djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2012 1:50:42 GMT -5
i am thinking no. check out this statement from the POTUS:
He added: "I'm often reminded when I speak to the Republican leadership that the majority of their caucus' membership come from districts that I lost. And so sometimes they may not see an incentive in cooperating with me, in part because they're more concerned about challenges from a tea party candidate, or challenges from the right, and cooperating with me may make them vulnerable."
that says a lot, doesn't it? everyone wants to save their political hide, which is put on the line by cooperating. doesn't sound like a recipe for legislative success to me.
at the same time, there are two $2T deals on the table right now that are only $200B apart. but then again, there is getting it through the House, which seems impossible, considering that Plan B was a much more modest proposal than either of the above, and it FAILED today.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Dec 21, 2012 3:05:18 GMT -5
It appears to me plans A, B, C, and the rest of the freaking alphabet are all based on one thing ... don't let them other guys get what they want! If they do, we'll look bad, and we can't have any of that (even if it's the best thing for the country)!
|
|
mwcpa
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 7, 2011 6:35:43 GMT -5
Posts: 2,425
|
Post by mwcpa on Dec 21, 2012 5:35:43 GMT -5
"don't let them other guys get what they want! If they do, we'll look bad, and we can't have any of that (even if it's the best thing for the country)!"
People called the 1970s the "me" decade.... now we have the "me" Congress....
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Dec 21, 2012 7:05:14 GMT -5
I personally find this line more compelling. From the same conversation Total deal is only 200b away from each other but, it is where the monies are coming from. Always distance between spending cuts, one side is offfering 800b the other is asking for 1.3T meaning the deal is 500b away. www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=167596327
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Dec 21, 2012 7:54:12 GMT -5
Note that the prez has no say in how the legislation is written. His only input is to either sign what ever comes out of Congress/Senate, or veto it.
Political theater....
|
|
mwcpa
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 7, 2011 6:35:43 GMT -5
Posts: 2,425
|
Post by mwcpa on Dec 21, 2012 8:06:15 GMT -5
"Political theater.... "
From extremists.....those who have a my way or the highway attitude... those who are focusing on saving the Koch Brothers and George Soros from income tax increase so we can all have huge tax increases... those who are focusing on all spending except things near and dear to them....too many idiots in Congress.... too many who did not learn things get done by compromise, not strong arming....
maybe if we go over the cliff and we all feel pain maybe we will wake up to the reality that some in Congress are self serving pigs...
Maybe in Jan 1 those Rs who walked out can vote for a tax decrease on those making a million or more and be okay with it, since it will be a tax decrease... such BS theater....
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Dec 21, 2012 8:20:24 GMT -5
It appears to me plans A, B, C, and the rest of the freaking alphabet are all based on one thing ... don't let them other guys get what they want! If they do, we'll look bad, and we can't have any of that (even if it's the best thing for the country)! I agree with your statement... from what I am trying to understand..I am reading it that the pubs will not support their leadership in what they proposed ...they feel as a group he went to far...giving in to the POTUS...Obama by increasing the thresh hold to $400,000 from $200,000...something I suggested a long time ago and to me makes sense..in today's world..except for some very rural sites..Dakotas and such..$200,000 per year income is not wealth..it's being comfortable...thus it is a logical increase ...also he is visiting entitlements....and what is being forgotten, he, Obama, would have to convince his own party members to go along with these decreases in social benefits..medicare, social security, medicaid..and many of the Dems..to them , any decrease is verboten... To me I see no deal being made here...and once these increases hit the American public the ones who will pay the most will be the pubs...as far as being held responsible for the problems that will arise for going over this cliff...and even though I am a middle to the left type person..that to me is not a good thing...the country is polarized enough right now and to make it any more split is a bad thing....personally I think the pubs here..over all..as a group..are acting stupid...the same as the South did when they thought they could win separation from the North/ Union....but they did have to try I guess...here too I guess some have to see what it's like, is it going to be so bad to go over this cliff or is most of it just talk and trepidation but little real risk...guess we are going to find out.. Hopefully the same thing never hits us in a stand off with other nations who have Atomic weapons...would we be ok with only a few going off..definitely a guarantee it would not escalate ...For me , there are no guarantees and I am afraid this falling off the cliff will become a big deal and make our recovery even longer and harder...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 0:57:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2012 8:22:53 GMT -5
i am thinking no. check out this statement from the POTUS: He added: "I'm often reminded when I speak to the Republican leadership that the majority of their caucus' membership come from districts that I lost. And so sometimes they may not see an incentive in cooperating with me, in part because they're more concerned about challenges from a tea party candidate, or challenges from the right, and cooperating with me may make them vulnerable." that says a lot, doesn't it? everyone wants to save their political hide, which is put on the line by cooperating. doesn't sound like a recipe for legislative success to me. at the same time, there are two $2T deals on the table right now that are only $200B apart. but then again, there is getting it through the House, which seems impossible, considering that Plan B was a much more modest proposal than either of the above, and it FAILED today. Saving ones "political hide" can be merely viewed as doing what the majority of voters in their district voted them in to do. Imagine that, representation.
|
|
Driftr
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 10, 2011 13:08:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,478
|
Post by Driftr on Dec 21, 2012 8:31:01 GMT -5
I sure hope not. Sure it's gonna suck a bit, but I'd rather it suck now than later.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Dec 21, 2012 10:02:25 GMT -5
I sure hope not. Sure it's gonna suck a bit, but I'd rather it suck now than later. That is the problem, it will suck now and continue to suck for a while, ending in a huge suck.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Dec 21, 2012 10:29:54 GMT -5
The President also stated the opposition does not like him, and will always vote against"him". Maybe he should do some compromising instead of demanding. And someone should tell him, he did not receive a mandate in the election. It was more like, stay with the idealogist we know, rather than go with someone we do not know..
|
|
vandalshandle
Senior Member
Never give a sucker an even break, or smarten up a chump...
Joined: Oct 12, 2011 20:34:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,005
|
Post by vandalshandle on Dec 21, 2012 11:23:35 GMT -5
I don't think that they will make a deal before January. There has been so much posturing on both sides that everyone loses face. It would be much easier for both sides to wait until after the cliff, and then adopt the stance that "we sacrificed, in order to save our country". In short, if you can not be the toughest negotiator, then be the martyr.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2012 11:29:37 GMT -5
Why would Obama and the Democrats want to wake up from their wet dream of raising taxes on everyone and slashing defense spending. No deal.
|
|
TonyTiger
Junior Associate
Mundi est stupenda locus
Joined: Apr 15, 2012 20:08:39 GMT -5
Posts: 5,583
|
Post by TonyTiger on Dec 21, 2012 11:31:49 GMT -5
I am guessing that the whole miserable bunch in Washington are gonna let us go over the cliff and then play rescue-ranger after the holidays... either as the Last Thing To Do for the lame-duck Congress or as the First Thing To Do for the new Congress...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 0:57:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2012 11:32:33 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, who came up with the term "fiscal cliff" and in what context was it used ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 0:57:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2012 11:32:46 GMT -5
I don't think that they will make a deal before January. There has been so much posturing on both sides that everyone loses face. It would be much easier for both sides to wait until after the cliff, and then adopt the stance that "we sacrificed, in order to save our country". In short, if you can not be the toughest negotiator, then be the martyr. You may be right. I've been assuming that there was already a deal in a filing cabinet somewhere and everyone just agreed to a certain amount of political theater before it went public. I don't think they'd be going home for Christmas if this were real.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 0:57:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2012 11:33:11 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, who came up with the term "fiscal cliff" and in what context was it used ? Ben Bernanke coined the term, didn't he?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2012 11:37:52 GMT -5
I am guessing that the whole miserable bunch in Washington are gonna let us go over the cliff and then play rescue-ranger after the holidays... either as the Last Thing To Do for the lame-duck Congress or as the First Thing To Do for the new Congress... That's Obama's plan- and frankly, it was a brilliant plan. He's going to seize the tax cut issue from the GOP by blaming tax hikes on them, and proposing tax cuts himself. He'll be the Democrat that cut taxes on the middle class after the GOP raised them. And he'll sprinkle in a little increase in defense spending-- and two big issues will be credited to Obama and the Democrats and the GOP will be left sitting there with egg on their faces trying to figure out what the hell the GOP stands for? They did it to themselves. They did it in 1995 with the budget deal when they cracked on the government shut down. That was their chance to let people figure out they really wouldn't miss government.
|
|
pepper112765
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 9, 2011 15:55:30 GMT -5
Posts: 1,812
|
Post by pepper112765 on Dec 21, 2012 12:01:18 GMT -5
I am guessing that the whole miserable bunch in Washington are gonna let us go over the cliff and then play rescue-ranger after the holidays... either as the Last Thing To Do for the lame-duck Congress or as the First Thing To Do for the new Congress... That's Obama's plan- and frankly, it was a brilliant plan. He's going to seize the tax cut issue from the GOP by blaming tax hikes on them, and proposing tax cuts himself. He'll be the Democrat that cut taxes on the middle class after the GOP raised them. And he'll sprinkle in a little increase in defense spending-- and two big issues will be credited to Obama and the Democrats and the GOP will be left sitting there with egg on their faces trying to figure out what the hell the GOP stands for? They did it to themselves. They did it in 1995 with the budget deal when they cracked on the government shut down. That was their chance to let people figure out they really wouldn't miss government. I think that the phrase "raising taxes" is but semantics. The taxes will go back to what they were before Bush instituted cuts for a limited amount of time, the time is expiring. All knew it was certain those tax cuts would expire. These two sides will never see eye to eye. Ideology is obviously more important than coming to a solution that is best for the entire country to achieve the stated goal of deficit and debt reduction. The solution has to be equitable, which is not synonymous with fair.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2012 12:20:06 GMT -5
Well if they wait until the new year, the Dems will have a few more seats in the house, 201 total, with 218 needed for a majority. Are there 17 moderate Republicans in the house, or are they all right wing? I ask because I don't know. There are no Republicans left in Congress from New England. let me put it this way. there are 20-40 Republicans who care more about getting this deal done than putting the country in a recession.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2012 12:22:44 GMT -5
i am thinking no. check out this statement from the POTUS: He added: "I'm often reminded when I speak to the Republican leadership that the majority of their caucus' membership come from districts that I lost. And so sometimes they may not see an incentive in cooperating with me, in part because they're more concerned about challenges from a tea party candidate, or challenges from the right, and cooperating with me may make them vulnerable." that says a lot, doesn't it? everyone wants to save their political hide, which is put on the line by cooperating. doesn't sound like a recipe for legislative success to me. at the same time, there are two $2T deals on the table right now that are only $200B apart. but then again, there is getting it through the House, which seems impossible, considering that Plan B was a much more modest proposal than either of the above, and it FAILED today. Saving ones "political hide" can be merely viewed as doing what the majority of voters in their district voted them in to do. Imagine that, representation. indeed. but this is not true for ALL districts. in SOME districts (i won't say many, because i don't know) they want the parties to come together and compromise. should not THEY also be represented?
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Dec 21, 2012 12:23:04 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, who came up with the term "fiscal cliff" and in what context was it used ? Ben Bernanke coined the term, didn't he?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2012 12:23:23 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, who came up with the term "fiscal cliff" and in what context was it used ? i think the fed came up with it in the hopes of scaring people into working together.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2012 12:25:25 GMT -5
I am guessing that the whole miserable bunch in Washington are gonna let us go over the cliff and then play rescue-ranger after the holidays... either as the Last Thing To Do for the lame-duck Congress or as the First Thing To Do for the new Congress... That's Obama's plan- and frankly, it was a brilliant plan. He's going to seize the tax cut issue from the GOP by blaming tax hikes on them, and proposing tax cuts himself. He'll be the Democrat that cut taxes on the middle class after the GOP raised them. And he'll sprinkle in a little increase in defense spending-- and two big issues will be credited to Obama and the Democrats and the GOP will be left sitting there with egg on their faces trying to figure out what the hell the GOP stands for? They did it to themselves. They did it in 1995 with the budget deal when they cracked on the government shut down. That was their chance to let people figure out they really wouldn't miss government. maybe YOUR people wouldn't- but this is clearly not the case for Democrats, as a general rule.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Dec 21, 2012 13:26:00 GMT -5
The President also stated the opposition does not like him, and will always vote against"him". Maybe he should do some compromising instead of demanding. And someone should tell him, he did not receive a mandate in the election. It was more like, stay with the ideologist we know, rather than go with someone we do not know.. Suggest you check out his latest offer...think he has done some compromising...raised the figure from $200,000 to $400,000 of those to pay a bit more...to me that is a biggie..and from what I had read believed GOP leader was in agreement but then not in agreement which can cause one to be a bit put off..also last time I looked, think Obama was the one who won the election...you either win the election or you lose the election so that to me is a mandate...as far as why he won it..as always your comment is supposed to be the way things are when it really isn't...I will suggest he won because moire people wanted him to be the POTUS then the other guy...enough felt over all he was a good POTUS..other wise why would one vote for him...?
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 21, 2012 14:01:05 GMT -5
That's Obama's plan- and frankly, it was a brilliant plan. He's going to seize the tax cut issue from the GOP by blaming tax hikes on them, and proposing tax cuts himself. He'll be the Democrat that cut taxes on the middle class after the GOP raised them. And he'll sprinkle in a little increase in defense spending-- and two big issues will be credited to Obama and the Democrats and the GOP will be left sitting there with egg on their faces trying to figure out what the hell the GOP stands for? I agree. If we go over the cliff (maybe I should say when because I don't see a deal happening), the republicans will come out looking bad when a deal goes through in January. The plan B proposal was just stupid by Boehner.
|
|
Driftr
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 10, 2011 13:08:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,478
|
Post by Driftr on Dec 21, 2012 14:35:08 GMT -5
That's Obama's plan- and frankly, it was a brilliant plan. He's going to seize the tax cut issue from the GOP by blaming tax hikes on them, and proposing tax cuts himself. He'll be the Democrat that cut taxes on the middle class after the GOP raised them. And he'll sprinkle in a little increase in defense spending-- and two big issues will be credited to Obama and the Democrats and the GOP will be left sitting there with egg on their faces trying to figure out what the hell the GOP stands for? I agree. If we go over the cliff (maybe I should say when because I don't see a deal happening), the republicans will come out looking bad when a deal goes through in January. The plan B proposal was just stupid by Boehner. Agreed. He should have started with a tax reduction in addition to renewing the tax decrease. He obviously doesn't understand that to negotiate you must start from a position of idiocy.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Dec 21, 2012 14:52:34 GMT -5
I agree. If we go over the cliff (maybe I should say when because I don't see a deal happening), the republicans will come out looking bad when a deal goes through in January. The plan B proposal was just stupid by Boehner. Agreed. He should have started with a tax reduction in addition to renewing the tax decrease. He obviously doesn't understand that to negotiate you must start from a position of idiocy. HaHa. I thought it was stupid because it raised taxes on more than just the $1 Million+ group. Not through rate changes, but through cutting deductions & credits, which in the end has the same result of higher taxes. If your position is not to raise taxes on anyone under $1 Million, then why put forth a proposal that raises taxes on almost everyone? Especially since the $1 Million was a compromise in itself. It is really a surprise that Boehner couldn't even get this through the house?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 0:57:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2012 20:09:19 GMT -5
I think the idea is to let us fall.
Good on the Dems,
These bizarre people are going to get a major ass kicking.
Who are the absurd Republicans...they don't represent me, they represent special intensest.
They will learn,
They will learn..
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Dec 23, 2012 20:54:48 GMT -5
On NPR the other day, heard a table discussion on the above topic...wish I could remember the whole of it but what I do remember was that if they do no reach a agreement in time and basically "over the cliff " clicks in..it doesn't click in all at once..as a bullet to the head would.
Agency's that are cut..there has to be no cuts at once as long as at the end of the fiscal year of that agency the total spent by them is what is legally mandated..
Since all those Bush Tax cuts that Obama and Dem's want lifted are now over with..they won..nothing stops Dem's and like minded folks from coming back with Tax cuts for who and what income bracket they want..say the compromised figure of $400,000 that supposedly Obama offered on the last go around or a figure between that an the original one of $250,000 and then PUBS would have to be the ones who vetoed that one costing the majority of the folks..all but the so called 98 % a decrease in taxes if they still want to fight it out for those millionaires..
To try and get back their tax cuts for all income brackets..that would basically be impossible under the current political line up now in Washington..
There were other things discussed but what the panelist all seemed to agree on ..pubs have been feeling for the most part , put upon by Obama and friends..not played fair with..and thus resentments are high and payback time could come as early as February when the debt limits have to be raised again and that's when the government being faced with not being able to make payments on debt securities ..bonds and such..would rear it's ugly head..whether Obama could get around this fate by Presidential decree or not i don't know..not that knowledgeable as to what a POTUS can legally do and not do...
Main thing of the round table was , if we do fly over the cliff..there still is some time to come to agreements before the hard facts kick in...
|
|