Care Act" goes into full effect next year, things are going to falter as prices on everyday items (groceries, clothing, housing items, ect) go up. Once again, the rich aren't going to loose money. The cost of ObamaCare will be past on to the consumer. And more and more American jobs will go over seas in favor of making things cheaper and not having to pay the high cost of insuring an employee.
Sources for both posts:
Bush's Open Season in Iraq
United States Tax code showing what those who make over $250,000 in payroll pay from my previous comment (found on page 36 and beyond)
Effects of "The Affordable Healthcare Act" on everyday items
And finally, contributing factors to the housing and credit crisis
found on page 740 in the second paragraph (don't worry, it starts on page 734. You won't have to look far)
Romney promised all kinds of free stuff to the top 2%. However he lost, and I'm one of the almost 52% that voted for President Obama and I want to know where my free stuff is?
So far we have received:
My 401 K has gained back the losses of 2008
Higher rate of Job growth than both terms Bush was in office and his father as well - check
Prevented the collapse of the us auto industry - check
Repealed Don't ask Don't Tell - check
Prevented the collapse of the economy - check
Troops home from Iraq - check
Osama Bin Laden killed - check
Health Care Reform - check
32 straight months of private sector job growth
GDP growth in 2008: negative 6%
GDP growth last year 2.9%
Dow Jones Average in January 2008: Under 8000
Dow Jones Average today: 12,500+
Record domestic oil production
GM – all time record profits
Near record corporate profits across the board
damn thing never puts on my links!! Guess MSN doesn't want you to know the truth!
Bush's Open Season in Iraq
Thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR04655:@@@D&summ2=m&
United States Tax Code showing what those who make over $250,000 in payroll pay from my previous comment (found on page 36 and beyond)
irs.gov/pub/pub-pdf/p15.pdf
Effects of "The Affordable Healthcare Act" on everyday items
Huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/health-care-reform-part-time-work_n_1952455.html
And finally, contributing factors to the housing and credit crisis
moritzlaw.osu.edu/eblj/issues/volume5/number2/oesterle.pdf
found on page 740 in the second paragraph (don't worry, it starts on page 734. You won't have to look far)
Hey MSN, the truth will set you free. Stop trying to restrict people's freedom to see things other then what you say!
The Big-Wigs huddle to talk about the fiscal cliff- more like, huddle to figure out how to save their own bank accounts
You may not be a teabagger, but you sure sound as ignorant as one. The Democrat party includes many different parts pofessionals, academia, youth, labor, working class, women, african-americans, hispanic, native, jewish, arab and muslims and asians. Everything the Democrats put forward is a comoromise for the good of all Americans.
clwyd.
Any sector of food is highly competitive. Hostess was already bankrupt. Lower priced knock-offs had taken a huge bite out Hostess's market share. All the unions except the baker's union made the necessary concessions.
What you are saying is it is fine to give up 18,500 good paying job just because the administrative makes more than you think they ought?
This is like killing a patient to get rid of cancer. The trouble is, that the guys at the top are smart enough to have put money back so if they lose the jobs, they aren't hurting. Not only that, but good management is hard to get and keep. The management will move to a new job and make even more money.
You have 18,500 middle income wage type jobs lost. These people will have to go to work at either a new entry level job at less money or get on at another bakery for less money. Some, may never be able to get a job for some time because unemployment is rising again based on announce layoffs and closings are up 50% over a normal year. Now, explain to the world how that isn't stupid?
I watched my father-in-law lose his Union Painting for Pullman standard. Yeah, the executives got big salaries, but these guys were making $30.00 and hour, only had to build so many rail cars, so when they built the quota they could go home with the full day's pay (they were usually done in 4 - 5 hours, and would walk out of the plant with anything that was not nailed down.
Then he refused to work for less than $20.00 per hour for painting, but would take $8.00 part time doing construction. My wife on a minimum wage job made more money than he did in a year. Her mom had to go to work and managed to pull down a state job. Eventually because of his obstinance, she filed for divorce to top it off.
The same logic is being used in the ACA. People who live and work in the real numbers have been telling the left that the ACA will not work. The left doesn't care what the reality is, the whole point is to buy votes and blame what they define as "Rich".
At some point you have to realize that there are always going to be a Rich Group, a middle group and a poor group. Here in America you have the most ability to start in the bottom of the poor group and advance to the top of the rich Group.
The key is to work for it and not try to tear the rich down. Work with them, they pay well to those who meet or exceed what they hope for.
Job1
Enough of Romney. Clearly you doubt that Obama is better because you continue to rip on people that have nothing to do with the current policies.
haha..talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. this is what happens when we 'think' we are entitled to have everything in this fiscal cliff and not give up anything....
"The Board of Directors authorized the wind down of Hostess Brands to preserve and maximize the value of the estate after one of the company's largest unions, the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM), initiated a nationwide strike that crippled the company's ability to produce and deliver products at multiple facilities," Hostess said in the statement.
King K,
The negotiations of those closed door meetings has never been made public, but Bonehead walked out saying that, "The cuts weren't in the right areas and that increased revenue was not going to be allowed!" In other words, " No tax increase for those making $5,000 or more a week. Neanderthals!
Unlike us who blog on this stuff, most Americans don't know what's going on in the political world and what they do know doesn't scratch the surface of what issues are being discussed. If the republicans reject this bill going through that keeps the Bush Tax cuts in place for 98% of Americans and we end up going over this cliff they will wake up these people who have been sleeping. These struggling people will not be happy that they sacrificed 98% of the population to stuff more money in the pockets of the wealthy. When you hit people's pocketbooks this crosses party lines. Republicans will die out in 2014.
What the President has done is very smart. He proposed a bill that includes no other pork, just a straight up continue the Bush Tax Cuts for 98% of the people. What the Republicans will do is hold these people hostage for wealthy entitlements and they will not be able to spin that successfully that they are the fighters for the middle class or not to mention the 98%.
Then maybe in 2014 instead of going to Clinton levels where the rich were taxed at 39% we can vote to go to Reagan levels and tax them at 50%. :)
DB,
Let's see if the threat of Hostess going Bankrupt is the truth? The threat of lost jobs and bankruptcy has often been a ploy. Like I say! The CEO's and other executives didn't take any cuts when they stopping paying into the pension fund that they had agreed to over a year ago in July of 2011. The CEO and execs. got raises at that same time! Greed and the power of the rich!
Why does Obama want to intentionally continue damaging this economy? EVERY college Economics textbook in the COUNTRY say you don't raise taxes during an economic decline. We never got out of the recession and the last four years of failed Obama policies have caused significant damage to our economy. But the LAST thing to do is raise taxes!!
So it is simple: Simply extend the current tax rates to give consumers and businesses certainty as to what is going to happen in 2013 and have the NEW Congress battle this out in the upcoming session. But since Obama despises success he is holding the lower and middle class hostage just to punish the wealthy and THAT is despicable. So simply extend one year and the Congress can battle out in the next session.
Damaging the economy JUST to punish the wealthy hurts everyone and the last four years is proof positive. Why doesn't Obama act like a president rather than a Community Organizer?
Punish the wealthy. hah We're talking Clinton level tax rates for the wealthy. I think we still had rich people during those years and they were doing just fine.
It's the war on the 98% that the Republicans are holding hostage.
ProBusiness: Just because it is written in a textbook does NOT make it written in stone. You might want to research WHO wrote that stuff.
The most divisive President in a hundred years will strike a grand bargain with Republican leaders? Suuuure.
The President whose never had a private sector job in his life (other than part-time law lecturer) will try and stave off this continuing economic slide? Yeaaaah.
But we're moving "forward", right?! Just ask the 18,000 out of work Hostess employees!
Probusiness,
Every Economics book also says that when you have a deficit you have to make cuts and raise revenue. By the way our Economy isn't in decline at present. Obama's term has resulted in 34 months of job growth , less foreclosure rates, raising property values and until the physical cliff increased an almost doubling of stocks, low inflation and increased GDP! Where did you make up that line of lies????
Arthur 666, Yes! Forward! 34 months in a row now. That after enduring 8 years of the "Worst President Ever!" The bushwhacker! Now hiding in Texas on his ranch for the past 4 years. He knows that the World Court in the Hague has a warrant out for his arrest for "WAR CRIMES!"
come on, the taxes the prez wants also includes about 1 million businesses. You want that too. That's all i hear from the prez is "pay your fair share". What he proposes won't even cover 5% of our spending deficit, much less do anything to the underlying problem of we spend waaaaaay more than we take in. Nothing. He says "balanced approach" but i haven't heard anything on how he plans to deal with the other 95+% of deficits. 99% of his "campaigning" on this issue is "more taxes" but that is a TINY portion of our deficits.
His 1 hour press conference ... not 1 word mentioned of cutting spending, entitlements or growth. The only thing i have heard is that he will definitely veto anything that doesn't include raising top rates on 1 million businesses and top rate earners AND ..... he doubled his demand of 800 Billion in new taxes last year to 1.6 Trillion. Doesn't sound anything like comprimise to me.
CLWD ... our economy isn't in decline? LOL The 34 straight months of job growth you speak of averaged out only equals the growth in population. We aren't even growing at 2% now. That is pathetic for a post recession growth rate. Rebounds from downturns always have a period of 4-6% growth. We aren't even half that. 2011 growth was lower than 2010. 2012 is less than 2011.
If one wants to claim a "war" on people look at the most basic of things, average income. We have LOST over $4,000 average income over 4 years ago. Give me more of that!!!!!!!!!!
Returning the top 2% to Clinton tax levels. Yeah that's a start to recovery. Oh it will only cover 5% of our spending deficit? So it's a start. We're not going to have a magic solution to fix 100% of spending in one shot. This takes care of one step, 19 more steps to go.
This is what the President has run on for two terms. We voted for it twice. Let's just do it already. Polls on this single issue the American people agree with at 60% which is higher then the population that voted for him. Wake up. This is not something he should compromise on and he will not.
If we want to raise taxes, why not do it through doing away with loopholes and deductions? For instance you could limit home mortgage interest deductions to say 30k. Many more you could do like that and not touch the marginal rates which would include 1 million businesses. The only way to get anywhere near the revenue needed to pay our bills is through growth in the economy. We are at an anemic 1.5 to 2% growth now and i fail to see how taking more money from the top small businesses will encourage them to grow.
Obama said in 2009-2010 that raising taxes on business in a down economy would be detrimental and a bad idea. We are at HALF that growth rate now than when he said that, so why is it a good idea now?
I heard some guys on CNBC talking about if our growth rate was 4% it would add 5 trillion to our bottom line at the current rates. Much Much more than the small amount of txes this MIGHT bring in. Seems to me thats where the focus should be. But its not.
Rapidrush: It is IN an Economics textbook because history and countless research and studies show it is true. And if you research WHO wrote that "stuff" it is the smartest minds in history. And if you are NOT a smartest mind you become a politician and don't have a clue about how an economy works.
Clwyd: Yes our economy IS in decline. Our GDP in 2012 is less than 2011 and our GDP in 2011 was less than 2012. Our unemployment rate has been hanging around a stagnant 8%. Food Stamp use has increased 40% in the last 4 years. We now have 1 in 6 in Poverty. Our current labor-participation rate is the lowest seen since the 70's, and our unemployed 6 months or more is the highest since the Great Depression. We are getting ready to enter into another official recession (or depression?) so if you can't see that I can't help you.
Now if you want to learn Economics I can teach you. I teach college Economics and you are welcome to register in my classes but I just can't teach you Economics in a thread like this - too complex. But what I CAN tell you is every Economics textbook tells you that how we have handled deficits and debts over the last 50 years (both parties) has been terribly irresponsible. You should not carry indefinite debt. The idea is short-term deficits are okay IF when the economy recovers you eliminate the debt. For example, when in an economic decline (like we are in) we reduce taxes and increase spending which will shift the Aggregate Demand to the right (an increase). This will grow the economy thus grow tax revenues. THEN when the economy recovers you INCREASE taxes and DECREASE spending to pay off the debt. Then you are ready for the next economic decline.
But both parties abused that. We decreased taxes and increased spending to get out of recessions (or economic downturns) but THEN did not INCREASE taxes and DECREASE spending when the economy recovered. We kept the same tax structure and spending. What Bush did in 2001 and 2003 (tax cuts) was PERFECT for an economic recovery and it worked brilliantly. We were out of the recession by 2004 and 2005 and 2006 were great - but we should have RAISED taxes (and reduced spending) in 2005/2006. But that is history and we can't change that. And the last four years of wasted government spending is history and we can't change that either.
So what to do. The ONLY way out of this mess is growing the economy. The only way to increase tax revenue is for MORE people to be working who will pay income tax AND not need Food Stamps or government assistance. MORE people working and paying taxes and LESS people relying on government is the only solution. Secondly, you need to understand that to grow an economy you either LOWER taxes and/or INCREASE spending. But continued spending BUT increased taxes to offset some of the spending decreases the economy shifting Aggregate Demand to the left. In other words they offset each other. Taking $100 from one side and spending $100 on the other side does nothing - zilch - nada - zero.
So increasing taxes on ANYBODY will decrease the economy AND reduce both business investment and expansion. My post is getting lengthy but let me finalize my comment by saying this: Raising taxes on job creators is a sure way to throw this economy into a recession or depression. My suggestion has always been cut unnecessary spending. How? I would tell EVERY government department (including defense) to come up with a budget at 90% of their current level. Act as if that is all you get. THEN each department make a list of what items they are cutting they ABSOLUTELY believe they need added back in. THAT list is brought in front of a committee and decide which of these items they agree should be added back in. Why this process? Because my guess is the LAST 10% will be things like copy machines, convention meetings, etc. and the answer is "no" for most.
I think when all is said and done we can eliminate on average 5% from each department. THAT will reduce spending by at least the same amount the "taxes on the rich" will bring in BUT will not take from those who will use that to create more jobs but rather we take it from the areas where there is "wasted money".
One other quick note: Our economy is a little over $15.4 Trillion and our tax revenue is about 15% of GDP (just to use a quick estimate). So let's see what growing the economy will bring in.
Assume a 4% growth rate so if we grew the economy next year we would have about $16 Trillion in GDP. That is GDP growth of about $600 Billion at 15% in additional taxes is another $90 Billion. So let me see if I get this straight: If we RAISED taxes on the "wealthy" we MIGHT get $60 Billion max but the economy suffers and goes into a recession. OR we give businesses and consumers certainty, the economy grows 4%, and the government get $90 Billion in additional tax revenues in only one year.
So either DAMAGE the economy with tax increases and get $60 Billion OR grow the economy and get $90 Billion. Only someone who despised success and capitalism like Obama would take only $60 Billion and HURT an economy rather than GROWING an economy and getting $90 Billion.
We should all be paying our fair share. Why did we get tax cuts anyway? I am middle class and of course love the extra money in my paycheck, but how do we pay for roads, police, the multi-billion dollar TSA that people think we can't live without? Republicans don't want to pay higher taxes, but, contrary to what they say, they still want "free stuff". When you get old, do you want to find that so many cuts were made to Medicare that no doctor will take it? We need to raise revenue and clean up waste! Simple as that. Cut the fat, not the necessities of education, medical care, infrastructure, etc. I'd bet there is plenty of waste to cut out, but our gov't - both sides - have to come toghether and do it. Plus, taxes definitely need to be raised on all capital gains over $200,000. No reason people like Romney should be paying 14% when making millions.
Sally: But here is the problem - define what the functions of government are? THAT is what we should all pitch in to pay for. But the functions of (federal) government are quite limited. Their job is one thing and one thing only - to protect the United States. How? With a military and a legal court system as well as REASONABLE regulations and laws to make that work. I got news for you - THAT'S IT!!
It is NOT the federal government's job to build infrastructure. It is NOT the federal government's job to control energy. It is NOT the federal government's job to control education. ALL of these things are the responsibility of the STATE governments and even stated so in the Constitution. But our federal government has been using the Constitution as toilet tissue for the last 100 years.
So why did our founding fathers give the STATES the power and not the federal government? Because a powerful federal government is an abusive federal government. Thomas Jefferson said "Most bad government has grown out of too much government" so the founding fathers specifically LIMITED the federal government and let the states control their destiny. Why? Because those states that did things "right" attracted more citizens and those who did not would lose citizens. So states who abused their people would soon not have an electorate of which to "abuse". They created a "competitive" nature among states and THAT limited their ability to abuse power.
But our Constitution has been raped and shredded and we have a federal government that the founding fathers feared. We have a federal government that blackmails states by taking transportation tax dollars FROM THE STATES then tells the states if they want it BACK they must follow the orders of the federal government. Wrong. THAT is not what is supposed to occur.
So I have no problem paying taxes for the TRUE functions of government and the salaries of those IN the government to run is correctly (which they don't know how to do). But THAT is okay. But the federal government should NOT redistribute money. It should NOT go to a Department of Energy, Department of Education, nor the Department of Transportation.
So the answer is "they get enough already". Make it work.
And one last point: Our federal government has such MASSIVE waste there are hundreds of billions of dollars that could be saved getting rid of waste.
The great economist Milton Friedman once said "if you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert within 5 years there would be a shortage of sand".
class of 69', you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Why isn't NBC reporting that Al "Racist" Sharpton and several other "civil rights leaders" met with Obama at the White House to discuss the fiscal cliff. Really? Why?????
Since this group has nothing to do with the fiscal cliff I would love to know what this meeting was really about. Of course everything is out in the open with this transparency administration, right? NOT!
Sharpton is a snake who is not to be trusted.
Job1,
Pull off the rose tinted glasses. We've also received :
1. An increase in health insurance cost that affects all middle class families.
2. A increasing decrease in quality of care due to ACA (20,000 more 'poor' people going on Medicaid as of Dec 1st in my county alone, the county population is around 60k).
3. An increase in out of pocket costs thanks to ACA (a normal doctor's appointment went from $84 to $110 last month here, the price increase is to cover the lower amount the government will be covering on medicare and medicaid, middle class gets to make up the difference)
4. Grocery prices continue to rise.
5. An upcoming increase in all energy prices thanks to the eco-terrorist group we call the EPA and their upcoming mandates. (Hope that investigation into their psuedo-name email addresses turns something up)
6. An upcoming increase in taxes across the board (Do you really really think that middle class taxes won't go up??)
7. My parents (both in late 70s, mom has dementia) will be having their treatments dictated by a panel of non-medically educated, non-elected bureaucrats who get to decide if they live or die.
8. A more racially divided country than any time in recent history thanks to obama pushing the racial divide (why did he meet with reps from the most racist organizations in the country; NAACP, La Raza, Sharpton, etc before meeting with law makers on the fiscal cliff?)
9 Family owned businesses are dropping like flies in the last week thanks to obama getting back in, they know they won't be able to afford ACA or the upcoming tax increases, along with all the regulations.
So honestly, you can take you 'change' and go @!$%# yourself.
The fraud in the white house has no intention of fixing any fiscal problems. He wants only to squeeze as much as he can in additional taxes while deferring this crisis for another time. Being a hard core socialist, he loves squandering other people's money pandering to his support base made up of society's dregs, and when it's gone, he'll be back for more until there's none left. We will then have achieved parity with the likes of Greece.
P.S. most people will not fall for his lie of increasing taxes only on the wealthy; they know he'll be increasing taxes on everyone. Everyone that actually pays taxes, that is.
Pay attention to the solution Obama comes up with and you will see that it will only have the effect of postponing the arrival at the fiscal cliff for a period of time, parhaps by a year at most.
The debt was created because of the tax reductions. If President Bush hadn't reduced the tax rates our deficit and our debt would be considerably lower. Remember, President Clinton left us with a budget surplus.
This was the plan all along; drive the country deeper and deeper into debt and then complain about the social services bankrupting the country.
There are a number of posters on this board who are wondering why people are so angry. Others are passing judgment without understanding that people have a right to be angry now.
This is a sample of complete BS. The wealthy do not invest in America. They just give their money to money managers. These money managers sometimes invest in American companies, other times, they cook up Ponzi mischief such as the ones that lead to bubbles that eventually ruin the economy and require government support in order to fix - which is the taxpayer.
As far as American companies are concerned, they respond to demand. Demand, by and large comes from the American consumer, which is mostly the American middle class. When the middle class is prosperous, everyone does well, including the rich - because they get good returns on their investment.
If any class is dependent on another, it is the rich who are dependent on the middle, not the other way around.
Most people have already "fallen" for "his lie" of increasing taxes only on the wealthy. That is why they voted him back into office.
The Republicans can call his bluff at any time - send him two bills, one with the current tax rates for everything except income above $1/4M, the other for income above $1/4M. They could then easily reveal him for the "fraud that he is."
You know why they haven't? Because, despite what you say "they have fallen" for it, too. They also believe he's sincere.
Obama does not need to propose a reduction in the rate of the increase of spending. He's already achieved it.
You are being self-contradictory. Raising taxes is reducing the "continued gift giving" that President Bush gave to the upper income earners.
80% of minority voters voted for President Obama. That's not a racially divided country by any stretch of the imagination. The only racial group that didn't give their majority vote to President Obama was whites, and of that group, highly educated whites voted overwhelmingly for Obama.
From http://www.latinospost.com/articles/6980/20121117/popular-vote-2012-results-breakdown-presidential-election.htm
Pretty much everyone is on the same side of the political divide, except for the lesser educated white voters. There really isn't much of a racial divide, unless you have a really poor understanding of America and think that America is only blacks and whites.
Let me guess...you are a less-educated white voter, aren't you? I recommend you go get a better education; you will then understand why Obama is the only choice for America, and why what he is trying to do is the only thing that will only get us out the mess we are in.
Have people forgotten about 9/11? 9/11 took a major hit on our economy. It changed the way we lived and the US spent a lot of money on those changes. This was the main reason Bin Laden hit the US. He wanted to destroy our economy and he did. The development of Homeland Security took a lot of money and it did keep us safe during the Bush years.
After Bush left the US got hit with the first terrorist attack since 2001. It happened in 2009 at Ft. Hood, Texas.
The story says:
Lot's of luck with this since Obama is leaving today on another one of his trips, this time to Southeast Asia. When he returns he'll be briefed about what transpired and coached as to what criticisms to level at the republicans. In other words, business as usual.
What Obama really wants is more tax revenue to spend and is content to push this financial crisis off into the future for perhaps another year, just like he did last year. Maybe he thinks he can push this crisis off indefinitely, a year at a time.
Hey!
Alt least the door was open and they met. Now if they can just keep the republicans from walking out the door again like the spoiled brats they are? America is sick of them and that is why I see today that the final votes for the House have the Democrats gaining 8 seats and maybe 9?
Grand Bargain is the Satan Sandwich
“They want to starve the beast as it were and kill all government spending that is not related to defense.”
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
President Obama is taking his case for a grand austerity bargain with the Republicans on the road, moving us “closer to eliminating the threadbare safety net.” Not so long ago, it would have been inconceivable that a Democratic president [could] barnstorm the country, “loudly and publicly demanding support for making right wing fantasies come true.”
Flush with victory and even shedding tears of joy, president Obama will hit the road to convince us to happily stab ourselves in the back. The “fiscal cliff” hoax began immediately after all the votes were counted. No sooner was Obama declared the winner than the White House, congressional leaders and the corporate media all began issuing dire warning about the consequences of not shredding what is left of the small safety net that Americans still have.
The president was so eager to begin the cutting process that he called two people who are allegedly his rivals, Republican congressional leaders John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, on election night. The two people who should be his opposition were among the first he reached out and touched. Both men ignored the president and told someone in their respective households to say they were asleep. Such is unrequited love…
http://blackagendareport.com/content/freedom-rider-grand-bargain-satan-sandwich
Obama is Bush Jr. in sheeps clothing. Look at his voting record. He will not allow the tax loopholes to run out, or capital gains to be taxed . I bet anything it is all resolved to Republican liking as of January.
First of all, economic textbooks also argue that you don't CUT SPENDING during a recession. I'm sure you know that. Secondly, you can theoretically raise taxes without damaging the economy; the CBO and the CRS have made studies that show that raising marginal rates on top income earners has a negligible effect on the economy.
We are struggling out of the depths of a depression; what the heck what did you expect, a bloody cakewalk??? Every economics professor knows that recoveries from recessions based on financial crises are SLOWER, thanks to a long period of debt-reduction on the part of businesses and consumer households. Add that to a lack of sufficient stimulus (government spending) and gridlock in Congress, and you have a jobless recovery with high levels of unemployment, underemployment, and poverty.
Problem is that we have done exactly the OPPOSITE; we cut taxes and kept taxes low consistently even though those tax cuts did NOTHING to stimulate the economy after the dot-com crash, and we kept taxes low but STOPPED spending money when the recession hit. You said it yourself that you increase spending during a recession; that's what the stimulus was all about. The problem was that it (like the New Deal) wasn't sufficient to boost the economy; we need a stimulus plan that will make the New Deal blush in comparison. And secondly, even if our economy grows at a tremendous pace (4% a year, roughly), we still wouldn't be able to pay off the national debt because we have a structural deficit caused by the costly Bush tax cuts and growing entitlement expenditures. And unfortunately, thanks to the rising austerity craze that has swept the world, we need to deal with that deficit NOW, or risk losing our credit rating and our economic prowess, or what's left of it.
Actually, the Bush tax cuts did not stimulate the economy after the dot-com bubble; growth and private-sector employment were still relatively weak even after the recession officially ended. Tax cuts aren't the best sort of stimulus, partially because some of them tend to be saved but also because tax rates are too low, even under President Clinton. A tax cut from perhaps 70% to 50% would have a larger stimulative effect than a cut from 39.6% to 35%. In addition, most of those tax cuts were aimed at high-income Americans and was thus a supply-side tax cut, which has a far less effect on aggregate demand than a demand-side (middle-class, consumer-focused) tax cut. And the "recovery" from the dot-com bubble was mainly buoyed by the housing bubble, which popped in 2007 and unmasked the weak economy.
Well, hypothetically we could do both stimulus and austerity at the same time to grow the economy and get out of the recession. The simplest way to do that is to simply let the fiscal cliff happen, achieving medium-term deficit reduction and buying us time to reform the tax code and our entitlement programs; and you can offset the negative effects via a short-term stimulus plan, via higher spending on things like unemployment benefits and infrastructure programs. You could enact small demand-side tax cuts to keep some money in consumers' pockets, but chances are most of it would be used to reduce household debt.
Well, the Congressional Budget Office released a report stating that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for the wealthiest 2% of Americans would reduce GDP by only 0.25%, a relatively small price to pay for longer-term deficit reduction. And technically, the wealthy are not job creators; consumers in the middle and lower classes are. Remember that our economy is 70% consumption, and that the most efficient way to boost economic growth is to target the engine of economic growth, aka the consumer. I am totally in favor of cutting out unnecessary spending, but we also need to boost revenues in order to reduce our structural deficit.
That would reduce the deficit in the short-term, but remember that any cut in government spending has a downward effect on aggregate demand. And since government spending is a more direct part of GDP, spending cuts thus tend to have a larger effect on the economy than tax hikes.
Let us hope that the two sides can COMPROMISE and work together. But I really doubt that they will put down the hostility and actually DO something.
cat, they r holding out for those tax hikes on the rich. cost is 800billion a year and we tax payers pay for that.
I hope so to Cat... and Class'69... let me give you a crash course on rich people:
If you forcibly take their money... they will find a way to make it up... they are NOT going to make a Million dollars last year and be happy with 800,000 this year because they can "afford" the loss. They are going to move heaven and earth to make up what they lost. If you are correct.. (and I know you think you are) then Greed doesn't go away because of a "deal". Mark my words... You make the rich pay... they will make US pay more...
Why should our "representatives" do anything when doing nothing is working just fine and dandy? We keep reelecting them based on what they bring home to US so why should they worry about the rest of the country, the economy or the jobs in another state other than their own.
Best durn govt. money CAN buy!
Don't bother trying to talk sense to classof69, he won't understand it. And classof69, I picked a lot of fruit and veggies while going to school. They don't grow in grocery stores as a lot of you libs believe.
Hi, Cat-1200657...
I agree with you on your doubt...but the GOP majority in the House is on the line
...if they -GOP- refuse..they are gone in November 2014; if they agree to work with Obama...things get better, bama and DEM get credit...Republicans of House majority are gone too...that's why it's harder for the GOP to compromise. It's no win for GOP
Unfortunately the only compromise Obama and the Democrats are seeking is having the Republicans give them everything they want. Every press conference is just another line drawn in the sand. All Washington is doing is arguing over scraps at the table, appearances and not solutions. This isn't a serious attempt to get our fiscal house in order, but liberals act as if this is what is needed to end our massive trillion plus annual deficits.
No Democrat controlled Congress has balanced the federal budget in over 40 years. The Republicans controlled Congress when Clinton had a balanced budget for part of his term. No Republican president has signed a balanced budget in over 50 years. So all this posturing about which side is right or can solve our fiscal nightmare is a joke. Neither side has a track record to point too, and neither side is even remotely serious now.
Obama will never put forth or sign anything into law that puts this country on a path to a balanced budget. Obama will leave office with a national debt that exceeds 20 trillion even if he gets this paltry tax increase on the top earners. The legacy history will record for Obama is that he will have added more to our national debt in 8 years then all previous presidents combined. It is time to demand real solutions, and stop buying into appearances.
The Democrats perfected getting elected by appealing to the "what's in it for me?" part of each of us. Bush and some Republicans successfully copied the model. The media has been complicit by running "analysis" based on who promises the most to each interest group. All of which brings out the greed in each of our sin natures. And no current politician believes he/she can be elected by appealing to "what will you contribute/sacrifice to save our country?"
So the can will be kicked down the road with a "compromise" that in reality achieves nothing, but the media and politicians applaud. When will the road run out? I'm sure it will run out before my teenagers become middle age. I am truly sorry for what preceding generations have done to them to satisfy selfishness, greed, and personal agendas.
Letting the fiscal cliff happen would be the 1st step in getting people to realize the enormity of the problem. If you look, the expiring Bush tax cuts were carefully crafted to give the large breaks (percentage-wise) to the lower and middle income folks. If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, there will be a significant number of the 47% suddenly eligible to pay income tax. The marriage penalty for dual income families returns with a vengeance, and so does the AMT for the upper middle class. Short sales on houses that are underwater are now huge taxable events.
The expiring Social Security tax reduction is worth 2% in take home pay to those making less than $100K, and less to those making more.
Even the expiration of all these tax breaks, and the resulting real lowering of living standards for middle and low income families will not eliminate the current deficit, much less pay down the debt. That's how out of control federal government spending is.
My solution: a flat income tax (eliminate FICA taxes, which are regressive) of 15% with a $30K standard deduction for all. No other deductions whatsoever. Income taxes are individual, marital and dependent status doesn't matter. You have income of any kind (investment, wages, pension, interest, capital gains) - anything over $30K (indexed for inflation) is taxed at 15%. Corporations pay too - 15% of gross, not net. After all, individuals pay on the gross, corporations should too. Federal spending is restricted to 90% of income until the debt is paid off. Then maybe the tax rate can be reduced to my ideal 10% at the federal level.
Likely results of my plan - low income (below 50K) should be close to neutral. But prices of goods will go up as corporations have to start paying. That is the real cut in standard of living to bring spending in line with income. In the middle class, it's hard to predict - too many deductions that apply to specific groups, like the mortgage, child, and head-of-household change the effective tax rate dramatically within this group. Above $150K, tax shelters go away since all income is taxed equally. There will be no distortions on investments by tax policy. The IRS now has a much simpler job. Just show the person had the income. No deductions or tax shelter to challenge. The lack of specific deductions also eliminates the government picking winners and losers. Which is why my plan will never pass.
An example of how tax policy screws up behavior is charitable giving. If I pick up a homeless person, feed them, clothe them, and shelter them, there is no tax deduction because that person is not a legal charity. But if I give money to do the same deeds through my church or other non-profit, the government doesn't take 28% of the income used in that donation. But which was the more effective serving of my fellow man?
my thoughts, your choices
THE RETARDICANS ARE TOO STUPID to do anything right it wasn't the repubs who balanced @!$%#. Tax cuts for the wealthy do not work. We need to have a 65% income tax on top earners. Taxes on dividends and investments need to be same as income tax
Tiffany: Only someone who has no idea how an economy works would say something so foolish as a 65% tax rate. BTW, France is seriously considering a 75% tax rate on the wealthy and you know what MANY of the wealthy are currently doing in France? Moving. They are moving to Belgium, Switzerland, and Britain. The people in France who actually are PAYING taxes are moving. What will be left? Those that DON'T pay taxes. Let's see how long that lasts.
So only someone with no idea how a global economy works would think a 65% tax would work is kidding themselves. A 65% rate on the wealthy would do one thing for the individuals AND their money - they would leave. Many other countries out there that would LOVE to have these ambitious and successful entrepreneurs in their country. So a tax like that would guarantee one thing - a U.S. economic collapse.
It will take compromise on both sides. Its too bad the American people have not really studied the issue. Why is it OK now to raise taxes on the people making over $250K when Obama ssaid four years ago rasing taxes in a recession is "absolutely the wrong thing to do". I think he is just playing to his base. Everyone should know that raising rates on this income bracket will only generate $800 billion over 10 years. What we need is a deal involving tax law reform such as eliminating mortgage interest reductions on 2nd homes and capping mortgage interest deductions for your primary home. Just two ideas. I am hoping Obama will meet half way and take a deal that raises revenue but I expect to see commitments on spending cuts.
I anticipate plenty of spending cuts, maybe not in the same categories as the GOP, but that will help us on the road to recovery. Those of us living on fixed incomes are barely surviving without public assistance. No pension, investments wiped out by stock market crash, lost all equity in house because of housing crash (can't sell it anyway), the list of challenges is endless. I avoid the grocery store because the prices of food are increasing at a mind boggling rate and it causes me tremendous anxiety. And I have it GOOD compared to many because I worked for 35+ years and paid into Social Security.
I'm counting on these leaders to work to the benefit of the American people. Anything less in unacceptable. Politics and egos need to be put aside as they divide us.
United we stand.....you DO have it good. At least your getting the social security! Our generation, the one behind yours probably will never see it. At least the way your generation keeps borrowing from it. Ok its really stealing it. I am so sick and tired of people crying about a fixed income. You have it good Pal. In your day....you didnt have to worry about finding a job. Or the cost of inflation the way it has in the past 15 yrs. I for one hope Obama really keeps his word and finally gets rid of the Bush tax breaks for Corps and the wealthy. As for all the other cuts..well that what the righties want to cut em. Put more folks out of work. We will always pay for the folks that dont work anyway.
I am also on fix income and have lost some small investments by greedy/inmoral people. We have no guidance in this country. The leadership out of Washington has been weak and still is. The Good book needs to be put back on the shelves as a guide to the ways of men/women. Without it we will stay in this spiral until we destroy ourselves.
Who do we really think we are? People who have let their lust for money/things be lead by the carrot, call middle class or American dream, that is dangle in front of them by leaders whose leadership is guided by their own greed for power and the life style of Kings. We are only peasants in the eyes of Kings.
Jon, I am also on a fixed income. My spending power goes down constantly. SS would be in great shape if LBJ had not put the funds into the general fund so the Feds could spend it. The SS crisis was brought on by the Dems.
The Republicans have been in the front seat for 12 years, time to get in the back seat and let our President drive.
grandpa our president is driving. hes heading for a brick wall and can't find the brakes the two parties will not come together to throw out the anchor and blame the other as usual and all he can do is try an deflect by blaming the wealthy. the gov is the ones who put the loop holes in to protect their monies and thats for both parties to take advantage of not for us mere peons
Once again, the biggest tone of bluster comes from Americans blaming OTHER Americans for the so-called Fiscal Cliff invented purely by the Republicans to get another round of tax cuts for the highest income earners. Who's fooling whom here?
That Fiscal Cliff is nothing more than a way for the rich to avoid paying their bills, budgeting a year in advance for their next salary increase in the billions and their next annual bonus. What a load of BS the GOP is handing to the dumbnuts in this country.
If you fall for this one, you deserve the hacking away of your Middle Class incomes. First of all, if you can't learn to live on a 6-figure income, whose fault is that if not your own? If you can't make it on 6-figures, you won't make it on 7, 8, 9, 10 or limitless salary increases into the gazillons either.
Let's stop the BS here. The lowest Middle Class incomes were stagnated to create the highest incomes in the world for CEOs. All while they looted their own corporations and plan 12 months in advance of their annual budgets for their salary increases.
If the GOP is so GD worried about this so-called GOP-created Fiscal Cliff...we may not be able to spend what we don't have but we can spend what we do have...like that $33 trillion in offshore tax free havens that owe a few trillion in taxes over the lasts dozen years.
Get real..if the GOP was so damned concerned about a Fiscal Cliff, they'd go after all those trillions in untaxed moolah their rich bois are hiding in these offshore accounts. Start with that. Then, when they are done, they can start working on ending all those loopholes and tax cuts they hand out to people who use them to grow their wealth and bankrupt the rest of the country.
Road to recovery, now that is truly a joke of a statement. Focus group tested no doubt. We are spending 1.2 trillion more then we take in, and there is no road to recovery for those in denial. Washington is arguing over scraps, the Bush tax cuts on the top earners amounts to 80 -100 billion a year. So where do we get the other 1.1 trillion needed just to break even? The road to recovery if it existed would not only mean eliminating our annual trillion plus deficit, but paying down our massive 16 trillion in national debt. Road to recovery. We need a road back from denial for everyone, and then maybe people would stop supporting appearances and start demanding solutions.
Let us not forget history, which obviously teaches us nothing. No Democrat controlled Congress has balanced the federal budget in over 40 years. It was a Republican controlled Congress that worked with Clinton to balance the budget for part of his term. No Republican president has signed a balanced budget in over 50 years. All this spewing about which party caused what or can solve anything is a load of crap. This country is being spent into oblivion, and neither party has a solution on the table. Until people demand solutions, all you will get is appearances. It takes a fool to believe that spending cuts amounting to 4 trillion over 10 years is a solution.
ewent...Brilliant...I could have not put into words so clearly the facts and truth you have done. I prise myself at digging into the real up front to the face facts and I see you do as well. Most people on this newsvine speak from their hearts, even I do the same, but the reality and hard nose " You can't get around the Truth " is very evident in your assessment. One commentor stated that there will be a serious backlash from the wealthy as it is perceaved they pay for job creation and they control the investment capitol and they control growth and they make the laws of the land to benefit them and the unsureal world THEY live in, and if that was the case they would have controlled the banks and their CEO's and the failure of the free market run from under them by the same wealthy people they have supported. You can not tax them enough in a short period of time to put a dent in a deflict which they feel is someone else fault and they had no doing's in creating it. The wealthy have their own created blindness to what a clearly thinking individual can see precisely. What Obama and the treasury officials ( which to me, these treasury officials are just to blame ) is go after these offshore accounts like they do with investments and assest from Iran, Iraq, Panama and other regime officials who illegally horde taxable income made in these America's. Remember, we have already created a class designation society by labling people as " Poor ", Working Poor, Middle Class and the Rich " and to eradicate the poor you must open up specific markets to them so they can get instantly rich like the wealthy do on a daily basis, not promise someone they can enjoy the fruits twenty years later as those fruit of wealth would be spoiled and rotten by financial definition. And the working Poor can only be eliminated when you increase those salaries to a higher level and the tax would also increase and therefore increased revenue to the treasury but you can't keep making something that cost a penny to build and price it at one thousand dollars to purchase or no one wins and those people who control class acceptance in this society know this and refuse to ammend the process.
Living above one's own mean is surely a path to disaster and as you stated in your comment that the average person should be well off living on a six figure income but our society has put in place a step system to get to those lofty salary level by means of education and achievement designation and minority and majority gender classification and there will alway be those who may never get to the acceptance of the few to make it better for the most ( laws of Greed )
So let's stop BS ing ourselves when we know exactly what the real problem is and identify the problem creators and eliminate those creators and correct the problem and create the solution and demand the change be immediate ( Controlled Social Revolution ) ( Not the revolution that Donald Trump wants ) and if the wealthy can accept that everyone deserves to have what they already have and stop thinking that all poor people are stupid, lazy and no good for nothing, cause it is THE POOR PEOPLE WHO SPEND THE MONEY THAT THE RICH PRINT ON THE THINGS BUILT AND MADE IN THIS COUNTRY THAT MAKE THE RICH< RICHER. If you have all the money and 98% of the population just has some of it, Then we brilliant people need to think and do the math.
Quick follow up to my PAL, Jon--
I don't want you to take away the wrong impression. My generation (Boomers) isn't stealing a dime from anyone.
While SS was expected to just be a safety net, employers across the country put the skids to any type of pension programs and we were encouraged to invest in 401K's and IRA's. The employer's contribution reducing dramatically over the years. We did that, believe me. We saved and invested carefully so that the safety net would be there for those LESS FORTUNATE.
Then I became one of those "less fortunate", and have been disabled since 2006. It was a bad time to be paying COBRA insurance rates and to have exorbitant medical expenses each year as the stock market crashed, etc. I had two kids in college and a mortgage.
Fortunately, the Affordable Care Act is working WELL for me. My Rx costs have been reduced significantly and that will get better every year. Three years ago, a normal month was $700 in Rx's. This year, most months were under $500. That puts money BACK into the economy. My medical expenses over all are about 18% of my gross income, vs the 27% they were previously. If everything stayed at 2006 prices, I'd be making out pretty good, hey?
My Pal, don't believe everything you read or hear without verifying it. It's sad, but many sources of "truth" are anything but. People are being manipulated, it's clear to see.
ewent: Do you think a grand bargain pushed by President Obama as a hyped up hysterical crisis is a selling out of the middle class? They will probably hem and haw until the distraction of the Holiday Season, and then rush in for a deal that delivers the safety net to McConnell and 1%ers. What bcomes of the Democratic Party then? Split like 1968, people leaving to join GOP or Socialist Party? Will Democrats win another national election? Will there be austerity riots around the country?
If no hyped hysterical Grand Bargain, new Congress will have more leverage to prevent major damage to social safety net. Economist James Galbraith, says there is no danger in a Debt Crisis.
He says , like you that it is manufactured .
I am waiting for the American Spring to start. I hope all you Obama voters get your butts kicked when it happens.
Hate much?
Who the freak are YOU Hawkeye??! Have you ever seen a gunshot wound? Have you ever seen really, really hungry people? You stupid A$$$! If inequity continue to slide away from the middle class to the very richest (which it has done since Reagan), there eventually will be civil war. It probably will not be in my lifetime, but maybe in my kids. You are a damnable idiot!
What in the world is fair about the present system of taxation? Is it moderately progressive? I think it has been moving away from this for quite awhile. Sorry for being so angry... People like you don't know but what guys like Limbaugh tell you. Most Americans don't want handouts. Most Americans are decent people that all they want is a level playing field and fair justice.
Remember.. if you don't like President Obama, you can always follow Romney's immigration plan, self deport.
Don't even get your feathers raised on Haweyes stupid statement everyone unless you are a racist extremist war hawking dumbazz like he is and born with limited intelligence solely to be used and listened to by the stupid and insane people of our society. Hawkeye, just climb under a rock and die!
Obama says we all must compromise as long as he gets his taxes on the rich and thats compromise?More money to Syria,Libya,Egypt and on and on!Stop spending money elsewhere, the people whose money the government is spending NEED IT!Lets stop postponing the inevitable..lets go off the cliff and finally fix this trainwreck!
tax weary, helping other countries is what made this country great. You do do heads of the teaparty need to go to england or somewhere , we the people spoke on election day, get over it and help out.
Obama offered $6 in cuts for each $1 in revenue increases. Yes that's compromise. You people are fools. You supported a guy wanting to cut revenue 5 trillion, increase military spending 200 billion a year none of our military leaders were asking for and starting a new space program and accuse democrats of being big spenders. Bush cuts revenue 400 billion, started a new 200 billion a year drug plan and started 2 wars all unfunded. Maybe democrats are tired of funding your spending sprees.
69 why would you say go to england? they have what dems are trying to get here as in socialized hc and look how well its working for them so it should be you who moves to england instead of trying to change america to a failing system
okie....It IS time to blame the wealthy and states like yours that get back more than you pay for the $1 you pay in federal taxes. Sorry, the rest of the states have had it trying to pay our states' bills and your states too. Red states all gloat how their conservatism has kept their taxes low. That's a crock of BS because when you review which states are getting nearly double their ROI for the $1 in federal taxes they pay, 90% of them are red states. Sure, your state taxes are low. Ours would be too if we relied on federal tax revenues for tax subsidies for your biggest industries while your politicians sabotage our industries and keep us paying that $1 and getting a lousy 61 cent return on investment.
When Eisenhower was president, the highest incomes were paying 91% of their federal taxes. Now? As your Rip Van Romo stated, they bitch because they have to pay a lousy 16%. The Middle Class has become nothing more than a safety net for conservative states who live off federal revenues for the needs of their states that should first come from their state, not the federal taxes, the way our states demand.
There is no mandate that a point and delegate CEO must must must become a billionaire. These jerks haved looted their own companies and then turn around and beg bailouts? Beg tax cuts up the gazork? Beg tax subsidies in the billions? All because they dump 80% of their incoming revenues into their salaries first and then when they don' t have enough to pay their bills, they run to their favorite Middle Class safety net? BS to that. Pay your fair share of your taxes. The highest income earners are not the elite class of the USA.
taxweary...how tax weary are the rich when they are paying only 16% of their incomes, get tons of tax subsidies in the billions for their corporations and then spend, spend, spend on $7,000 shower curtains and live larger than God? What wearies these jerks the most is their inability to find a way to become the first totally tax free elite class of Americans.
The joke is they like the world to believe they actually earned all that wealth by themselves. Anyone who has EVER worked with executives knows how far in advance a CEOs salary increase is loaded into every budget.
If you can't make it on 6-figures, boo hoo. Maybe, living large has gone to too many Americans heads...Affluence isn't an entitlement.
50% of Americans pay no federal taxes. One are singling out a very few who make million with capital gains... CEOs mostly make INCOME and pay the highest rates. Can you share for me what shared sacrifice means for all americans not just the top 2%? I´d love to hear your thoughts. FYI I support the Clinton tax rates!!!!
But isn't that the point of why the law was signed? So we could go over the cliff and get the automatic spending cuts and tax increases while the sheeple slept and dreamed of making history? Wonder what history will really think about this period of America
Bob - CEO's making multimillion dollar bonuses paying a few thousand more in taxes compared to people who make so little that they do not have to pay taxes??? Where is the fairness?? Are you serious?
I have a hunch that the poor folks who work two or three jobs with no benefits would be more than happy to start making enough to be able to pay income tax. The CEO's will never miss it (perehaps one less condo in Aspen). I suspect the "little people" have already made more than their share of sacrifice.
Patriot Tom - I was commenting back to ewent who was discussing CEO who pay 16% federal income tax. Sorry I didnt put her name in the front, my mistake... I wasn´t defending tax rates just pointing out she was wrong about CEO´s tax rate. Here´s what I´m for.
*Clinton tax rates for all phased in 1% a year until fully implamented. 10% bracket at 1/2% until complete.
*Cap gain and dividend rates back to 20%
*Retirement age for SS now 69 years (never intended to be a retirement program)
*Freeze current reciptants of SS for three years then up with inflation (they broke the promise they made to themselves by not assuring the sucess of the program. They broke it and they should bare some of the scarifice.)
*NO MORE CARRIED INTEREST!!!!!!!!!!!
*Means test SS. If your income is over $150k congratulations but sorry...This number increases with inflation
*Mortgage deduction is out. Interest rates are so low that it in itself is a tax cut.
There, problem solved.... Everyone participates and everyone shares in the sacrifice. Its a shared responsibilty.
Lets see what Obamas shared sacrifice looks like....
Let it go off the cliff. It's only a TAX increase of $68 a week for the
average person.
Oh is that all?! Doesn't sound like much to most people, but to me it's huge! I haven't had a raise in 5 years, but still have to pay for insurance, gas, food, clothing etc.. I can't afford it, period!!!
It isn't the Middle Class who would hurt if the Republicans won't stop obstructing this president with their demand for another tax cut for the wealthy...which is really what this Fiscal Cliff BS is all about. It would be the highest income earners who have not paid their fair share of their taxes since Reagan was president.
What makes a billionaire suddenly become so elite that he begins to believe that by earning those billions he shouldn't have to pay taxes? It comes down to one thing...Are his billions earned honestly or by destroying the US economy. This is a country that has always been predicated upon "the greater good for the greater good." Billionaires don't believe they are part of a democracy...They've become nothing more than a class of Plundering Plutocrats who wipe out their own corporations demanding the highest CEO salaries in the world and then when their bills come due they expect the Middle Class to recoup their losses.
Dip into those billions in salary first before they dare and ask for help. That's common sense.
Dear ewent.... name one CEO who makes a billion per year..... there are none. All your comments are really interesting in light of the 50% who pay no federal income taxes. Please share with me what shared sacrifice for the greater good means to you? Should 50% pay nothing in fed taxes. If you answer is they should pay nothing, then offer some things in which those 50% can do you satisfy your requirements for contribution to the greater good... I am for higher rates for everyone, Clintons rates, and I´m for everyone paying something. In fact I´m against payroll deduction. My belief is that every American be responisible for send the govt their owned taxes at the end of every quarter like I´ve done. This way they would feel a part of ¨the collective us.
Unfortunately voters have only themselves to blame.
We elect people based on ideology, and then we wonder whey they can't govern ?
If we elected competent people based on their ability to govern, we wouldnt have this problem. Unfortunately that does not make for good sound bites, and it doesnt pass the litmus test of being true with the ideology.
So now we have people who wont compromise because of their ideology, and we wonder why a deal cant get done ? It makes no sense.
This country's standard of living has been in decline because we elect people who promise us something for nothing. We want all the benefits of big government, but we dont want to pay the price in taxes.
As a result, the country spends $1.30 for every $1.00 it takes in. This is a prescription for disaster that the voters refuse to change. People in Washington either refuse to cut spending or refuse to increase taxes. Even when they say they have done smoething to fix it, it is really just a smoke screen, and the problem just get worse.
It doesnt matter whether they are GOP or Dems. The GOP wont cut defense, despite the fact we spend more on defense than all other nations combined. The Dems wont cut entitlements despite waste and overspending in that area. The Dems of course want to raise taxes on the wealthy, the problem is there arent enough wealthy to balance the budget, even if we taxed them at a rate of 100%. So the numbers never add up.
People get the government they deserve.
Bill....."We want all the benefits of big government, but we dont want to pay the price in taxes" I don't think so. What benefits of big government are you talking about??? Too many dollars going to welfare and pet projects to benefit a few select congressmen and senators. Going over th fiscal cliff may just right this ship.
Ordinarily BK I would agree with you, especially in 2004, when we put a already proven disaster back into office. But in this case, all you had for choices were which path to failure to pick from. One has proven he can't deliver and the other couldn't even run his campaign, much formulate policies that were consistent and reasonable. And now he's crying "foul", like a little kid who lost a softball game. Hardly presidential behavior. For the record, from '72 to 2000 I voted Republican.
tbrownjt they where not the only two candidates to choose from. i just cant understand why everyone is in lock step for the democratic and republican candidates. why do you all keep choosing the same back and forth failed polices from these two parties. myself i voted for Gary Johnson, i wish more had been smart enough to have done the same. maybe then we would see something getting done for the actual better.
You speak common sense so my guess is your comment will be ignored, it's really sad.
Bill k hey lay off the negative, your math doesn't add up. Like many people in a bubble, learn the facts first of all, we are not in decline, your morals may not be what everyone believes. That why they call it freedom. What a jerk.
I'm with ya on the libertarian thing except in one major thing. Their foreign policy is bread from pure ignorance. There are evil people in this world who want us dead just because of who we are. They are not going to change their minds even if we close every military base in every other country in the world. If they (libertarians) would get real on this issue, they would have my vote. Until then, they will not be taken seriously by the masses so when the other choices are so critical not many will waste their vote on a libertarian candidate.
The problem is, Eric, is that most people who vote are too lazy to sit down and do their research on the candidates that are placed in front of them. They believe what the media tells them whether it is the truth or not. I was another person that voted for Johnson but people need to understand that the two party system is a recipe for disaster. I guess our country has to learn the hard way before anything gets done. I honestly think it is too late to avoid the cliff because no one except wants to make the hard choices to get our fiscal house in order. The taxes must go up and spending must come down and both sides need make sure that happens.
It isnt just the President that matters. We have 500 people in Congress who are the ones that pass the laws. The President yes sets the tone and agenda, but its pretty obvious he doesnt always get his way. None of them do.
We nominate the people, and then we elect them.
We say we want a compromise, but how many of us are really willing to compromise on OUR government benefits ?
For those of you who say you dont want government subsidies, how many are getting a mortgage interest deduction, how many are getting untaxed health care from their job, most people in this country are getting government benefits of some kind or another, and if YOUR benefits were cut you would pitch a fit.
Every government expenditure has some one benefitting from it. Whether it is defense spending and those associated jobs, or mortage interest, or welfare. Some one is benefitting, and will not like THEIR benefit to get cut, cut someone else's because mine Im entitled to.
As for whether we are in decline, our standard of living has been in decline for at least 10 years and probably more. That is why the middle class is under pressure.
We wouldn't be spending $1.30 for every dollar we pay in taxes if states like Alaska, Texas, Georgia and others were helping themselves to more than that dollar in federal tax revenues. We other states in the union can match what the top 2 feeders at the federal trough get in tax returns. The excuse for that used to be Big Oil in Alaska and Texas. Since offshore drilling and drilling in other states is compounding the profits for Big Oil in Alaska and Texas, neither of these 2 states should be getting all the ROI of federal tax subsidies.
The GOP is too cowardly to admit that the $33 trillion in offshore tax free havens is a lump sum that could help reduce the deficit. Why won't they touch that or put enough teeth into those who dumped their wealth into those accounts? Or is that too much like a mortal sin against the god Grover Norquist?
Actually, our country has been in decline since we enacted policies that have grossly redistributed wealth from the middle class to the top 1%. "Trickle down" has been very effective as "trickle UP".
Taxes are really a side issue. We need to move back to policies of administrations before Reagan, that helped us to have a strong middle class. We need good, effective regulation and enforcement.
Economics 101 teaches us that if you increase taxes, businesses invest in capital and expenses to avoid paying the taxes. When you lower taxes, businesses have an incentive to take their profits at the lower rates. That is precisely what has happened. The supply side economists were contrarians, and they have been proven wrong. Time to reverse this nonsense.
People do not want handouts, they want opportunities. Most of the famous 47% work multiple jobs and struggle to get by. They are not on welfare, they just make too little.
We are heading towards a huge crisis, with the concentration of wealth in this country the worst it has been since 1929. We need to move back to the middle.
Peace.
Meet the new boss same as the old boss, he didnt do nothing in his first 4, he isnt going to do nothing his next, but kill civil liberties and drive us over the cliff, you got what you asked for he got what he paid for, so hows the food stamps and obamaphone coming? wait til january when your taxed to death and he wants a vat and carbon tax on top of that, there wont be any jobs, we are in a recession, the ndaa he signed the ndrp, why does everybody skirt these treasonous bills? people are stupid lemmings thats why, bad things are coming no doubt, he isnt going to fix them or they already would have been, hes part of the problem, always blaming bush, but doing nothing himself, just wait and see.
Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress; but I repeat myself.
Mark Twain
sorry people but we are currently in a world of hurt. we need to do both raise over all taxes and drastically cut all govt spending across the board. our economy will never get better as long as our nation has the huge debt we hold. the dollar deflates by a large amount when a country is in debt like us. lower get rid of the debt, the dollar will get stronger, and our economy will get better. we also need to get rid of the federal reserve, why pay interest to a private bank to print our money? we will alway be in debt if we continue to allow this.
unfortunantly i dont see obama getting any of the above done (neither would have romney). the only candidates i saw that where willing to do what was needed, was Ron Paul and Gary Johnson.
What a shame. The Republican Party is imploding before our eyes. Even now, we can see that 2016 will be another loss for these neo-nuts.
Mary.....you should up your medication and open a history book. When was the last time we had a democratic president for more than two terms straight? Us republicans won't be pulled down to your level of name calling. You just create hate when you do.
Mary, it's not that simple. Remember, every one of the 435 members of the House was up for re-election in 2012, just like every 2 years, and they still held control of the House. That's all they need. They've got the money and can wait us out.
Chris....don't be so sensitive! And you are a scholar of what? "History does not repeat itself, but man does."
Mary,actually it's not a shame the imploding Rethuglican party, it is a good thing. We are tired of hearing,gloom and doom and the sky is falling day after day.
We're moving forward..give the man a chance oh yee of little faith. AmericanVeteran1 food stamps and emergency phones are small worries. The USA has bigger fish to fry...expand your visions - let's stop all the wars and work on preserving the earth.
The republicans will get the best of the deal. That you can be sure of. However, if you read between the lines, the real winners will be the politicians, and the real losers will be the people. Like I've said many times before, all the democrats are doing is giving the people a stay of execution, but before it's all over, they'll take us to the gallows and hang us themselves.
The tax plan Ryan wanted was to eliminate all taxes on the wealthy. Then he could stash 200 million instead of 100 million in his Caymans account. Not sure how that creates jobs.
"The president enters these conversations, though, having just won re-election after campaigning on the promise of increasing the tax burden for the wealthiest of Americans." I think it is adorable for MSN to carry the Presidents water. Indeed he ran and won on gift giving and was voted in by the takers not the makers. For that reason alone common sense would tell one to go the opposite direction. We are each and everyone paying A LOT more taxes now and into the foreseeable future. If grate leader gets his will the revenue he raises will fuel the government for 8 days. So either raise taxes on EVERYONE or DRASTICALLY reduce spending. PS unemployment numbers of 430,000 have a direct impact upon tax revenue.
Barney many numbers
We're hoping for a balanced approach, which is exactly what the President has been saying for months, if not years. Spending cuts are needed, no-one disagrees with that, AND we need revenue. The middle class can least afford tax increases and would throw us into another recession should that occur. We got screwed by the banks, the housing bubble and are stuck paying for years of war we didn't vote for. The wealthy have a huge advantage the way our tax code is written, and reform is important to this whole package.
It all has to happen TOGETHER--
Count on it!
You are right, but most people ignore the facts.
Go ahead Obama, I'm part of the two percent. Raise my taxes... Go ahead... That's what you want... Do it...
Now STFU and balance the budget..
"The wealthy have a huge advantage the way our tax code is written?"
Guess you must be a blind Obamavoter....
Paying 70% of the federal tax collected for the top ten percent is an advantage?
You sound like another cheap whiner,who wouldn't pay a dime to see Moses part the Red Sea.
Hey, let Obama put his money where his mouth is... I am one of the so called two percent. Raise my taxes. But balance the budget...
If the middle-class pays anymore taxes then we will qualify for foodstamps. We should not have to pay anymore to breathe air than the next person. Youwant us to pay more taxes then let's get a special license plate for how much money you pay and if you are in front of someone that pay's more then get out of their way.
Funny the ones that are saying raise my taxes don't know the difference between Personal and Business tax. One of the richest men in the world on made 100k in personal taxes and it was not Romney.
Federal income taxes are less than half the federal budget. 53% are payroll and other taxes mostly paid by the 99%. There are far more taxes paid in state, local, property, personal property, sales, gas, utility and others all paid mostly by the 99%. They can't get large chunks out of individuals making low money but multiply 250 million times all taxes paid and a lot more is raised on the 99% than the top 1%.
State tax is not federal tax. Payroll tax is a lie.. It is Social Security Tax.
The top two percent pay 30% of all federal and state tax. There is no measure of all the taxes you describe...
So, 99 people cumulatively pay more in tax than one person? Seems to make sense to me. Doesn't apply to the top ten percent though as these numbers would change dramatically.
Take one step back and consider this.... Look at all the sources of income of the government. Throw in lotteries, tax on liquor, cigarettes, cars, etc... How much money do they collect? And it's still not enough? How much money do they waste?
Barney: Obama ran on gift giving? What do you think Romney's 20% tax cut was? He did the same as Reagan once and Bush twice, he bought votes with our money.
While none will see I had to respond was busy attempting to make a living to pay taxes so missed the opportunity to share.
United we stand - If this was the plan the why did grate leader take over the Bush tax cuts stating that cutting taxes during a recession was not in the countries best interest? And the tax cuts are already in place reascending the Obama tax cuts for all makes sense if it makes sense for the few. What Republicans have offered is a tightening of deductions which would INCREASE revenue more than dropping the Obama tax cuts on the alleged wealthy. And the man and the party have done ZERO regarding cutting spending why would you think that he would change now that he has not got another election to run. I would say that deficit spending to the tune of 4 trillion is far from reduced spending. Especially when he PROMISED to cut the deficit in half in four years. So the Republicans are on track with two of your ideas but I bet grate leader is far from cutting spending. Why don't we touch base in say 2 years and see if ANY progress has been made. COUNT ON IT.
Voodkook it is impossible to follow such inane ramblings.
Larry in case you missed it grate leader won and so did not buy votes. And taxes were cut by Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush all resulting in increased revenue as well as economic growth.
Hey Boehner
Next time you meet with the president make sure you have a nice long hand shake and make sure the media takes notice of his tiny little girl hands. And tell him no matter what happens just don't cry.
Think they mean post-election comedy.
Oh yea, BCBS just sent another fee increase, said it was due to all the people that were using health care. I told them I thought Obamacare was suppose to fix that and they couldn't stop laughing.
Then I see this:
Proposed DoD Budget Hits Military Retirees and Families
Retirees Asked to Cough Up $13 Billion Over Five Years
The White House's proposed defense budget will result in significant fee hikes for retirees of all ages and their family members.
The proposed TRICARE changes include the following:
-- TRICARE Prime annual enrollment fees for retired families would rise to as high as $538 starting October 1, 2012, and continue may rise at anytime in 2013. In addition the premium will increase over the next five years and beyond. These fees could be based on military retired pay level.
-- A new TRICARE Standard annual enrollment fee of $70 for individual working-age retirees (under age 65) and $140 for family coverage in FY2013 with further increases over the next five years. In addition the plan includes a slightly increased deductible starting Oct 1, with the deductible rising to $580 within 5 years. These flat fees apply to TRICARE Standard enrolled retirees under 65.
-- New TRICARE For Life (TFL) enrollment fee of up to $135 per person starting this Oct. 1. This fee also would be graduated based on retired pay amount, and would rise to as much as $475 per year within 5 years. This new enrollment fee is for all retirees over 65.
-- TRICARE Pharmacy copays for retail and mail-order brand-name medications would more than double (from $12 to $26) starting Oct 1 and would feature further increases over the next5 years.
Did I vote for the wrong person again?
Yes...
We are sitting on 400 billion barrels of shale oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. We could solve our problems he just doesn t care because he is a progressive (translate that communist it is the new word for it) and wants government control of everything. We are done as a nation with these idiots as our leaders.
Captain Kirk: Better have Scotty beam you up. You're getting space happy. We're producing record amounts of gas since Obamas been president and shale oil extraction is a dream for the future. They have no idea how to extract it yet.
Larry, where is all that gas going. How much gas do we export?
The United States is now on pace to produce more oil than SAUDI ARABIA. How much more do we need to produce to make you happy?
P.S. The US CONSUMER is not benefiting from this one bit, its the oil corporations that are benefiting from it. Can we also stop the BILLIONS given to oil corporations as a subsidy
ItsAboutTime:
That is only theory and it wouldn't happen theoretically until 2030. That's a long time away and a lot can happen in 17 years.
Actually, it was by 2020. Why Romney tried to use it in his campaign. It was already in the works, he just wanted to take credit for it.
http://www.ibtimes.com/us-produce-more-oil-saudi-arabia-2020-iea-871484
A lot can change in 8 years though. Thanks for the post.
Its not the leaders i don't trust, they are all good men/women its the Taliban terrorist tea partiers I fear because there goal is to destroy the government and make it go bankrupt to get more and more things cut, but of course not defense, they need defense spending high in order to crash the government and they know it, they are just using the deficit as an excuse to cut entitlements and end them all, they care much more about huge tax cuts for the top than they do the deficit, always have, always will-and they don't care if it doesn't work and people suffer, the environment suffers, they are just selfish greedy people on a mission to destroy the federal government and make everyone on their own
You are a very poorly informed person.
Unfortunately another example of a crackhead whose vote counts every bit as much as yours our mine..
LOL, afraid the T-Party will bankrupt America. It is going to be hard catching the democrats.
For you so distressed Obama won there's always Canada. Have a nice trip.
Did you say you and obama are headed to canada?
Bush took office with a 200 billion a year surplus and turned it into a 450 billion deficit his first year. His last year Oct. 2008 through Oct. 2009 there was a projected deficit of 1.2 trillion dollars. Bush cut revenue 400 billion, implemented a 200 billion a year drug plan and started 2 wars we have to pay for. You may be tired of paying for social programs but we're tired of republican war mongering and wasting money. There are far more rich democrats than republicans. We're paying most of the taxes and you're spending all your effort to avoid paying any. Maybe when you stop spending we'll listen.
Larry where is the documentation to such inane facts?
You idiots just have lost again the elections and you keep bothering the people with your stupid behavior,...you are nothing but dreamers-losers, get down of that cloud!!!!!
Lost the elections, LOL. The president is nothing more than a hall monitor just like in third grade, popularity contest.
What does the House look like?
We are hoping senator Mitch McConnell and Speaker Boehner get the message, if not, we .....THE PEOPLE....can promise ALL EXTREMIST REPUBLICANS they will get the same treatment like Gov Romney.....Todd Akin...& Richard Mourdock....as a matter of fact not even their grand-children would enjoy reading their political biography................
TOP OF THE OBSTRUCTIONIST CLASS MITCH McCONNELL & SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER
You will have to get a lot more votes out of the graveyard for that to happen.
The House of Representatives needs to draw a line in Granite and tell President Obama to cross over it. The Election gave them a mandate to stand their ground.
The election gave them instructions on how to bend over and apply the vasoline!
The American people elected a Republican Congress to stand their ground
Mr. O'Bama said in 2008 under his plan no family making under 250,000 dollars will see any form of tax increase liar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The congressman who called O'Bama a liar was sooooooo correct.
Have you had a tax increase?
why yes I have. Explain to me how in 3 years without a pay raise or decline, keeping the same job, that I payed $2,000 more in taxes? I don't make anything near $250,000.
Tired: Delusional much? It's spelled paid and nothing Obama's done has raised any ones taxes until Obamacare is implemented. Do you pay your imaginary tax increase with imaginary dollars? P. S. If your checks smaller you're probably paying more for your insurance. That's nothing to do with Obama.
Seems that a Supreme Court Judge also called Obama a liar on Obamacare.
For starters go off the fiscal cliff. Go back to the old tax rates. . . Then introduce a 'new' double down tax rate on on the rich. Let them feel the pain the rest of us have been dealing with. Finally come back and institute adjustments that have hammered the middle class and give some relief that will do us all some good.
No you need to pay tax like the rest of us.
I've already done two hours of work this morning.
What have you done?
Do you work weekends?
Need to travel and be away from your family for three and four days at a time?
It's the people who bought houses they couldn't afford and didn't pay their mortgages who are every bit as responsible as the banks and the politicians who forced them to lower their lending standards.
You want rights, then take some responsibility..
Still waiting....(But expected as much... More blabber and hot air...)
But..But.. Everything is going up. Greedy people/businesses who actually make something understand this. Stupid people hoping people that make more than them get taxed more. Well, expect everything we buy (get free in someone peoples minds) to go up. Everything will be going up except wages and employment. Foward to a quadrillion with nothing to show for it. People on fixed incomes are in for a hard time. They will blame everyone else except the government. Since the government is NOT investing in infrastucture/America, all the new tax income is going down the drain just to pay interest.
Yes, we will pay for our voting. When GDP/ debit ratio gets to 125%, we are screwed.
Harry Reid and the Party of No are holding up all the legislation that is needed to restart the economy
Enough with the bo-hooing already, I mean wasn't it the repubs that brought up the ole' dreaded fisical-cliff when this Re-Elected President took office. Except when they we're in charge deficits didn't matter "Remember". Or how about raising the debt ceiling like "Every" other President has done since the onset of raising the ceiling "Remember". Well just in case you repubs have forgoten, some of us haven't. And now that the American people have resoundly spoken over this past election. Yes we will set our sights on these issues and they will be addressed, with a balanced approach. You all can fight like you have been doing. Obstructing everything and spewing doom and gloom hateful rhetoric. But after all is said and done. We the American people will be better off, the deficit will be tamed and more jobs will be created for the middle class and the wealthy will make their money as well. So calm down, take a chill-pill and let "Big Daddy" handle this. Because when you guys were running things. The only thing that you all ran was the economy off of the cliff. To bad, so sad...
Good luck with that... Big Daddy couldn't even handle being questioned about his policies without stuttering like Elmer Fudd. Go ahead, raise my taxes... Then STFU and balance the budget Obama.... Bet you can't do it...
He can and he will. With the obstuctionist repubs kicking and screaming like the little wimps that they are. "Eating their Peas"... Bet that
He can't and he won't. His class warfare is nothing but a ploy to divert attention from the fact that massive tax increases are necessary to support government spending..
You lefties are in denial.... 42 bil raised in taxes on the top 2% is only a drop in the bucket compared with the deficit spending. They will only talk about reductions in the budget somewhere down the road... Which will never happen when the time comes to pass.
Bush tripled our debt. He started with a 200 billion dollar surplus that Clinton left him and turned it into a 450 billion deficit his first year. His last budget that ran from Oct. 2008 through Oct. 2009 was projected to have a 1.2 trillion deficit. You bash Obama for not being able to balance the budget but never asked Bush too. I guess deficits only matter when democrats have the presidency.
No group can pay enough to pay the deficit that doesn't mean eveyone shouldn't pay their share. When someone like Romney owed 10.3% in 2010 on 21 million that's not his share. You can use all the arguments you want but 2 out of 3 Americans believe the rich should pay more. You're beating a dead horse.
LOL, Clinton was lucky he got out when he did. Bush inherited that crap from Y2K. Everyone knows it takes a couple of years for the cycle and in 2002 that is when the housing market started going up and people taking job cuts. The people that thought they were millionaires found out really quick that they didn't have enough money for a cup of coffee. So what was all this surplus that Clinton gave us?
Wiggle room is good if it is the right wing entertainment complex that is wiggling!
Yea Larry you say 2 out of 3 Amerians say they should pay more, well the 2 don't have a pot to piss in and third one has the money. So you are going to force me to pay more. I don't think so.
Yoiu're a complete fool. Bush turned the 200 billion surplus into a 450 deficit with 1 stroke, his tax cut. He added to it with his stimulus sending everyone a check, a 200 billion a year drug plan and 2 unfunded wars. No president in history has simply operated new wars and programs off the books. Had Clinton remained president there'd have been no wars, no drug plan, no tax cut and no deficit. You people are simply fools willing to fuk the country for a few thousand less in taxes. The rest of us can't be bought. You lost so suk it.
Larry, you are about as dumb as the day is long. I know clinton is yo hero but you need to get yo fax strat. clinton was the president when the attacke the WTC in 93. Bush would not have had to start a war if clinton had done his job, but hey he was playing smiles with monica. Take you tired comments and sell them to some of your idiot democrat brothers and sisters.