The fact is we need both spending cuts and increased revenue. We cannot continue to spend the way we do. But getting to this level of agreement between the two parties is just the beginning.

There needs to be a larger conversation that is about more than just dollars and cents. We need a fundamental re-think of how the government operates. It's slow, extremely wasteful, and incentivizes the wrong behavior.

That is what needs to be discussed, decided, and legislated. Unfortunately, I don't have much faith that Congress is up to the task.

Well, partisan rhetoric like Steve's aside, you guys are right. Boehner, Reid, Obama, all of them; are just like TV wrestlers. They do an excellent imitation of angered conflict and pain, but they are really acting in choreographed cooperation. Their objectives are exactly the same: to ensure that the American taxpayer continues to fund their ever-expanding Washington empires.

Going off the cliff ....is what Bama real wants...remember all 3 House are 1%ers...

starbuck49 you are confusing H.R. 6684, which passed over a week ago, with "Plan B." The latter was yet another attempt that Boehner made to compromise. The idea was to have two bills available to try to please the Senate Democrats. Plan B was the one that failed to pass because it went too far.

H.R. 6684, the one that passed, is a good bill that would would cancel the automatic defense and non-defense discretionary sequestration, or across-the-board spending cuts, scheduled to take effect on January 2, 2013, and would extend current tax rates to all taxpayers.

House Republicans urged Reid on Wednesday to take up the bill. His only reply was more meaningless attacks on the Republicans.

Try to keep your facts straight.

Let it go over the cliff, that is the only way America will even have a chance to fix this mess, We need more revenue and this is a way to get it anyone that thinks saving a few hundred Billion over ten years like these MORONS think is going to do anything is as STUPID as these politicians are, nothing says We can't raise taxes on the RICH after the fall off the cliff RIGHT. Any cuts should be made to our Congress pay and Pension as a start, say 50% for not doing their job! I bet majority of the American people would agree Congress needs a PAY CUT.

@brenda1964 Do you just repeat the same old stuff from Fox News and Rush?

Brenda, I don't follow either Fox News or Rush. Do you have a source for your accusation that my comments are plagiarized?

Actually Kannin, it is you who needs to keep the facts straight. It is not up to the Senate to come up with a budget, that is the Houses job in which they seem incompetent to do. Once they forward a budget to the Senate, the Senate vote on it and then if it passes it goes to the President to either veto or put into law. Just because the House says they sent a piece of legislation to the Senate does not mean they did their job. They need to actually do a bi-partisan piece of legislation if they want to Senate to take them seriously. The President who campaigned on the 250k or more incomes paying higher taxes and won will not accept anything from the House without that in the bill. So if the House sends 1000 bills to senate, nothing will happen unless they get serious as Beohner puts it and include that in the bill. Learn how the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches work.

brenda1964 You are very confused! This article has nothing at all to do with the House budget bill that was passed in the House way back in March.

That plan caps non-defense discretionary spending at $1.028 trillion, $19 billion below the levels set by the Budget Control Act of last August. It will cancel automatic spending cuts put in place in that bill, known as sequestration, that would include large cuts in both defense and domestic spending.

Guess you didn't read the article, it is about the fiscal cliff that we are about to go over due to the House Republicans and their inability to pass legislation concerning spending and revenue. Now if this isn't concerning the budget then I don't know what is. Also they need to increase the debt cealing to pay for what they have spent so far. So yes, this has every thing to do with the budget. Not just the budget passed way back in March, but the budget moving forward.

Kanningu is thinking the Senate will pass a bill that doesn't touch the top 1%. That is what the election was about. Obama won. Romney didn't really want the job anyway.

How about cutting spending??

Oh way too late since that boat has sailed!

7 Trillion later and we are screwed!!

Kannin

The House has already passed legislation to avert the entire fiscal cliff. Obama and the Democrat legislators have never abandoned their "My way or the Highway" approach, totally rejecting any compromise. The Democrats are the roadblock here, not the Republicans.

What part of that whole statement is rational discourse. The whole thing is false. Standard Fox news talking points.

President Obama will be sitting in a room with only Senate members as Bonehead hasn't called the House back till Sunday. I guess we know how important the fiscal cliff is to republicans and the millionaire, billionaire corporate world!

Really a shame the Empty Suit will be the blame of this......He won...he owns it...just like Benghazi.....But then again it's obvious that the well being of others isn't high on his list......

We will never pay off the debt no matter how high you raise taxes. We have been digging this hole since WWII and the New Deal. We never paid any of that off, we just relied on GDP and inflation tow dwarf it out. Now that we are in a global economy in which US GDP may not grow yearly and there will be even less high paying jobs, we cannot keep the Federal spending structure in place that we set up in the second half of the 20th century. That is one thing I do agree with the GOP on. I do not agree with their philosophy of open market corporate structure and loopholes. That only worked up to the 20th century America, not in a global economy.

In 1929 the wealthiest people in America could have paid off the debt, now they can not even keep the fed government running for a year never mind even touching the debt.

This whole debt bomb explosion could have been postponed by a few decades at best, but Bush dug us a whole going to war and Obama is digging us a hole with his academic exercises. Congress failed in their job to stop the executive branch from carrying out damaging agendas in both these cases, and now it is failing to pass a budget...just a long line in their string of failures. Both sides are to blame because of their lack of understanding of America's position in the world in the 21st century. We need a third, MODERATE PARTY badly that understands the 21st century.

Brenda - Funny with your name calling....But apparently you forget that the House is not 100% responsible. The House has passed budgets and the Senate did not do their part.

Obama has had a full year to get this thing negotiated and he, Reid, and Beohner all avoided it until the lame duck congress because none of them wanted to take responsibility for the tough choices needed. Obama would not even support his own debt commission.

Tax increases are NOT the answer because you can not tax enough to reduce anything substantial. Obama & Reid do NOT want serious cuts in spending because they will have to tell people "no" and make them discover that the govt is not Santa Claus.

Obama pledged almost as much as his tax increase proposal for hurricane relief. What does that tell you about his proposal? That it is just a dog and pony show to make liberals think he stuck it to the rich.

The bill is coming due....Time to pay the piper.....America needs to be told "no". For all the poeple who look to govt as their god, well, this is what you are putting your trust and faith in. Better start taking care of yourselves before its too late.

It's so pathetic that as we continue to see positive signs in the economy - improved jobs, housing, automotive numbers and strategic manufacturing investments in the US - our elected representatives spend more time primping for the pundits on cable than they do talking to each other so they can hammer out a deal that the overwhelming majority of Americans want. All the plans on the table that have bipartisan, business community, professional economist, and popular support look a lot like variations of the original Simpson-Bowles proposal. Yet, Clowngress continues to show their determination to posture for their reelection and support ideaologies (that lost in the last election) rather than bargain in good faith. And we all know that in 2014, we'll be bombarded with ads from these incompetents telling us that "they were fighting for us in the fiscal cliff negotiations". The only combat these pigs are engaged in is nosing each other out to get a better spot at the public trough. I say that if we go over, then we unelect every one of the incumbents; seriously - how could it get worse?

Let's see now - Everyone agrees that we need tax increases and spending cuts to reduce the Deficit.

If the President and Congress do NOTHING, we get significant spending cuts AND tax increases.

I wonder if they should do what they do quite well - NOTHING.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Perhaps it's a good time to stop 'kicking the can down the road' and spending our children's future?

Brenda,

Sorry you're all alone here!

Kannin, Brenda is right, Obama's been the one moving. Let me fix what you said up above:

The House Senate has already passed legislation to avert the entire fiscal cliff. Obama Boehner and the Democrat Republican legislators have never abandoned their "My way or the Highway" approach, totally rejecting any compromise. The Democrats Republicans are the roadblock here, not the Republicans Democrats.

Cut the Waaa Waaa talk and blame game- This is a CLEAR indication of our political system failing us and neither party is exempt! Neither party has participated well over the last 10 years when they had control of the legislative and executive branches. Neither party said, "You know, we need to control our spending and make sure that the system works for our children." Neither party said, "No thanks, it's not worth spending the extra money." They just kept kicking the can down the road (raise the spending limit- SURE!, spend more on more- GREAT! Create a national budget- WE CAN'T BE BOTHERED). NEITHER party is innocent. They each had their chances to lead and they failed miserably. If you've got a majority- you've got an opportunity to do something productive. They CHOSE not to.

I don't want to hear any of your namby pamby "they did it" BS anymore! Grow up and realize that your government is failing you- your representatives are taking advantage of you for their own gain, and we aren't holding them accountable for it. I can understand why- half of us are on the government aid teat now and growing, so why stop "free money" right? The only way to get back on track is to demand that our "representatives" stop having vacations, stay in DC and DO THEIR JOBS. I say lock them all in the Capital and don't let them out AT ALL until they figure things out. No more trips, no more fun and games, do your JOBS! Here's a thought- No national budget, Congress violates the terms of their employment and get fired! How about a 10% cut in all programs and departments- BUT let those departments decide where the fat is being cut? Clearly politicians can't do it, so create a suggestion box for each dept. and let the actual workers figure out where the worst waste is happening.

Lastly, I can't get over the politicians telling us that they are "saving money"- what a load! They go to a Mercedes dealer and don't get the 500 series, but a 400 series and proceed to tell us taxpayers that they "saved money". NO, you just spent $80,00-100,000 on a car- you didn't just save me $40,000 by not buying the 500 series, I've still got the bill for the rest. That's not savings, it's just spending less "more" money. Dopes, all of us!

Paws93

Brenda - Funny with your name calling....But apparently you forget that the House is not 100% responsible. The House has passed budgets and the Senate did not do their part.

Apparently you didn't read my response to this already. Read #1.16 for your answer. Not going to hash over things that where already covered while you where sleeping.

I don't think the American people will get a deal from the Congress. I'm an independent, not holding out much hope for a better year in this country. I think the nation is suffering from a poverty of imagination. a worse problem in the US today than taxes and government spending.

Every time I hear Republicans refer to the wealthiest Americans as "job creators", I wonder: who believes that? Who thinks that? It's preposterous! If the wealthy are job creators, I say "Prove it. Create a job. And I don't mean create a job in China!" These are the people who created the hedge fund and dreamed up the subprime mortgage, selling it to the government as guaranteed economic progress, the most risk averse segment in our energetic, constitutionally liberal society.

I don't expect job creators to turn stones into bread or to spin straw into gold. When I use the term job creators, I don't mean the wealthy, politically conservative business sector. Poverty of imagination has always been with us.

I don't believe for one minute that President Obama wants the ship of state to run aground and sink on the rocks of public debt. It's an idiotic assertion. So what's the answer? I think it's a safe bet the answer won't come from this Congress; they are too divided. I noticed when i went to the polls to vote for Obama that many offices would be filled by Republicans whose candidacy was uncontested. It's sad but true.

What a bunch of rhubarbs.

Kannin:

H.R. 6684, the one that passed, is a good bill that would would cancel the automatic defense and non-defense discretionary sequestration, or across-the-board spending cuts, scheduled to take effect on January 2, 2013, and would extend current tax rates to all taxpayers.

I thought the problem was spending? Now you want to ditch a major part of the spending cuts? Make up your mind!

BTW, that elimination of spending cuts and provision for NO tax increases is the reason this bill was a non-starter with the Senate and President. How does this bill solve ANY problem. Aren't YOU guys the ones complaining about kicking the can down the road?

JoeNY

This is a CLEAR indication of our political system failing us and neither party is exempt! Neither party has participated well over the last 10 years when they had control of the legislative and executive branches. Neither party said, "You know, we need to control our spending and make sure that the system works for our children." Neither party said, "No thanks, it's not worth spending the extra money." They just kept kicking the can down the road (raise the spending limit- SURE!, spend more on more- GREAT! Create a national budget- WE CAN'T BE BOTHERED). NEITHER party is innocent.

NO, actually Joe, BOTH parties SAY that, they just don't ACT on it.

The DEMOCRATS are the ONLY ones who have routinely attempted to fix these problems over the last 30 years. Republicans Tax CUT and spend, while Democrats Tax and spend. Which is more fiscally responsible?

Read and learn some history:

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

Obama says that we need to 'compromise', but then says "If you don't give me what I want, I will veto it".

'My way or the highway' is not most people's idea of 'compromise'.

The Republicans should stick to a very simple concept - "For every Dollar of tax increases, Obama must cut a Dollar of spending. And no more 'tax increases today for a 'promise' of spending cuts in 5 years. A Dollar for Dollar offset in each fiscal year.

Brenda,

You might also note, to counter Kannin and the rest of them, that the Senate did pass a clean bill extending all of the Bush tax cuts for those making under $250K last July. The House just has to take that up and pass it. It probably would pass with all Democrats and a handful of Republicans, unlike Kannin's poison pill House bill that eliminates ALL of the tax increases and ALL of the spending cuts.

Like ALWAYS, who has the more responsible bill? The Democrats.

Like ALWAYS, who has the bill with poison pills and gamesmanship? The Republicans.

OK Brenda 1964 You do know that the house DID pass a budget all 3 years and the senate is suppose to review and ammend it and send it back to the house for ratification. The LAZY ass demorat Senate has yet to do it. So to blame the house just show your ignorance. Quit telling others to get there $hit straight when you do NOT have your straight.

The House also passed a resolution for the fiscal cliff. Yet the demorats in the senate have yet to review it and ammend it then send it back to the house for ratifacation.

When you know how the process works then you can see where the HOLD up actually is. The demorats are holding it up and blaming the republicants.

Give me a break Roy.

Obama has moved to change to $400K and include SS cost of living concessions. Republicans couldn't even get their own caucus to approve increases only on $1M and above.

Who's compromising?

This article is saying Obama is calling everybody together to talk again today. Who's the leader here?

The original Sequester WAS 1 for 1 taxes and spending cuts. Everybody is scrambling to get rid of it!

Steve,

You had it right there in the last word of your post: REPUBLICANTS

Of course it's last minute--Obama has been busy, why, nothing should get in the way of all those trips to visit family in Hawaii and all that golf...

*Puhleez!*

And the entire congress (both Dems and Reps alike) don't lag too far behind either with their lackadaisical attitude! As long as they all get paid, everything can be done last minute and at greater expense to taxpayers.

Wish we could amend the Constitution simply to say that if the work of Congress doesn't get done they just won't get paid--the President included.

And no more raising the debt ceiling. When you raise the debt ceiling, you cannot fulfill basic obligations of government. The only time governments should even remotely consider raising the debt ceiling is in times of war.

You'd be amazed at how reasonable people become when their paychecks are on the line.

Amazing its all the GOPs fault. Hmmm Obama's plan to tax the rich doesn't cover his spending addiction so he has convinced you the GOP is to blame. Time to look at the simple math here...

Wake up everyone in DC is incompetent. And we are all to blame because we believe their BS. We will all pay for it... Every household needs to write a check for $160,000 to day to cover the debt. EVERY HOUSEHOLD! You got that spare change. Better yet did you get $160,000 benefit from the government?

It is already too late, we are going over the cliff by design. Its only a stage act to try and gain some popularity out of blaming each other... Neither party wants to be responsible for doing the right thing and cutting the deficit spending...too may votes at stake...

Finally - Obama should have called everyone together months ago on this - not with two days left...he is not a leader, he is a showman, a snake oil salesman, a community leader worried about his popularity. And in today's America I am ashamed to admit thats all it takes to sell the average voter to become the President.

It might have made you feel better if Obama had stayed at the whitehouse even though congress had all gone home but would have made no difference, it takes both sides to negotiate. Strange so many find a president returning to the state he was born in as somehow more exotic because it's Hawaii than if he went to Texas. Both Reagan and Bush took far more vacations. Bush even started making a few calls so he could claim his vacations were working vacations.

kessler,

Obama had a whopping 4 full days in Hawaii. Extravagant vacation at Christmas?

Get Real,

What spending "addiction"? What Obama policies exactly have caused spending to increase? The Stimulus is IT, and it was 50% tax cuts. So there is $400 Billion. EVERYTHING else has had a pay-for.

Amazing its all the GOPs fault. Hmmm Obama's plan to tax the rich doesn't cover his spending addiction so he has convinced you the GOP is to blame. Time to look at the simple math here...

Get real: Your names appropriate. Bush's last budget ran from Oct. 2008 until Oct. 2009 and had a deficit of 1.2 trillion which meant our debt at the end of his last budget hit 12.1 trillion. Had Obama merely run Bush's last budget the debt would still be 15.7 trillion. Bush cut revenue 400 billion, started 2 wars unfunded and a 100 billion drug plan that Obama still had to pay for. The only program Obama implemented was Obamcare was fully funded. The increase in food stamps and unemployment that you blame on Obama according to the CBO would have occurred under whoever took over from Bush due to the economic meltdown.

Obama campaigned on what he is trying to accomplish which is to raise taxes on the RICH and since the American people have spoken by reelecting him he is only doing what he has said he would do, and as a Democrat which voted for him I don't want a compromise and feel Obama needs to be firm, it's time that people pay their fare share, why should I have to pay more on a percentage basis than someone make a hundred times more than me, that a bunch of Cr_p.

Further, Get real,

YES, you DID get a benefit for the $160,000 you owe. Didn't you get the $600 check from Bush in 2003? Haven't you been paying reduced taxes since 2001? then extended in 2010? You've NOT been paying along with the rest of us. You got IRAQ and AFHGANISTAN. You (or your parents) got Medicare prescription drugs. You got the TSA and DHS. You got lots of "stuff" for that debt.

But, put it in perspective. There's a good chance you have a mortgage that is $160,000. So what's the big deal. The $16T debt is not a big deal for a country like the United States. No one in the world is worried about it. Our "paper" -- the T-BILL -- is at the lowest interest rate EVER. That tells me EVERYBODY trusts us to be able to pay.

I don't see what the Republicans have to gain by working with the Democrats on this one. If I were
Boehner I would let the US go over the cliff and for the rest of his term fight every attempt by Obama to cut taxes on his voting base - and don’t let him raise the debt limit ever again either. If the President is going to spend like there is no tomorrow, why should only the well-off people (most of whom did not vote for him) pay for it? It's no wonder the Republicans call him The Santa Claus President, in this case, it fits. Maybe if the Democrats had to start paying for what they voted for, our deficit spending would come under some pressure to be brought under control.

Republicans should just let them have it and make them own it. Make the Left lie in the bed they made. The alternative could be devastating for the brand.

Why does a portion of the 47% that voted for Willard, work so hard to protect the top 1 to 2% that could care less for them. The bottom line is taxes will be going up on the top 2% and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

"No one in the world is worried about it. Our "paper" -- the T-BILL -- is at the lowest interest rate EVER. That tells me EVERYBODY trusts us to be able to pay." -- SmBusOwnerinNY

This is maybe the most short-sighted statement I've ever heard. If you run your business with his level of foresight, I'm shocked you're still around. China funds a large portion of our debt because their policy is that this is good for them, not because it is a great investment. However with us having less and less spendable income this is not sustainable. Should China decide that their best interests are served by becoming the sole remaining super power, then they will stop funding our government's gluttony and we're screwed.

But, Job1, they may just take their marbles and go home. If taxes are going up on the 2%-ers, why wouldn't they just be happy to take everybody else with them and have no tax cuts for anybody?

I think it's funny how the Left portrayed the Bush administration as only caring about the rich, but are now screaming to high heaven that the middle and lower income folks will be devastated if Bush's tax cuts aren't extended for them. You can have one or the other Left. You can't have both.

SmBus, No one is worried about $16T in debt? Really! What you meant to say was "no democrat is worried about the 16T in debt". They want more and more and more. No one and I mean no one is willing to do what really needs to be done. Dems and Rep. are both spineless when it comes to doing what needs to be done. Rework the tax codes and get spending under control, including entitlements. The public is also not willing to do what it takes. Well at least a good portion of the public. Just can't handle the truth.

No Mike,

China buys T-bills because they have to do SOMEthing with all of the DOLLARS we send them to buy their crap. They have no choice. Having a pile of unused dollars does them no good.

If we had a decent trade policy with China, they'd be BUYING goods from us to repatriate those dollars instead of just buying our debt.

MP30,

$16T is about 100% of our GDP. We've been there before. 125% after the Great Depression and WWII.

It took 30 years to grow out of that down to 36% of GDP in 1980. The problem is Republicans have be tax CUTTING and SPENDING the whole time they've been in charge, Clinton briefly changed directions, and Obama has been saddled with the debt and crappy economy.

We need higher tax rates, and reduced spending in the long run. Not the short run. In the short run, we need to get the economy going. That's how we grow out of $16T in debt.

Hey liberals! YOU'RE RETARDED!!! The GOP has compromised plenty with numerous proposals but the liberals have shot down EVERY one of them. It is the liberals who are taking us over the cliff, but you people are all uneducated and uniformed and have no clue as to whats going; you just like to sit there and collect your unemployment check and b!tch about how evil conservatives are.

Mike, you can definitely have it both ways. The rich benefitted the most from the tax cuts because they received larger percentage cuts, and they hoarded the cash flowing in from a middle class with a lot of spending power. Now that middle class spending power (the driving force in an economy) has been mainly dried up and hoarded by the rich. The rich can lose their tax break, but if you want economic recovery, you need to keep the tax cuts extended for the middle class.

Poor Jeff Flake is only fooling himself. His party just voted down a bill that gave MASSIVE cuts with almost no tax increases at all. Other main stream republicans have even called out the 40-50 teaparty "chuckleheads" in their ranks as the same idiots that keep derailing negotiations, time and time again. And all they're doing is guaranteeing themselves MORE tax increases once we go over the cliff. The tea party has to be the single most idiotic collection of morons ever assembled. I really feel sorry for Boehner. He's trying really hard. After the cliff, he'll have to deal with liberal senate bills and trying to ammend them as best he can. Wonder what the tea party will do then?

When the date was set for the "Bush Tax Cuts" extension previously, it was good until JUST AFTER THE ELECTIONS ... and there was a reason for that ! Obama NEVER had intentions of extending the tax cuts, and now that he has been re-elected .... why he has absolutely no reason to see them extended !

For Obama, this is a win-win situation .... he raises taxes on EVERY ONE WHO PAYS TAXES, redistributes it as he sees fit by growing government and handing out the "free stuff" to the lap dogs who voted for him .... AND he will blame the Republicans !!!!!

Can any liberal, "progressive" or Democrat show me the clear-cut, defined SPENDING CUTS Obama has promised ? Anyone ?? Anyone at all .... maybe a link or something ??? I won't hold my breath because those "spending cuts" exist only in the minds of the truly gullible who voted for this financially disastrous President. It was all quite predictable.

Never a budget, never a plan, never a clue about fiscal reality... this will be Obama's legacy.

Oh, and Patrick at #1.59 ... you are simply wrong. Those on the lower end of the tax spectrum received the largest % tax cuts. A reduction from 15% to 10% amounts to a 33.3% rate reduction.

SmBusOwnerinNY, you are so full of crap it is leaking out of your ears. You write the high and mighty Democrats are trying to spend less of our money, who are you kidding? Do you think we fell of the turnip truck yesterday? What a joke. Stop the bull. Face it, they all want to spend our money or someone else's money. And I call it stealing when we have to raise the income tax rate to meet our spending needs. Yes, Obama and the democrats are stealing the resources from American's. Plain and simple!

Brenda - Nice of you to take 10% of my response and ignore the rest. Typical spin job.

Bottomline is that neither side has offered a serious solution to the country's financial problems. Obama has not. Beohner has not. Reid has not.

Until spending is brought under control, it does not matter how high taxes go.

somebody should teach this guy to salute. He bows to kings, can't pronounce "corp" and doesn't have enough respect for the military to salute correctly. We see pics of him at his desk with his feet up in the face of staff and congressional leaders. He snubs our allies and embraces our enemies. Lacking in decorum and respect.....We had a real hero die yesterday who'd have made a much better president.

We don't have a tax revenue problem we have a spending problem.

2007:

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $2.8 Trillion

2012 (Projected):

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $3.8 Trillion

Explain to me how if tax revenue is the same as 5 years ago but spending has increased over 35% that this is NOT a spending problem?

But the uninformed voter elected a president who believes in MASSIVE government and MASSIVE government spending. Well, you got what you voted for.

The problem now is how to PAY for it? The answer is YOU must pay for it. Not the "rich". Not the "wealthy". Not the evil "Oil Companies". There is not enough money from selected groups to pay for it. Since you approve of a 35% increase in government spending then EVERYBODY must pay an additional 35% in taxes.

I say if the Democrats want to collapse the economy (and they have done a GREAT job the lost 4 years of doing that) then we should have an across the board 35% increase in EVERYBODY'S taxes. Maybe, JUST MAYBE, if YOU realize what the cost will be for this reckless out of control spending then you just MIGHT take your head out of the sand and realize it is unsustainable.

But an intelligent citizen and voter is difficult to find anymore - when you have over 50% of the voters elect an incompetent and irresponsible person like Obama as president then intelligence is not their strong suit.

Patrick 93--EXACTLY!

The middle class is the engine of the economy. During the mid 20th century, tax rates on the rich were very, very high. This forced them to reinvest their income to create deductions and avoid tax. Those investments were in the form of labor (jobs) and equipment (American equipment) that in turn created more jobs and prosperity for everybody, including the rich. The middle class was the recipient of the policy that forced rich people to USE THEIR MONEY, which also helped RICH people!

Now, taxes are so low that there is NO INCENTIVE for them to do anything but hoard their money! This helps NO ONE.

High taxes, generous deductions for economy-stimulating activities. That's the ticket.

DZ1900,

Read some history. Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones, sound bites be damned.

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

nico,

We get it, you hate him. Plenty of us hated W. You just have to live with it, too bad, so sad.

ProBusiness,

As always, you are completely FOS.

The spending is caused by something called THE RECESSION.

Disingenuous slob. What policy has Obama implemented that CAUSED said spending increase? I'll wait a long time, because you're not going to come up with it, because THERE IS NONE.

Democrats are the fiscally responsible ones. From Democrats reining in Reagan spending (ever so slightly) to Clinton's "largest tax increase in American history" that actually fixed the Reagan-Bush debt debacle, to Obama's proposed deals (rejected by the tea-people).

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

Republicans ARE the source of the TAX CUT and SPEND Problem. THAT's what's put us in the situation we are in.

Job1

Those poor or middle class that voted for Romney work to protect the top 2% because they have some how been made to believe that trickle down economics works. If you give the rich man more money...he will feel sorry for your pathetic peon a$$ and maybe give you a job scrubbing his toilet. It does not work and has never been proven to work, but those who voted for Romney that are not rich bow down to the rich man so he can squirt some trickle down right on there backs. Just look at your own place of work. You can always tell who the Romney supporters are. They are either the rich boss or the ones following him around trying to be his best buddy or the they are the ones who are always willing to take whatever benefits deal there bosses see fit for them to get. They live in a perpetual fantasy that by associating themselves with rich people will some how make them rich by association...when in fact they are the butt of the rich mans joke.

SmBusOwnerinNY, I looked at the link it is is a bunch of crap just like you. Go to the US Bureau of statistics and you will find Obama has spent more in the four years he was President than most other Presidents in their 8 years. Look at the government facts, not some sleezeball leftist group you want to coddle.

WOW. What can one say. There is just to much BS and name calling. You all need to grow up. This mess belongs to all of us. The Rep's ran up this debt while they were in power from 2000 to 2006. The Spent like Drunken Sailors "John McCain R of AZ" All that spending went to the Rich, the 2%. All that spending was not paid for, or put on the Credit Card. Guess What, the bill has come due. 2 wars put on the country credit card, Time to pay up. You guys seem to think we are all stupid. Bush and more to the point Dick Cheney did this to us. Cheney said Debts don't matter. Iraq's Oil will bay for the war. How did that work out for us. Cheney made out very well as did other Rich people. Brown and Rut, Heallabuten made over a Trillion alone, witch went right into Dick Cheney's pockets. We should take all the money back from those people that ripped us off so badly during these 2 wars. That would go a long way to balancing the budget. Same with Dr. Health Insurance Co. Health Providers that have stolen trillions from us. Stop the over charges. We can fix health care by stopping the fraud and waist. We can go a long way to cut the debt by stopping waist and Fraud. To me we need to start there first, and then see where we stand. We know Hallaburten stole billions from us by over charging while Bush was still in. We know after Obama got in, We found out they over charged $75 billion and refused to pay it to them. Same with our defense contractors, They just keep sending the bill for not doing there job. Look at the so called Super Chopper to replace the one the President uses now. That thing was Hundreds of Billions over budget, When Obama cut the project. We all know what to do. but the Rich will just spend a bunch of money to get there way. The army said we don't need any more tanks. The joint chiefs said they can cuts Hundreds of billions out of Defense. But Congress will not let them. It seems we can afford waist as long as the Rich keep getting there's. But we are to take away from the Poor. Isn't that always the way it is. When is enough, enough? Seems like never. I mean How many homes can one family use??? Romney made $25 million and only paid 10% taxes. While People that work for a living pay 38% some times. Giving those tax break to the rich didn't do one thing for America. It helped China. These great Americans invested in Communist China because they have slave labor there. I am happy to have seen last night that this Christmas people were buying American only and if they couldn't find the Made in America, they didn't buy.......

Oh my. The Prez called a meeting at the last minute. Every one is impressed I bet.

This should have been done along time ago but when you only campaign and vacation this is what you get.

I like the Icon of SMBusOwnerinNY, alternate energy that Obama makes us pay more to make them rich.

Probably MWBE also.

SmBusOwner: Democrats are the responsible ones? Did you NOT read the DATA from our own federal government? Here it is again since you obviously didn't read it:

2007:

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $2.8 Trillion

2012 (Projected):

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $3.8 Trillion

The "rich" were not responsible for the 35% increase in federal spending by the Obama Administration. We do NOT have a tax revenue problem. If our government spending was just simply the same as 2007 we would have nearly a balanced budget. Increasing spending by our government 35% then blaming a group of people for the government's incompetence and irresponsibility is pathetic.

Amazing how liberals are so unintelligent that cannot even look at data and facts to realize they are wrong.

But facts are to liberals what sunlight is to Dracula - I think it burns their eyes............

PB,

Your whole rant is such BS. Sure, Democrats WANT to crash the economy. Nevermind all of the jobs bills that REPUBLICANS fillibustered, and "our #1 job is to make Obama a 1-term president"

Right, Obama and the Democrats are the ones that tanked the economy in 2007! It was all a grand plan!

Can't tax the rich, no, they're the job creators! See how well that's going!

Tax the rich and it "won't be a drop in the bucket!" Except that over 10 years (or the last 30 years) that's Trillions of dollars. If we hadn't given those tax cuts away, we'd be in MUCH better shape to deal with the recession, instead of doing VIRTUALLY nothing to fix it.

Let's see now; four Democrats against two Republicans in the Democratically controlled Oval Office with cameras and the Press present, and they want to have a "real, get something done" meeting. Man, this just looks like an Obama photo op to me. They're not going to get a lick of meaningful business done with those six people present.

Go lock yourselves in a room with; no cameras, writers for the bill, and a pot of coffee. Roll up your sleeves and don't come out until a bill is written that will be passed by Congress and signed by the President. That's a "let's get it done meeting". Otherwise, this is all smoke and mirrors for the associated press.

DZ and PB,

The zfacts link is not crap. They use the same sources for stats as you guys do.

http://zfacts.com/p/gross-national-debt.html

You just don't like what the numbers say.

That graphic of national debt vs GDP says it all. Reagan-Bush killed the golden goose. TAX CUT and SPEND is and will always be our demise. YOU guys BELIEVE that CRAP actually HELPS the economy. DEMONSTRABLY NOT TRUE with 70 YEARS of DATA.

SmBusOwner: So sad that you STILL can't read the data so I will try it again:

2007:

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $2.8 Trillion

2012 (Projected):

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $3.8 Trillion

Under Obama our federal spending is 35% higher than only 5 years ago. Our tax revenue is the same. So obviously we do not have a tax revenue problem we have a spending problem. This is not a problem that can be solved with taxing a section of people you want to punish. Simply return federal spending to the same spending level it was in 2007 and we have nearly a balanced budget.

It is called "facts". It is called "data". Look up those two words in your dictionary since you obviously don't know what either of those two words mean.

Upstate,

The wind turbine is not mine, and was installed in ~2005. The credits were instituted under Clinton and Bush.

We could just keep burning coal.....

It is OBAMA and the DEMOCRATS who are unwilling to address government spending. and truly offer a deficit reducing budget.

Anyone really paying attention?

The FEDERAL DEBT CEILING is being requested to be RAISED AGAIN in the very near future.

Whose fault is that? The PRESIDENT and the SENATE, who refuse to have a budget.

A country can not SPEND THEIR WAY TO PROSPERITY! America has lived on GREED and immediate gratification for 30 years now. It is time to pay for the US to pay for those deeds.

Kicking the fiscal responsibility can down the road solves nothing, and puts the fiscal burden on future generations.

The days of I am owed, gimmee, gimmee, gimmee, (spoiled) is over.

If you can't afford it, you can't own it! And you are not owed a job in the work force of your choosing, be happy to have a paycheck!

It won't happen, of course, but I'd like to see Obama ask Harry Reid where the Senate proposal is! That useless old creep has been running off his mouth all week about the House not doing it's job....well......Harry...you're in charge at the Senate, what do you guys have to offer??

PB, you can cherry pick one number over and over again all you want.

These numbers are not DUE TO OBAMA POLICY

History shows that Democrats TAX and SPEND. Republicans TAX CUT and SPEND.

Which is more fiscally responsible?

SmBusOwner:

I don't give a tiny rat's behind what Reagan did, FDR did, Lyndon Johnson did, or George W. Bush did.

We have a problem today and that problem is our federal government is spending 35% more than we did just 5 years ago in 2007. We are receiving the SAME amount of tax revenue in 2012 that we did in 2007 but are spending 35% more. What Reagan did is old news. What FDR did is old news. What Lyndon Johnson did is old news. What George W. Bush did is old news.

What we have now is a problem. A problem that both Democrats and Republicans caused over many years. But the problem is TODAY we are spending 35% more by the federal government than only 5 years ago. So we have a spending problem - period.

2007:

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $2.8 Trillion

2012 (Projected):

Tax Revenue $2.4 Trillion

Federal Spending $3.8 Trillion

Trying to "blame" someone from 5 years ago, 30 years ago, or 80 years ago is pathetic. We have a clear problem today of government spending. Return government spending to simply the spending levels of only FIVE YEARS AGO and this "problem" we are addressing is a problem no more.

Try to stay focused and let's discuss the problem we have TODAY of an out of control government spending problem.

MTMike,

The debt ceiling has nothing to do with spending.

The money has already been spent.

It is just paying the credit card bill when it comes due.

Going to the store and buying the items is the act that created the bill. Congress already spent (approved spending) the money.

Take any four year time period under Bush and the largest debt increases totaled $2,740 Trillion. In the four years under Obama the debt increased $6.376 Trillion. These are US debt figures straight from the government website. Under Bush, who I did not vote for, he had a total GDP of $97,771 Trillion during his 8 years and increased the debt $4.350 Trillion during the same 8 years. Under Obama the total GDP was $59,802 Trillion and the debt increased $6.376 Trillion during the same 4 years. No fuzzy math, no picking of particular stats. Straight forward.

"China buys T-bills because they have to do SOMEthing with all of the DOLLARS we send them to buy their crap. They have no choice. Having a pile of unused dollars does them no good." - SmBusOwnerinNY

Again it's hard to believe you could be so wrong, but your are. There are plenty of other things for them to do with their dollars. They could revitalize their agricultural sector providing jobs and food for their hundreds of millions of starving farmers. They could invest more heavily in other economies. And yes, they could just sit on those dollars but they don't because if they did the dollar would go down in value compared to theirs and the US would eat into the Chinese export market.

Instead they fund our gluttonous debt keeping our interest rates unnaturally low so that we can continue to grow THERE GDP. As noted, this is not sustainable as the debt and interest on that debt -- soon to be a trillion dollars a year -- pinches our pocketbooks more and more.

steve-1962

OK Brenda 1964 You do know that the house DID pass a budget all 3 years and the senate is suppose to review and ammend it and send it back to the house for ratification. The LAZY ass demorat Senate has yet to do it. So to blame the house just show your ignorance. Quit telling others to get there $hit straight when you do NOT have your straight.

Gotta put forth a real budget if you want the Senate to do what your asking. The crap the House has been spitting out is not even worth the paper it is written on. I got my sht straight, now get yours.

I'm pointing out a systemic problem. Spending is only a problem because we don't TAX enough to support it. One comes before the other.

Here I'll repeat just like you do:

These numbers are not DUE TO OBAMA POLICY

History shows that Democrats TAX and SPEND. Republicans TAX CUT and SPEND.

Which is more fiscally responsible?

"Our tax revenue is the same. So obviously we do not have a tax revenue problem we have a spending problem." - ProBusiness

It's worse than that. Since 1970 our per-person income extractions (taxation) has gone UP 33% in real 2012 dollars. The problem is that in those same real inflation adjusted dollars our spending has exploded by 100%. We spend double per person now -- in real dollars -- than we did in 1970. Taxation is NOT the problem, it's actually gone up. Spending IS the problem, it has exploded.

Mike,

Chinese farmers don't take American dollars for payment.

You do understand the concept of national currencies, don't you?

There are 3 things the Chinese can do with all of the money we send them for the crap we buy from them. Keep the money in a pile, buy t-bills, or buy AMERICAN PRODUCTS and SERVICES with the AMERICAN DOLLARS. They don't do that because we DON'T MAKE THEM.

DZ,

Nevermind that the 2007-2009 recession was the worst since the Great Depression. THAT had nothing to do with those numbers, right?

In case anyone has been asleep lately, many seem to forget that taxes on those making over $200k/single and $250k/married... have ALREADY BEEN RAISED THROUGH OBAMACARE !!! This bill imposes a 3.8% tax on "investment income" and .9% on earned income. It also pretty much crushes medical deductions for everyone ...... no matter what their income levels happen to be.

Is everyone forgetting these tax increases that have already been passed and are due to come into play ???

SmBusOwnerinNY,

Your concept of a sustainable free enterprise system is pretty misconstrued. I guess that is why you're a "small business" owner. Maybe you would do better living in China. Your philosophy on government and business, from your posts, would be better complimented in that environment.

Kanin,

You seem to be in contradiction with your own GOP party on this issue. The President and Senate already passed a Bill to avert the Fiscal Cliff, first, (July 25, 2012- S 3412) before the House even passed ANY Bill to avert this Fiscal Cliff. The House is revolting by offering no vote on the Presidnt's/Senate Bill because they're (GOP) too cowardly to find out if it passes. Boehner tried it his way. The plan B failed. The other House (GOP) Bill narrowly passed 219-215 votes. The GOP is afraid the President's Bill would pass the House if put up for a vote because there would be enough Republicans and Democrats voting for the Senate/President's Bill for passage. This is pure bullsh#t while Republicans falsely claim our President needs to lead......when he already has. The GOP is just "hijacking" Democracy in the House.....that's all.....end of discussion. And ultimately, the GOP attempt to stall that Bill for a vote won't work.

Keep in mind, your Party is stating their desire the "President take the lead" on this issue. Mitch Mcconnell and John Boehner keep saying repeatedly only our President can take the lead on this issue. Well......President Obama has taken the lead by presenting Bill S 3412 which the House has refused to vote on. The President already told the House he would veto plan B and their previous Fiscal Cliff Bill offered. After having taken the lead, as President. The House is refusing to vote for the Bill. Despite the House false accusation Obama isn't taking the lead when he already has. He has already intiated $716 billion in Medicare Advantage entitlement cuts the GOP confirmed before the election but now denies post election. Obama's additional proposal offered the GOP rejected offers another $400 billion of entitlement cuts totaling $1.16 trillion.

dr821,

I haven't said a peep about "sustainable free enterprise." Maybe you've misconstrued something, not me. We're talking about government fiscal matters, and a touch about currency repatriation.

At this point in time Our Congress is completely dysfunctional and out of line. They have forgotten that We the People not only voted them into to office but also pay for their unearned to date salary and bennies. Congress is out of control and both sides are posturing to one another as if a bunch of juvenile delinquents fighting over a territory!

They have forgotten they they work for us not just their contributors! There should not be a bargaining chip when it comes to US! The US has lost it way and finese to that of greed, personal perks and posturing. Either a contract is formed today to help the majority of people without eliminating what we have paid for (SS) and our right to medical care or Congress will prove that they are out of line and completly dysfunctional to serve and protect us---We The People.

As this country trys to protect the world and teach other countries how to protect themselves, our government continues to fail our own country and the people within.

Whatever, Jim,

I frankly think the Medicare tax is just a stealth way to increase taxes on high income because there seems to be no other way to do it.

I'd prefer they just increase plain Jane marginal rates. That way people with high income can find ways to shelter it with favored activities: such as actual American job creation.

I'd even be for a super-deduction for such a thing. Create a job, deduct not just the cost of the job itself, but a premium on that, say another 25%. You hire somebody and pay them $20K, get a tax deduction for $25K. Not a credit, mind you, a deduction. That makes hiring someone more of a tax advantage. Nothing wrong with THAT kind of tax loophole.

Sm business

How about if you dig up all the news and put it in a matrix, wait I'll do it for you starting in

Obama Boehner

Raise taxes on the Rich. Don't raise taxes on anyone

Raise taxes on the Rich Let's raise revenues by capping deductions

Not Acceptable, raise taxes on the rich Capping mortgage intersest and other +$800 Bln

Raising on the rich not good enough,

cap deductions also. Then let's just raise taxes on the over $1 Mln for +800 Bln

No, let's raise taxes on the +$400,000 Enter Plan 'B"

Spending is similar

Obama Republicans

NO Domestic cuts unless waste, and

none are specified We found ways to cut Defense without harming Security

We could go along with altering COLA's Most savings are toward the back, and get elimited

We need more specific cuts

We could go along with other cuts, you

figure out what the cuts ought to be No, way, you tell us what specific cuts your party can support

comments and background into various positions.

First of all the current top rate in 2011 was $379,000. This year it should be about 385,000 and 2013 it should be about 390,000. Obama not only was increasing the tax rate for this bracket, but enlarging it to include MORE Taxpapers and swallow a larger portion of the small businesses.

Obama's proposal of raising the bracket to $400,000 was a bit of a compromise, but not much because the 2013 upper bracket was already going to be at least 390,000. and might have reduced the revenue increase by $100 Billion of the $1 Trillion Obama was insisting on.

In reality Boehner gave Obama $800 Bln in revenue increase without raising taxes on most of Small Businesses. Obama only gave up $100 Bln.

Let me explain something else you apparently don't know, or don't see.

On August 10, 1993 Clinton signed an Omnibus bill that added the current 35% and 39.6% Brackets. Anyone with a taxable income of less than $89,000 did not notice a change, but the Rich did. The tax was basically retroactive to all of 1993. Payment for that did not occur until April 2004.

Unemployment, which peaked at 7.8% in June 1992 had decreased to 6.1% in May of 1994. That is an unemployment decline of .07 points per month. May, June, and July stayed at 6.1%, and then the rated did decline to 5.4% by February 1995. From there Unemployment rose to 5.8% and wandered between 5.5% and 5.7% for the next 16 months when Unemployment suddenly dropped in August of 1996.

Here's what I found. When the Republicans took the house and retook the senate in January 1995, one of the things they did was restore income tax bracket indexing. This was implemented in the 1995 tax tables making thier taxes less for 1995. With the extra money, small businesses began to expand, but at a .015 point per month rate.

The decline in unemployment continued through August 1997 to 4.8% when the rate of decline Doubled. What happened in August of 1997 was Repbulicans had pushed for and won a cut in the Capital gains from 28% to 20%. The decline ended in April of 2000 at 3.8% unemployment, just about the time the Dot Com Bubble burst. From that point the economy turned down and unemployment began to rise before Bush 43 took office in January 2001.

This study, used only BLS monthly Unemployment rates, The actual historic IRS tax tables, and a solid working knowledge of how people actually work with taxes.

I looked at this area because the left claims that the Clinton increase in taxes got the economy going. I was expecting to say that raising taxes modestly would not significantly stall the economy. 8 months from the actual taxes being paid, that appeared to be correct 8 months in. But, through all 24 months, the economy had actually stalled a bit. What you believe is the total opposite of the reality.

Small Business, you must be pretty small. What Obama is wanting to do on this issue, would not directly hurt the smallest businesses directly, but it will affect you indirectly over time. If you are larger, you really better rethink your position after veriftying what I have posted.

The GOP seems to have forgotten or ignored the fact that 5 million MORE American citizens voted for President Obama's plan of action vs. Mitt Romney's wavering, confusing proposals.

Five million MORE votes.

The people have spoken. And now the Republican/Tea Party acts as if none of that matters.

If anyone is to blame for the mess we have in this country, it is the GOP/TP and its brainwashing Fox News Propaganda.

Remember this in 2014, people.

Vote every single GOP and TP member OUT. Time to put the Party of NO out to pasture.

Mike: You say China can do something else with their money but missing a more important point.

We are borrowing so much money that the world financial markets no longer are willing to lend to us. Yes, we are "borrowing" over $1 Trillion a year but from who? OURSELVES!! Why do you think the Federal Reserve is printing $85 BILLION of NEW MONEY every month!! Because we are spending money we don't have and the world financial markets are not willing to lend it to us - at least not at the rate we are wanting to pay (less than 3%).

So the Federal Reserve is PRINTING money then using the money to buy Treasury Bills. We are preparing ourselves for MASSIVE inflation in the future. Want to know why prices of goods are going up like they are? Commodities? Energy? Because we are devaluing the dollar with every month of new printed money.

Now I know the next comment from an uninformed liberal would be "but gas prices are going DOWN!! So your comment is not true!!". Sorry, gas prices are going down because we are entering an economic decline (or collapse?). But the LAST time this happened (in 2008) gas prices went down below $2.00 a gallon where I live. They are still above $3.00 a gallon now but demand has significantly decreased AND supplies have actually increased. Why isn't gas prices below $2.50 a gallon now or even below $2.00? Because our dollar has already been devalued and need MORE money for the same value.

Folks, I have been warning of this for over 5 years. I have been stockpiling metals (such as copper, silver, etc.) in preparation for what is now becoming clearer is going to happen. When I started stockpiling it was a "what if" type of thought process so thought it best to plan "just in case".

But it is becoming clearer and clearer a monetary collapse is on the horizon. I can't say when but the Ponzi Scheme has started to crumble. When our Federal Reserve is FORCED to print nearly $100 billion of NEW PRINTED MONEY to lend BACK to the country that is the final step of a collapsing economy and monetary system. We saw it in the German Weimar Republic in the early 1900's, Hungary in 1946, Yugoslavia in the early 90's, and Zimbabwe in the late 90's.

Hopefully the people of this country wake up and realize that the rest of the world already is starting to recognize we can't possibly pay back our debts and when a country resorts to printing money to continue spending money it doesn't have it MUST lead to monetary collapse. We are not there (yet) but if we don't stop it very very soon we WILL be there - and will not be a pretty sight.

The last step to a monetary collapse is when a country must resort to printing its own money to make purchases and pay back debts - and we have just started doing this. Dangerous. Very dangerous. And it better stop. It MUST stop. Or we will see a monetary and economic collapse that will create a "survival" mode where food and protection of food and family (requiring guns for protection) would be next. We are just a few short steps away from starting that quick and irreversible fall - and our citizens AND our politicians better wake up and realize it it sooner rather than later.

SmBusOwnerinNY "What policy has Obama implemented that CAUSED said spending increase? I'll wait a long time, because you're not going to come up with it, because THERE IS NONE."

Oh really? I guess that $862 Billion 'stimulus' bill that Obama signed didn't exist. The average federal spending for Bush's 8 years was $2.396 Trillion per year (including all war costs). The average spending for Obama has been $3.529 Trillion per year - an average increase of $1.133 Trillion per year (47.3% per year). That's a total increase over Obama's first 4 years of $5.332 Trillion. Coincidentally, that extra $1.133 Trillion of increased spending per year under Obama is close to the average Deficit under Obama of $1.274 Trillion per year.

But you continue to claim 'We don't have a spending problem'?

Thanks for the laugh.

Oh that's right - You will probably blame that on Bush.

Obama eliminated school security to save money. Check out this article.

http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure

I hope that he did not leave our children at risk to further the gun control agenda.

I have a solution, congress needs be be treated like the children they are acting like. They should be locked in their respective chambers, the house and the senate and not allowed out for any reason until they have come to an acceptable deal, no matter how long it takes. Put several jiffy johns and cots in each room and feed them through a slot in the door, make it at least as uncomfortable for them as it is for the general public. No showers, no clean clothes, no contact with friends and family, no personal phone calls, no vacations, no TV, no lobbyist contact. They need to do their jobs and serve the American people as they were elected to do.

If SmBusOwnerinNY Runs whatever business he/she has, Then that 20K salary he/she is paying is nothing. $9.61 per hour? Really? How can someone in new York live on $9.61 an hour? Then take someone Else's tax money in return for the self appointed badge of honor bestowed upon themselves. If this isn't liberalism in a nut shell.

If SmBusOwnerinNY would run whatever business they are in like the government, they would have to change their name to bankruptinaNYminute.

The simple truth is we need real reform now. Not 5 Not 10 years down the road. We are saddling our grandchildren with debt and no real showing of leadership from DC. No one has ever spent their way to prosperity. PERIOD Anything that is not tied to real spending cuts now, will be nothing short of a useless waste of time and money.

My suggestion would be for every $1.00 increase in revenue generated by the government there should be $2.00 decrease in spending. For every $1.00 the debt limit is increased there should spending reduction of $5.00. The average reported spending of the government is now 7 million dollars a minute.

"Chinese farmers don't take American dollars for payment." - SmBusOwnerinNY

But International Harvester does and every other large farm equipment manufacturer. So does every steel producer in the world and every large concrete producer, etc. for large irrigation and terraforming projects. Again, I'm extremely surprised you are not out of business at this rate, never having heard of a global economy and all

ProBusiness

What kind of name is that? You must be one of those 'selfish, greedy rich' people who also happen to employ and pay workers and taxes to support those 133 million working people in this Country.

Please bend over and be prepared to be demonized and punished for daring to be successful.

PS - For those without discernment skills, I'm being facetious.

Roy: Don't worry - I picked up the humor and knew you were being facitious:)!!

I love how liberals elect a president that increases federal spending 35% EACH YEAR from what was being spent in just 2007 then blame it on "tax cuts" for the rich. But THEN complain when these supposed tax cuts that ONLY (supposedly) helped the "rich" will be catastrophic to the lower and middle class if returned back to their original rate.

How can a conservative argue with the incompetence and irresponsibility of a liberal? We can't because to have a debate you need two people that can have a rational and logical discussion - but liberals are neither rational nor logical.

So I guess all we conservatives can do is continue to laugh at liberals and their inability to forward a valid discussion and watch the country collapse around us.

BTW, for those who haven't yet it might be a good time to start buying pure metals (copper, silver, etc.), store some long-term food supplies, and stocking up on ammunition because when the SHTF it will first be the liberals that will be affected because most of them couldn't care for themselves for 24 hours let alone days, weeks, or months. But us conservatives are smart enough to plan accordingly. So plan accordingly.

Mike in SA"China buys T-bills because they have to do SOMEthing with all of the DOLLARS we send them to buy their crap."

They are certainly not buying our Debt with it any more - China has decreased its holdings of Treasury Debt by about $200 Billion over the last year.

They know that the Feds printing all of that money (about $85 Billion per month) to finance Obama's spending spree will eventually result in massive Inflation, and they are moving their investments elsewhere. They no longer consider U S Debt to be 'safe' - Pretty smart, those Chinese - they learn from the mistakes of Japan when they were 'riding high'.

I'm not sure if you mixed up who said what, but that was my original point to SmBusOwnerinNY. At any time China can change course and decide it suits them best to be the sole super power left and stop funding our gluttonous government.

"Mike, you can definitely have it both ways." - Patrick93

No you can't. It's impossible say rescinding the tax cuts will devastate the middle and lower income groups without tacitly agreeing that those same cuts greatly benefited the middle and lower classes.

ProBusiness "So I guess all we conservatives can do is continue to laugh at liberals and their inability to forward a valid discussion and watch the country collapse around us."

Sadly, it's our children and grandchildren who will pay the price of the massive Debt increase under Obama. Here is some scary information;

Under Clinton, the National Debt (as a % of GDP= Debt Ratio) averaged 64.2%. (The Debt Ratio is a key indicator of someone's ability to borrow money - for example, to get a home loan, your Debt Ratio should be about 35%).

Under Bush, the National Debt averaged 62.6% of GDP (yes, it was lower under Bush).

For 2012 under Obama, it has increased dramatically to 107% of GDP, and Obama's projection (2013 Budget) calls for it to increase to 119% in 2016 (if he gets all of his tax increases). Greece was no longer able to borrow money when they got to 120%, and they now have an Unemployment Rate of over 30%, and people are rioting over the forced 'austerity'.

Increasing the number of people getting support (food, Medicaid, cash aid) from about 30 million in 2008 to about 47 million in 2012 may have been good politics (Obama narrowly won reelection), but it is devastating our economy as it continually increases our Debt.

Ironically, when Interest (only) on the National Debt increases from the the $199 Billion per year under Bush to about $1 Trillion per year in just another 4 years, that $800 Billion per year extra cost ($8 Trillion over 10 years) will have to be paid by the very same college kids that voted overwhelmingly for Obama in the last 2 elections - I guess you might call that RETRIBUTION. lol

Let's see now... the Fed Govt

1. President Obama knew he had a spending issue the day he took office the first time, but spending went up, and is still climbing.
2. President Bush knew he had a spending issue when he took office the first time, and long before any of the wars started, and still, the spending went up.
3. Both of them knew they had numerous agencies under their control that accounted for enormous amounts of waste, and neither did a damn thing about it despite promises to the contrary. Instead, both created more useless agencies, and the spending went up... and is still climbing today with no end in site for the foreseeable future.
4. Turning to Congress, the holder of the purse strings... Every sitting congressman and congresswoman knew the nation had spending issues when they ran for office, but few since have raised their voices much less their hands to vote for a curtailment in the waste; and spending continues to rise. Apparently, there isn't going to be any help coming from that direction.

OK... so since the federal government obviously isn't going to be much help, how about starting at a lower level like...

1. The states; our govenors and state legislatures (CA, MA, IL, OH, NY...). Nope.
2. The cities (LA, NY, Chicago, etc., etc.). Nope.

Last resort... how about the people... you know... us!! After all, anyone with a lick of sense, who has a job, pays their bills, and feeds their kids knows about personal and fiscal responsibility.

Well... given the number of times this nation has opted to be led by those incapable of demonstrating even the slightest hint of either trait (electing and re-electing the same dumba$$e$ back into office election after election), or allowed graft and corruption to flourish in our government and markets, my guess is there are not enough people with enough sense, so, "No, there's no hope there either."

Maybe the best thing for this nation is a good crash to wake us up to reality. Our national, state, and local spending has been rising for decades, always with the hope that the money will be there... and as a lot of us know, it isn't... at least not until the FED cranks up the printing presses. You know... that lack of fiscal responsibility?

Moreover, we have stood by while corporations have raped their way through the markets, watched on as politicians and corporate talking heads have lied to us, stole from us, cheated honest working people out of the life savings, helped themselves to the public coffers, and held themselves above the law.

In Iceland, when the financial system failed as it has elsewhere in the world, they threw the crooked bankers and politicians in jail. Why? Because the citizens held them responsible for their actions.

Here in the US, we rewarded them with bailouts and bonuses while those whom they destroyed lost their jobs, homes, and life savings. Why? Because we are no more willing to hold them accountable for what they did than we are willing to hold ourselves accountable for allowing them to do it. Worse yet, it was our own lack of responsibility and unwillingness as a nation to hold crooked bankers and politicians accountable for their deeds that caused the suffering of our neighbors, and we are unwilling to even admit it.

I'm afraid we've fallen so far as a nation, the only way it can get fixed is after it crashes.

Mike in SA "At any time China can change course and decide it suits them best to be the sole super power left and stop funding our gluttonous government."

They already made that decision - they have DECREASED their loans to the Federal Government by about $200 Billion over the last year - They don't want to get caught 'holding the bag' when the value of the Dollar tanks. Since nobody else wants to loan money to Obama, the Feds are printing money like crazy to finance Obama's spending spree (about $85 Billion per month).

Any reputable economist will tell you that the government printing money is highly INFLATIONARY - actually, the formula is taught in every entry level economic class - here it is (From wikipedia);

"MV=PQ"

where

M is the nominal quantity of money.

V is the velocity of money in final expenditures;

P is the general price level;

Q is an index of the real value of final expenditures;

In this formula, the general price level is related to the level of real economic activity (Q), the quantity of money (M) and the velocity of money (V). "

In simple terms, a dramatic increase in the Money Supply soon leads to a dramatic increase in Prices (Inflation).

Gotta go now - work to do - can't wait to move to Costa Rica next month.

Everybody have a nice day.

Roy Wilson, Not really sure why you're arguing since what we're saying is based on the same premise that the Chinese can pull the rug out from under us whenever they want. But since you're pushing it: "China increased its holdings of Treasuries in October, data showed." - Bloomberg. "For the year, China’s holdings have increased 0.8 percent." They're still buyers...for now.

Here's a few facts you should know.

1. Despite the fact that the debt has increased by 6 trillion dollars under Obama, 4 trillion of that took place during his first two years in office. During that time he tried to pass a number of bills that were blocked by republicans. It's true that the Democrats had a majority vote but they did not have the 2/3 vote needed to pass the bills. It's also true they ould have passed them on just the Majority vote but did not. Both parties here were idiots.

2. When Bush left office, are debt was increasing drastically during the end of his second term blossoming to an increase in the debt by the end of his presidency. When Obama took office the amount added to our debt every year has been steadily decreasing. While our debt continues to grow, we are no longer hemmoraghing as much. It's like a giant open wound. The blood is still coming but the flow is starting to trickle less. This means Obama has either had to increase revenue or cut spending. Which is it? Either way, he's been helping the economy. Slightly. But yes. Not enough.

3. Obama has organized multiple talks between the House and Senate. The negotiations have fallen through on every occasion. The Republicans put fourth a plan that called for a plan that called for more cuts and spending then in the fiscal cliff.. only targeted at the middle and lower class instead of the wealthy and defense. So we can't handle the fiscal cliff but we can handle a plan that's higher then that cliff if it doesn't effect you. Democrats wouldn't put entitlements on the title. Obama did. Democrats wouldn't negotiate on cutting taxes for people making 250 thousand Obama said "Let's make that a little higher." Obama has compromised. Democrats have kind of begrudgingly gone along with him. The Republicans even have gone so far as to filibuster their own bills.

"It's true that the Democrats had a majority vote but they did not have the 2/3 vote needed to pass the bills. It's also true they ould have passed them on just the Majority vote but did not." - Kelman Beaumont

You would think by now the Left would realize the ridiculousness of this argument. So Kelman, were this true, then how on earth did the Dems in the Senate push Obamacare through? The reality is that had they wanted any legislation passed through their chamber during the first 2 years, they could have...using the same mechanism they used for Obamacare. But they didn't and not because Republicans obstructed.

"When Bush left office, are debt was increasing drastically during the end of his second term blossoming to an increase in the debt by the end of his presidency."

Again a lie. The deficits for Bush's last 4 years of spending bills that he signed were: $318.4B (2005), $248.2B (2006), $160.7B (2007), $458.6B (2008). His budget request for FY 2009 called for a $407B deficit. Obama's deficit's on the other hand have gone up in each of the past 3 years: $1412.7B (2009), $1293.5B (2010), $1299.6B (2011), $1327.0 (2012).

"Obama has organized multiple talks between the House and Senate."

Now you're just rewriting history. The only House and Senate talks he has organized were the "stimulus" talks in which he and the Dems shut the Republicans out and the behind closed doors private health care talks in which Republicans weren't even invited. He and Boehner had negotiations 18 months ago in which they agreed to a Grand Bargain, only to have Obama pull the rug out at the last minute after talking to Congressional Dems and suddenly demanding 50% more taxes than they had negotiated. BTW...Boehner has continued to stand by the deal they negotiated and is ready to agree to it whenever the President is willing to stand behind his part of that negotiated bargain.

Mike in SA,

Actually, US spending.com calls you a Liar.

Federal Deficit FY 2009 (July 2008- July 2009) when Bush left office Jan 2009 was at $1.4 trillion

Federal Deficit FY 2013 (July 2012- July 2013) after 4 yrs of Obama is at $901 billion.

case closed...........

@ Probusiness

Are unfunded coporate tax cuts are form of spending ??? I think you're in denial.........of how math works.

@ Probusiness,

Are twelve years of unfunded coporate tax cuts a form of spending???? I think you're in denial of how math actually works...........

@ Mike in SA

You're not slick by leaving out FY 2013 with your Federal Deficit projection figures....it's on US gov't spending.com

Kanin,

Only someone of inferior intelligence/judgment would call our President incompetent after following George Bush's (the guy you voted for) last act. Following Bush's screw ups was enough to make any following President competent in comparison. The stupidity in your statement is ridiculous...

As luck would have it (for our country), Obama just happens to be super competent. It's John Boehner who looks incompetent ignoring one passable Bill to vote on a failing Bill, LMAO. I think you need to put your bi focals on..............

"Actually, US spending.com calls you a Liar." - Tonytellsthetruth

Sorry Tonytellsthetruth, but you are doing everything but "telling the truth". If you'll remember, the Democrat controlled Congress purposely made sure that then-President Bush had nothing to do with the 2009 budget. They purposely refused to pass any budget measures until Obama was safely in office so they could rubber-stamp each other's bloated spending. It is extremely deceptive and disingenuous to blame Bush for a deficit that he had nothing to do with and that was passed and signed into law under Obama.

"You're not slick by leaving out FY 2013 with your Federal Deficit projection figures....it's on US gov't spending.com"

The deficits shown for 2013 are solely based on the Presidents budget request. The same type of budget requests in which Obama has underestimated the deficit every other time. For instance Obama estimated that deficits would peak in 2010 and would go down in both 2011 and 2012. He was wrong, they went up in 2011 and 2012. 2013 revenue right now is anybody's guess. There is no way you could accurately say what the 2013 deficit will be without accurately knowing what that revenue is going to come in at. Right now there is nothing to make anybody believe that 2013 will come in below $1T.

wb52-Really a shame the Empty Suit will be the blame of this......He won...he owns it...just like Benghazi.....But then again it's obvious that the well being of others isn't high on his list......

You can keep putting out all the bs you care too. But the American people aren't buying it. The majority know that the blame lays with the Republicans. The polls already show that. And as soon as we go over the cliff,the Republicans will totally own the disaster. They are done in 2014.

@ SmBusOwnerinNY

I find it amazing that your logic is so shallow and that you would actually print/say that the bills are due and the only way to pay for them is to raise the debt ceiling.

SmBusOwnerinNY your quote "The debt ceiling has nothing to do with spending. The money has already been spent. It is just paying the credit card bill when it comes due."

really lacks some depth!

The bills are due, stop the Ridiculous Government SPENDING, cut, control waste, stop government spending on what is not needed and one might be surprised how many tax dollars are found to pay the bills (whether personal or government)!

America is right back where we always are/were in any budget negotiations that needs balancing, cut, cap, balance!

One can not SPEND their way out of DEBT! It simply does not work! No one is entitled to the job of their choosing, nor entitled to have the TOYS of they want, especially when those wishes are not tied into hard work, but government handouts.

Too many are riding in the wagon, enjoying their "toys", not enough pulling the wagon is the problem!

The whole point of the "Fiscal Cliff", which does not logically result from the deficit but was constructed by the two corporate backed parties, is to cut and eventually destroy social programs like Social Security and Medicare.

The slight raise in taxes on the upper income brackets that Obama is proposing is window dressing. It's intended to fool the public into believing that the slight increase in taxes on the rich with the trillions of dollars of cuts to entitlements, some how represents "balance".

It's a bad joke, especially considering that the middle class and poor (the people who depend on Social Security Medicare and Medicaid) have already lost 38% of their wealth (mostly in home equity) and that the rich are doing better than ever.

Also because both parties are planning on meeting again next year for "comprehensive tax reform" that they say will include cuts to corporate taxes and taxes on the wealthy.

Democrats, Republicans work toward “fiscal cliff” deal

By Joseph Kishore

29 December 2012

...The Obama administration and the Republicans have sought to create a crisis atmosphere around the “cliff” to facilitate passage of highly unpopular measures. These efforts will continue in the new year if no comprehensive agreement is reached by December 31.

The most significant immediate consequence of the fiscal cliff is the end of federally funded extended unemployment benefits for more than 2 million long-term jobless workers. This socially devastating prospect is treated by the two big business parties as a bargaining chip. Continuing these benefits was not part of a Republican proposal in the House earlier this month, and it may not be included in any final agreement.

Any increase in income taxes on the wealthy will be used as a fig leaf by the Obama administration for further devastating cuts in these programs, aimed ultimately at dismantling the principal health care and retirement programs upon which tens of millions of people depend.

Earlier this month, the Obama administration presented a proposal that included $700 billion in cuts from health care and other social programs over the next decade. This is on top of over $1 trillion in cuts passed last year. Obama has boasted that the cuts already approved reduce non-military discretionary domestic spending as a percentage of GDP to the lowest level since 1962.

Speaking on the “Today Show” Friday morning, Charles Schumer, the third-ranking Senate Democrat, said he was “hopeful for a deal that avoids the worst parts of the fiscal cliff, namely taxes going up on middle-class people.” He said nothing about the expiration of unemployment benefits.

Schumer added, “We know we have to cut some of the mandatory programs and do other cuts, but it has to be accompanied with revenues… the problem has not been Democrats being willing to do cuts—we did a trillion of them last year. We’re willing to do more this year.”

Whatever tax agreement is worked out by the end of the year, moreover, will likely be replaced next year by a “comprehensive tax reform” supported by both parties. This refers to the reduction of corporate and income taxes, combined with the elimination of deductions that benefit many working people.

Behind the smoke and mirrors of the “conflict” between the Democrats and Republicans over the fiscal cliff is a common agreement that the working class must pay for the capitalist crisis through a drastic reduction in social programs and living standards.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/12/29/fisc-d29.html

Thanks for your left-wing version of keen intellectual insight, Chuckles.

O is filthy rich just like all his holly weird buddies why would he care about you ?

How are the "filthy rich" treating anyone like slaves??????

By continuing to fight for ever lower taxes with the pretense of creating jobs then using the money to create jobs in China. Bush gave them 400 billion a year and they created an average of 32,000 jobs a month. About 1/4 of Obama's monthly rate and the worst job creation record since Eisenhower. Wasn't Romney's 10.3% rate low enough and how many jobs did the 100 million he had in his Caymans account create?