Fiscal agreement is a fiscal disaster

[mastoidbone]

adds 4 TRILLION to debt---no wonder Dems love it.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/cbo-score-of-the-fiscal-cliff-agreement-85650.html

[mastoidbone]

again---obama has NEVER sought a path to reduce spending---ever. All he HOPES to do is increase debt a bit slower then his record setting first 4 years.....he is a terrible terrible fiscal manager.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/01/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-deal-cbo/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[jimgata]

Anyone that believed Obama was ever for a reduction in spending was either ignorant of his actions or gullible and wanted to believe anything he said.

[gatormoe1]

Obama is doing everything possible to ruin America. This has been obvious from day one.

[ncgatr1]

Is this right, those bastards are only cutting 15 billion and raising tax revenue by 620 billion?

[GatorAbe7]

Is this right, those bastards are only cutting 15 billion and raising tax revenue by 620 billion?

The stat I am seeing is $1 of cuts for every $41 of taxes effecting 77% of households. Republicans really, really screwed the pooch voting for this one.

[QGator2414]

The stat I am seeing is $1 of cuts for every $41 of taxes effecting 77% of households. Republicans really, really screwed the pooch voting for this one.

Yeah if the house goes for this our country loses...

[gtr2x]

Since i cant access the info, how is the 4 trillion calculated? Sounds like more political speak at this point.

Debt ceiling right around the corner. No need to get too excited, that is where the cuts will come. Problem is unless defense spending is on the table nothing will happen on social services spending either and everyone will sit around pontificating how its the other sides fault. . And as far as working on the tax code, think you can forget about that.

[G8trGr8t]

i will be surprised if the house approves this

[oragator1]

i will be surprised if the house approves this

Dems will carry the vote they need.

[gatordowneast]

Is anyone surprised by this? If so, they must have been in a coma. Part of the manifesto playbook.

[Matthanuf06]

In 10-20 years when there are bread lines and gas lines and 25% unemployment and a worthless dollar most of these politicians will be retired or dead, so why would they care?

[Row6]

The $ 4 trillion increase is in comparison to not extending any of the Bush tax cuts, a position which no one elected to a federal office today favors, Republican or Democrat. Compared to extending all the Bush tax cuts - which most Republicans favor - deficits will be reduced by about $600 billion over 10 years. BTW, some of the extra spending includes not cutting doc pay for Medicare, something else in the baseline that results in the $4 trillion. Also, this part of the deal is on taxes and some immediate budgetary items. Sequestration and longer range spending cuts will be addressed later this winter.

Pretending otherwise is howling at the moon.

[g8trjax]

The $ 4 trillion increase is in comparison to not extending any of the Bush tax cuts, a position which no one elected to a federal office today favors, Republican or Democrat. Compared to extending all the Bush tax cuts - which most Republicans favor - deficits will be reduced by about $600 billion over 10 years. BTW, some of the extra spending includes not cutting doc pay for Medicare, something else in the baseline that results in the $4 trillion. Also, this part of the deal is on taxes and some immediate budgetary items. Sequestration and longer range spending cuts will be addressed later this winter.

Pretending otherwise is howling at the moon.

Yeah, that's a GREAT deal. Congress should be tarred and feathered.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/12-2/Tax%20Hike%20In%20Perspective.jpg

[G8trGr8t]

charged with theft for stealing from future generations

[T3goalie]

LOL... did anyone expect anything different?

If so why?

There is absolutely nothing in the Republican leadership's recent history that would cause anyone to expect anything different. Nothing. The beat goes on and Boehner is beaten like a red headed step child. Again. :beat: Shocker...

[Row6]

Boehner and the republicans wanted more tax cuts. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming to raise any taxes. Let's keep this straight.

[T3goalie]

Boehner and the republicans wanted more tax cuts. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming to raise any taxes. Let's keep this straight.

Absolute BS. They have accomplished nothing. The only thing you have straight is that Boehner gets dragged around like a rag doll. He stands for nothing and caves on every hill which he purportedly stands. He and the republican leadership, Mitch et al, are a Farce. Boehner cut his own legs out and white flag signaled surrender over 3 weeks ago. It was just a matter of how badly. There is no surprise in this deal and there is no surprise in surrender. They have kicked the can down the road and the debt will expand at increasing rates. The GOP capitulated exactly as the democrats knew they would. The Republican party stands for nothing and they lay down for everything like cheap whores.

[Row6]

Absolute BS. They have accomplished nothing. The only thing you have straight is that Boehner gets dragged around like a rag doll. He stands for nothing and caves on every hill which he purportedly stands. He and the republican leadership, Mitch et al, are a Farce. Boehner cut his own legs out and white flag signaled surrender over 3 weeks ago. It was just a matter of how badly. There is no surprise in this deal and there is no surprise in surrender. They have kicked the can down the road and the debt will expand at increasing rates. The GOP capitulated exactly as the democrats knew they would. The Republican party stands for nothing and they lay down for everything like cheap whores.

Apparently you would have preferred adding more to the debt by not raising any taxes. Fine, but quit pretending that's what you care about.

[gatorman_07732]

Apparently you would have preferred adding more to the debt by not raising any taxes. Fine, but quit pretending that's what you care about.

Those taxes aren't going to do anything to reduce the debt

[mastoidbone]

row lets be straight----this deal is a drop in bucket size of a tanker truck.
So ALL we did was raise taxes on the most productive workers in order to finance GREATER government spending.

If you tell me i pay more taxes but debt goes down fine.

That is not what dems pushed for.

They asked people to pay more taxes to allow them to keep spending too much. At same time Obama RAISED fed pay---which CBO says is already ABOVE private pay for same job and experience.


So what DID we accomplish other then financing continues waste and excess spending beyond our means?

i 100% agree we need more revenue.

But to increase revenue while INCREASING spending is democratic 101 from 1963----that has worked great for US and is why we are 16 T in the red.


I have NO PROBLEM with more taxes---AS LONG AS IT IS USED TO REDUCE DEBT while govt spending is CUT, not reduced growth----actual CUTS to ALL programs and ALL govt salaries and ALL pensions and defense, etc etc.


Increasing taxes while NOT touching spending is the WORSTE of all possible scenarios for our future.

[philip214]

Those taxes aren't going to do anything to reduce the debt

That's the problem. This disingenuous argument that taxing the rich more was going to solve many of our problems. It does very little to nothing other than to get the frenzied, entitled, not very intelligent part of our population to back down a little. Those evil rich people. The issue here is eventually the majority of Americans will be taxed significantly more and some of these new taxes on the "rich" will be passed down to most Americans in some way or another. Let's all celebrate because taxes on the "rich" have gone up and many problems are solved.

[T3goalie]

Apparently you would have preferred adding more to the debt by not raising any taxes. Fine, but quit pretending that's what you care about.

I would have preferred they went over the cliff and forced real pain and real reform across the board in tax and spending and stopped the nonsense. The democrats, of which i am one, held firm and crushed Boehner. In doing so they have have only made the problem worse and kicked a bigger can down the road. They have done nothing. The only ones pretending to do something are the GOP. The Dems did exactly what they wanted to do. They increased taxes, increased spending, have fractured the GOP in 1/2 and will spend till they break. I am pretending nothing. This is destructive to the Country.

[tegator80]

Pick your best assessment of what is going down.

1) It is all a ruse, that there are no differences between the aisles in congress and the "opposition" fought a heroic battle but lost. Need to keep them in place for future battles. The next "crisis" is the debt limit in February. STAY TUNED!

2) The Pub is the minority party and does not have power anymore. The House Dems had the votes to stop anything tangible to reduce spending and then Obama/Senate put them in a position to be the "bad guys" in the end. Chose to retreat rather than make a stand.

Personally, I want to believe 2) based on the limited capabilities of the American public to think for themselves but I vote for 1). Things play out so tidily for our sound bite society. The march towards cattle in corrals and overseers continues. Just need to shuffle the money and power structures a little bit more before the Master Plan gets implemented in full force.

[T3goalie]

Pick your best assessment of what is going down.

1) It is all a ruse, that there are no differences between the aisles in congress and the "opposition" fought a heroic battle but lost. Need to keep them in place for future battles. The next "crisis" is the debt limit in February. STAY TUNED!

2) The Pub is the minority party and does not have power anymore. The House Dems had the votes to stop anything tangible to reduce spending and then Obama/Senate put them in a position to be the "bad guys" in the end. Chose to retreat rather than make a stand.

Personally, I want to believe 2) based on the limited capabilities of the American public to think for themselves but I vote for 1). Things play out so tidily for our sound bite society. The march towards cattle in corrals and overseers continues. Just need to shuffle the money and power structures a little bit more before the Master Plan gets implemented in full force.

3) Political Cowardice! Your premise in 2 in incorrect. The GOP controls the House and thus controls the purse strings. The Dems have proven over the years that you can use the leverage of the House to control the debate. he who has the money rules. The Debt ceiling will be more of the same, Boehner will talk big and fold. But not before he engages is the political theatre of trying to do something. He will take the conservative base of the party out of the debate and spread his legs like a cheap whore for Pelosi, Reed and the President. He went to new lengths yesterday by taking a cram down.

[ncgatr1]

The stat I am seeing is $1 of cuts for every $41 of taxes effecting 77% of households. Republicans really, really screwed the pooch voting for this one.

They are only cutting 15 billion and know one sees a problem with this? We have had 4+ years of trying to spend our way out of this recession, now all of a sudden, everyone forgets the last 4 years and Congress puts a 15 billion dollar cut on table. What the hell is going on in Washington. We have to greatly reduce spending too.

[gatorman_07732]

3) Political Cowardice! Your premise in 2 in incorrect. The GOP controls the House and thus controls the purse strings. The Dems have proven over the years that you can use the leverage of the House to control the debate. he who has the money rules. The Debt ceiling will be more of the same, Boehner will talk big and fold. But not before he engages is the political theatre of trying to do something. He will take the conservative base of the party out of the debate and spread his legs like a cheap whore for Pelosi, Reed and the President. He went to new lengths yesterday by taking a cram down.

In all fairness 3/4 of the party voted against this bill.

[tegator80]

3) Political Cowardice! Your premise in 2 in incorrect. The GOP controls the House and thus controls the purse strings. The Dems have proven over the years that you can use the leverage of the House to control the debate. he who has the money rules. The Debt ceiling will be more of the same, Boehner will talk big and fold. But not before he engages is the political theatre of trying to do something. He will take the conservative base of the party out of the debate and spread his legs like a cheap whore for Pelosi, Reed and the President. He went to new lengths yesterday by taking a cram down.

Your 3) is essentially my 2). Yes the Pubs control the House but the politics of today are not about who owns what but what is the perception of the American public. For a complete side note as an example, FEMA was designed to assist in keeping money flowing between the banks and those affected in a disaster and nothing more. Now they are expected to run the cleanup and hand out treats like Santa. Not because their mission has changed but because the perception of the American public has changed. So in my take they could not get something tangible passed so they lost any ability to put up an alternative idea to the American Public. The Dems maneuvered so that the House could either come along or be be seen as the bad guys, so they came along. THAT is the definition of a minority party.

But as I said, my real vote is that 1) is what is really happening. It is all theater for keeping us in our places and not paying attention to the real maneuvering.

[g8orbill]

looks like most everyone who works is going to pay higher payroll taxes

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/02/morning-bell-taxes-to-rise-on-most-american-workers/?roi=echo3-14141259614-10828315-6ed889a3a414933b2c806b0dc2a04504&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

[T3goalie]

In all fairness 3/4 of the party voted against this bill.

88 votes in the Senate means approx 3/4 of GOP Sen voted for the bill. Both leaders pushed for passage. Boehner took a cram down. No discussion, no amendments, nothing. Reed shoved it down Boehner's throat and pulled it out his ass.

The GOP is afraid of a fight, any fight. They more concerned with appearance of a fight to say they tried than they are with reality.

When Boehner relegated the fiscal conservatives to the sidelines 3 weeks ago he sent the message to the Dems that there would be no opposition and he basically neutered himself in negotiations. He took away all objections and it was a clear signal to the left to do as they pleased with the purse strings. I understand that we live in a media driven world, but this is pure political theater, nothing more. Leadership in the Senate and House caved and got nothing. They are a joke. They will increase the debt by another 4 trillion or more. Tax revenue will be less than projected. People will simply modify their behavior. They always do. They will not give their money to the Harlots in DC.

[gatorman_07732]

88 votes in the Senate means approx 3/4 of GOP Sen voted for the bill. Both leaders pushed for passage. Boehner took a cram down. No discussion, no amendments, nothing. Reed shoved it down Boehner's throat and pulled it out his ass.

The GOP is afraid of a fight, any fight. They more concerned with appearance of a fight to say they tried than they are with reality.

When Boehner relegated the fiscal conservatives to the sidelines 3 weeks ago he sent the message to the Dems that there would be no opposition and he basically neutered himself in negotiations. He took away all objections and it was a clear signal to the left to do as they pleased with the purse strings. I understand that we live in a media driven world, but this is pure political theater, nothing more. Leadership in the Senate and House caved and got nothing. They are a joke. They will increase the debt by another 4 trillion or more. Tax revenue will be less than projected. People will simply modify their behavior. They always do. They will not give their money to the Harlots in DC.

I wasn't talking about the Senate and Harry Reid was not involved in the passage of the bill in the Senate.

[jimgata]

What great tax cuts. 77% of American household will pay more taxes, thanks to increase in payroll taxes. You make 50,000 a year ,you will pay 1,000 more.
Obama is getting everything he wants, while the majority still grovel at his feet.
The left still can't see the destruction that is being done to this country, but as long as everyone has their hand out and are willing to sacrifice their ethics, pride and self esteem, it will not change.
The dems, the potus and the media pushes the reps against the wall and more dems voted for the bill,but I am sure the reps will suffer the blame for this disaster of a bill.

[wgbgator]

I think most of the GOP leadership realized they have more leverage to extract cuts over the debt ceiling fight, which is basically only a month away or so. Only a small group of people and punditry are really obssesed with a "grand bargain." Now, the Dems have signed away most of their leverage there with taxes going up.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

37% of the House GOP members voted for it,

[QGator2414]

I would have preferred they went over the cliff and forced real pain and real reform across the board in tax and spending and stopped the nonsense. The democrats, of which i am one, held firm and crushed Boehner. In doing so they have have only made the problem worse and kicked a bigger can down the road. They have done nothing. The only ones pretending to do something are the GOP. The Dems did exactly what they wanted to do. They increased taxes, increased spending, have fractured the GOP in 1/2 and will spend till they break. I am pretending nothing. This is destructive to the Country.

Yep. Though I would not claim to be a democrat... ;)

[tegator80]

I think most of the GOP leadership realized they have more leverage to extract cuts over the debt ceiling fight, which is basically only a month away or so. Only a small group of people and punditry are really obssesed with a "grand bargain." Now, the Dems have signed away most of their leverage there with taxes going up.

So you believe that they made a strategic retreat so that the fight could be made in better surroundings? I think the last time that happened was when the sequestration idea came up. I do not see the Tea Party getting stronger between now and the vote.

We are going down the path of complete government oversight and there isn't any really push to change course. The budget negotiations are merely a component of the overall strategy. JMHO

[wgbgator]

So you believe that they made a strategic retreat so that the fight could be made in better surroundings? I think the last time that happened was when the sequestration idea came up. I do not see the Tea Party getting stronger between now and the vote.

We are going down the path of complete government oversight and there isn't any really push to change course. The budget negotiations are merely a component of the overall strategy. JMHO

Better leverage doesn't guarantee a result. Just better leverage for getting cuts in exchange for a vote on the debt ceiling. Are house GOPers willing to spook business leaders and shut down govt if they don't get cuts? Who knows.

[jimgata]

The reps could not handle this debacle. Does anyone really they will be able to do anything to stop the USA from going bankrupt?
The reps currently have the weakest lesdership that I can remember, and that is a lot of years.

[MichiGator2002]

Steyn summarized it brilliantly -- a months-long fight yielded a "cut" that will be borrowed back in a day and a half or so. Every dime we "cut" in this deal will have been borrowed back again before kickoff of the first divisional playoff game this weekend. To that I will add, the cuts aren't cuts anyway if they are just reductions in still unrealized, planned increases.

[HALLGATOR]

According to the following the Reps got some of what they wanted and what many on here have argued long and hard for. The article also states the definition of "rich" has been increased to 450K

Yesterday, the government voted to extend almost all of the Bush Tax Cuts permanently.

Not temporarily, as a stimulus measure.

Permanently.

Ever since the Bush Tax Cuts were first enacted in 2001, one goal of the Republican party has been to "make the Bush Tax Cuts permanent."

For most of the last decade, this goal has seemed like an extremist view: Making the Bush Tax Cuts permanent would drastically reduce the federal government's revenue. It would also increase inequality and balloon the national debt and deficit--so how could we possibly justify doing that?

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/fiscal-cliff-deal-redefines-means-rich-154657208.html

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

The stat I am seeing is $1 of cuts for every $41 of taxes effecting 77% of households. Republicans really, really screwed the pooch voting for this one.

The Tea Party will get renewed life with this vote.

[jimgata]

CBO estimates this deal will add an additional 3.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade. Based on CBO history, double that.

[Dreamliner]

CBO estimates this deal will add an additional 3.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade. Based on CBO history, double that.

We're saved!

[HALLGATOR]

While cuts are needed the other solution to slowing the growth of the deficit is jobs. More Americans working equals less on assistance and more revenue.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

While cuts are needed the other solution to slowing the growth of the deficit is jobs. More Americans working equals less on assistance and more revenue.

Which is why cuts have to be gradual and tempered. If you cut 500B out of our budget a whole lot of people, both public and private, lose their jobs.

[gatorman_07732]

Which is why cuts have to be gradual and tempered. If you cut 500B out of our budget a whole lot of people, both public and private, lose their jobs.

Do you really think we have to be worried about large immediate cuts?

[Dreamliner]

Problem is the only thing that ever gets cut is rate of growth of government, and that's only momentary.

[jimgata]

What proposals were in this bill to add jobs? After all Obama said that was the first tiing he thought of in the morning and the last thing at night.
By the way, he left for Hawaii to resume his vacation, at an additional cost of 7 million dollars to the taxpayer, without signing the bill.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Do you really think we have to be worried about large immediate cuts?

:laugh:

Indeed.

Obama thinks we can tax and spend our way to prosperity.

[mocgator]

I hope when I told you to plan your fiscal exit strategy 5 or 6 years ago you did. We are on a speedy decline now. There will be no turning this back. Protect your finances and get money and or assets out of the country. Get out of debt and get into financial vehicles to protect yourself from the coming inflation.

[viningsgator]

The pubs in office are losing their minds. Still haven't figured out why they dont ask the Dems to return to the Clinton spendings levels while simultaneously accepting tax increases.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

The pubs in office are losing their minds. Still haven't figured out why they dont ask the Dems to return to the Clinton spendings levels while simultaneously accepting tax increases.

Indeed. I have often wondered why the GOP does not call the Democrats out on doing just this?

Shoot, most of the liberals on this board have been very vocal about the "evil Bush tax cuts." But when pressed on their desire to see ALL the Bush tax cuts repealed, they only want tax increase "on the rich."

This bill will raise taxes on 80% of Americans. So, I guess in a sense, it IS broadening the tax base. Where it fails is to reform entitlements, reduce spending and reform the tax code. All it does is raise taxes.

No surprise.

[mocgator]

Indeed. I have often wondered why the GOP does not call the Democrats out on doing just this?

Shoot, most of the liberals on this board have been very vocal about the "evil Bush tax cuts." But when pressed on their desire to see ALL the Bush tax cuts repealed, they only want tax increase "on the rich."

This bill will raise taxes on 80% of Americans. So, I guess in a sense, it IS broadening the tax base. Where it fails is to reform entitlements, reduce spending and reform the tax code. All it does is raise taxes.

No surprise.

There is a Marxist in office. There are no cuts ever. Obama wants a leftist state. And that's what we're getting. All is lost for our kids.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

All is lost for our kids.

All is not lost. America will probably just have a period of what Robert Heinlein called "bad luck."

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded- here and there, now and then- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.This is known as "bad luck."

-- Robert A. Heinlein




But then, most our our voting youth were responsible for voting the man in office the first time and then reelecting him. So, this gets to another one of my favorite Heinlein quotes;

We get the government we deserve.

[jimgata]

People react to what they are taught. With the extreme left outlook in today's education, why should we expect the public to change their views on the economy? Socialism may be here to stay.
Dont'cha know we are to expect everything we want from the day we are born, without doing anything for it?

[Dreamliner]

Even the looney leftist Yahoo News is pointing out that soaking the rich is going to hurt the average American.

[mocgator]

The looters now hold dominion over the producers. The producers are now thought to be the problem. The looters are Saintly. We live in Bizzarro World. I will take great joy when the fools who voted for Obama begin to say.. "This is not what we expected or wanted". I will laugh out loud. My exit strategy will be in full force by then.

[G8trGr8t]

CBO estimates this deal will add an additional 3.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade. Based on CBO history, double that.

no problem, just print some more money....

[Dreamliner]

I predict that when the average working American opens his first paycheck, and finds that he's been stiffed 2% ... he'll find a way to blame this on the Republicans.

[jimgata]

The average American worker will be told, by the liberal media, who to blame and they will believe it.

[HALLGATOR]

Which is why cuts have to be gradual and tempered. If you cut 500B out of our budget a whole lot of people, both public and private, lose their jobs.

Totally agree with this. It's too bad those in Washington, as a whole, can't seem to see it.

[Matthanuf06]

I hope when I told you to plan your fiscal exit strategy 5 or 6 years ago you did. We are on a speedy decline now. There will be no turning this back. Protect your finances and get money and or assets out of the country. Get out of debt and get into financial vehicles to protect yourself from the coming inflation.

Actually in this case you WANT debt. Why pay it off now when you can use a cheaper dollar later?

[g8rjd]

Since i cant access the info, how is the 4 trillion calculated? Sounds like more political speak at this point.
Debt ceiling right around the corner. No need to get too excited, that is where the cuts will come. Problem is unless defense spending is on the table nothing will happen on social services spending either and everyone will sit around pontificating how its the other sides fault. . And as far as working on the tax code, think you can forget about that.

Good question. From the article that the OP cited, and no one seems to have read:

The fiscal cliff deal approved by Congress will increase deficits over the next decade by close to $4 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That estimate is relative to a benchmark where all the Bush tax cuts expire and the the fiscal cliff stays in place. Technically, that's what would happen if Congress had done nothing to avert the cliff.

But that was never a likely scenario. For one thing, most economists said that such abrupt fiscal tightening would hurt economic growth in the near term. Plus, few expect Congress to stick to such a strict fiscal regimen anyway. Instead, most expected Congress to largely preserve the Bush tax cuts and cancel or weaken the rest of the fiscal cliff.

Compared to that more realistic scenario, the fiscal cliff bill will actually reduce deficits somewhat -- various estimates suggest by roughly $600 billion, and more with interest savings. The CBO did not offer a cost estimate for the Senate bill relative to this more realistic scenario.

So, basically the figures the OP complains about are calculated against what would have happened if we had gone off the fiscal cliff, not against where we are now. The OP ignores that, as compared to the budget on 12/31/12, the legislation reduces the deficit by $600B plus interest.

Details. Such a b---h.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Do you really think we have to be worried about large immediate cuts?

Not at all. But there are plenty of people screaming for them. It would be horrible.

We need large cuts done over a period of 6-8 years followed by a balanced budget amendment.

[Matthanuf06]

Good question. From the article that the OP cited, and no one seems to have read:

So, basically the figures the OP complains about are calculated against what would have happened if we had gone off the fiscal cliff, not against where we are now. The OP ignores that, as compared to the budget on 12/31/12, the legislation reduces the deficit by $600B plus interest.

Details. Such a b---h.

A week ago the left was saying the Bush Tax cuts increased the deficit?

[g8trjax]

600 b over 10 years out of almost 5 t. I believe the math is correct.

[g8rjd]

A week ago the left was saying the Bush Tax cuts increased the deficit?

If you are suggesting that I have said otherwise, I'm not on the left, Matt. And I haven't said anything about the Bush Tax cuts to that effect and you are welcome to use the search function right at the top of your screen to check whether I have. I'm addressing the question (which I wondered when I read it too) and providing the answer with the OP's own posted article.

[mastoidbone]

from a rational mind---taxes as percent of GDP are too low---easy to fix.
Spending as a % of GDP under Obama is at levels i could not imagine just a few years ago. Reducing that is ONLY long term path to prosperity....and Obama is LOATH to do it as are most dems.

They prefer to SLOW the rate of growth rather then cut...while allowing taxes to go up to fund that growth. SO over time govt has more and more of GDP under its control. To the point that we approach European levels. The problem with that----is that OVERALL economic growth slows down when you do that. See Europe since 1970s when social spending started to rise as an example.

[Row6]

row lets be straight----this deal is a drop in bucket size of a tanker truck.
So ALL we did was raise taxes on the most productive workers in order to finance GREATER government spending.

If you tell me i pay more taxes but debt goes down fine.

That is not what dems pushed for.

They asked people to pay more taxes to allow them to keep spending too much. At same time Obama RAISED fed pay---which CBO says is already ABOVE private pay for same job and experience.


So what DID we accomplish other then financing continues waste and excess spending beyond our means?

i 100% agree we need more revenue.

But to increase revenue while INCREASING spending is democratic 101 from 1963----that has worked great for US and is why we are 16 T in the red.


I have NO PROBLEM with more taxes---AS LONG AS IT IS USED TO REDUCE DEBT while govt spending is CUT, not reduced growth----actual CUTS to ALL programs and ALL govt salaries and ALL pensions and defense, etc etc.


Increasing taxes while NOT touching spending is the WORSTE of all possible scenarios for our future.


1 Something tells me my concrete finisher is more "productive" than your attorney and psychiatrist but will not have his tax rate increased.

2 Glad to see you acknowledge that the action taken yesterday constitutes a deficit reducing bill when compared to extending all the Bush tax cuts, as republicans favored.

3 Some of the new spending in it includes the doc fix which I assume you applaud.

[mastoidbone]

I favored allowing ALL the tax cuts to expire----taxes as % of gdp are TOO low to fund modern government.

At same time MASSIVE across board cuts to govt pay, pensions, entitlements are needed.

Obama dems and pubs got all 3 wrong.

[mastoidbone]

is your concrete finisher really more productive?
are you sure?

his force of labor is likely much higher---but his economical productivity is unlikely to be greater.

I am indifferent on doc fix. Medicare pays me less an hour then many of your laborers are paid---so if you cut medicare i could care less. The problem is that we would just stop seeing medicare patients---so i dont think it was doing docs a big favor---really more keeping medicare working.

Medicare is 40% of my work and 10% of my revenue----see what happens when govt gets control of purse string?

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Totally agree with this. It's too bad those in Washington, as a whole, can't seem to see it.

Are you serious? What rapid spending cuts have been enacted?

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Not at all. But there are plenty of people screaming for them. It would be horrible.

But the tax increases are OK?

[g8trjax]

I heard Boehner cut his tanning bill substantially.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

But the tax increases are OK?

Neither is "OK." But there is reality.

[JerseyGator01]

The right cuts now would lead to more jobs later. As usual. Americans only think about next week and not next year.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Neither is "OK." But there is reality.

Indeed there is "reality."

And the reality is that the rampant spending has exacerbated the recession.

What spending decreases were enacted?

Very, very few.

[92gator]

The $ 4 trillion increase is in comparison to not extending any of the Bush tax cuts, a position which no one elected to a federal office today favors, Republican or Democrat. Compared to extending all the Bush tax cuts - which most Republicans favor - deficits will be reduced by about $600 billion over 10 years. BTW, some of the extra spending includes not cutting doc pay for Medicare, something else in the baseline that results in the $4 trillion. Also, this part of the deal is on taxes and some immediate budgetary items. Sequestration and longer range spending cuts will be addressed later this winter.

Pretending otherwise is howling at the moon.

Don't you ever tire of toting Barry's jock strap?

:huh:

[viningsgator]

Only in Washington can they announce budget cuts when spending actually increases. Must eliminate baseline budgeting

[92gator]

This disastrous fiscal cliff compromise reminds me of that infamous, inflamatory, and controversial quote from Bob Knight:

If you're getting raped, and you can't do anything to stop it, may as well relax and enjoy it.

[gatorman_07732]

Don't you ever tire of toting Barry's jock strap?

:huh:

When he does he'll just change up and carry his water

[DeanMeadGator]

Boehner and the republicans wanted more tax cuts. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming to raise any taxes. Let's keep this straight.

I doubt that our 3 children and 6 grandchildren will care about which party took what position. The fact is that we will leave them a $20 trillion [or more] budget deficit that they will have to pay. They will remember us as a selfish generation who ruined their economic futures.

The Congress is comprised of incompetent, selfish and finger-pointing buffoons who lack the political courage to do what is best for America and future generations. If they were running a business, it would have filed bankruptcy long ago.

Anyone who thinks that higher taxes is the key to reducing the ever-increasing deficit is not looking at the facts. If you don't believe me, calculate the interest that will accumulate on $16 trillion of debt in one year. Deduct from that figure the increased tax revenue for that one year. If there is a positive balance, apply it against the additional spending during the same year. Let us know the amount by which the deficit is decreased that year.

As a wise person once said, "I learned everthing I needed to know in kindergarden." The members of Congress should go back and learn simple lessons.

If you have 10 cents, you can't spend $10.00. If you do, the $9.90 has to be repaid some day.

It's easier to let someone else pay the massive debt that is growing by millions of dollars a day. It's immoral to expect our children and their children to do so because we won't.

[Matthanuf06]

Whatever happened to not raising taxes on the middle class? 2% tax increase to all workers is a major tax hike for all. Combine that with no deficit plan and Obama is killing the economy

[Row6]

Don't you ever tire of toting Barry's jock strap?

:huh:

Whoa!

Mr. "Landslide, Book-it!" shows back up. Any predictions on the economy?

[Row6]

I doubt that our 3 children and 6 grandchildren will care about which party took what position. The fact is that we will leave them a $20 trillion [or more] budget deficit that they will have to pay. They will remember us as a selfish generation who ruined their economic futures.

The Congress is comprised of incompetent, selfish and finger-pointing buffoons who lack the political courage to do what is best for America and future generations. If they were running a business, it would have filed bankruptcy long ago.

Anyone who thinks that higher taxes is the key to reducing the ever-increasing deficit is not looking at the facts. If you don't believe me, calculate the interest that will accumulate on $16 trillion of debt in one year. Deduct from that figure the increased tax revenue for that one year. If there is a positive balance, apply it against the additional spending during the same year. Let us know the amount by which the deficit is decreased that year.

As a wise person once said, "I learned everthing I needed to know in kindergarden." The members of Congress should go back and learn simple lessons.

If you have 10 cents, you can't spend $10.00. If you do, the $9.90 has to be repaid some day.

It's easier to let someone else pay the massive debt that is growing by millions of dollars a day. It's immoral to expect our children and their children to do so because we won't.

If debt is your primary issue you should applaud a measure which is estimated to reduce $600 billion of it over 10 years. No one pretends that is sufficient but on that measure it is superior to not doing anything with taxes.

[g8rjd]

Whatever happened to not raising taxes on the middle class? 2% tax increase to all workers is a major tax hike for all. Combine that with no deficit plan and Obama is killing the economy

Ending the SS tax holiday was advocated by the GOP last year. It was a temporary measure that was part of the much maligned stimulus package.

Here's a Fox News article on it from last year.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/27/kyl-gop-may-not-support-extension-payroll-tax-holiday/

[surfn1080]

If debt is your primary issue you should applaud a measure which is estimated to reduce $600 billion of it over 10 years. No one pretends that is sufficient but on that measure it is superior to not doing anything with taxes.

Maybe I misread some other post but was it not estimated this deal would not reduce any debt but actually add 4 trillion? It was off a cbo report.

[Matthanuf06]

Ending the SS tax holiday was advocated by the GOP last year. It was a temporary measure that was part of the much maligned stimulus package.

Here's a Fox News article on it from last year.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/27/kyl-gop-may-not-support-extension-payroll-tax-holiday/

So? Obama didn't fight at all for it and his campaigned was centered around not increasing taxes to the middle/low classes.

Just bc neither side wanted it doesn't mean that Obama kept his promise

And also the stimulus was maligned for pork and crazy spending, not tax reductions

[wgbgator]

So? Obama didn't fight at all for it and his campaigned was centered around not increasing taxes to the middle/low classes.

Just bc neither side wanted it doesn't mean that Obama kept his promise

And also the stimulus was maligned for pork and crazy spending, not tax reductions

And this is why politics is ridiculous. There's little doubt the GOP will attempt to hammer Obama for raising taxes, even though they opposed the measure to extend the tax holiday themselves, and the Stimulus which included it.

[92gator]

Withdrawn (misfire).

[92gator]

When he does he'll just change up and carry his water

:laugh:

:yes:

[g8orbill]

If debt is your primary issue you should applaud a measure which is estimated to reduce $600 billion of it over 10 years. No one pretends that is sufficient but on that measure it is superior to not doing anything with taxes.

makes me laugh that you could even remotely believe this :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

[g8rjd]

So? Obama didn't fight at all for it and his campaigned was centered around not increasing taxes to the middle/low classes.

Just bc neither side wanted it doesn't mean that Obama kept his promise

And also the stimulus was maligned for pork and crazy spending, not tax reductions

I'm pretty sure that it was deemed to be a temporary measure at its inception and was extended through the Administration's advocacy, over GOP objections. But, feel free to continue with the democrats-are-to-blame-for-everything rhetoric.

[92gator]

Whoa!

Mr. "Landslide, Book-it!" shows back up. Any predictions on the economy?

Why yes, now that you ask. The economy will flourish in Barry's second term!

BOOK IT!

[Row6]

Maybe I misread some other post but was it not estimated this deal would not reduce any debt but actually add 4 trillion? It was off a cbo report.

That is when compared to not extending any of the Bush tax cuts, a position that no one in elected office favored and was never going to happen.

[Row6]

So? Obama didn't fight at all for it and his campaigned was centered around not increasing taxes to the middle/low classes.

Just bc neither side wanted it doesn't mean that Obama kept his promise

And also the stimulus was maligned for pork and crazy spending, not tax reductions

Your wife almost certainly received a tax cut as part of the 2009 and 2010 stimulus - 95% of Americans did.

[Row6]

makes me laugh that you could even remotely believe this :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Those figures are from the same source as the OP.

[Row6]

Why yes, now that you ask. The economy will flourish in Barry's second term!

BOOK IT!

I was feeling pretty good about things until I read what you predict.

[Dreamliner]

News snippets:

"With Fiscal Cliff deal, Americans earning $30,000 a year suffer bigger tax hit than those making $500,000 a year."

"Unemployment remains at 7.8%. Jobless claims up. Hiring not accelerating."

[Matthanuf06]

Your wife almost certainly received a tax cut as part of the 2009 and 2010 stimulus - 95% of Americans did.

So what? Cutting taxes is good stimulus. When did I say it was bad? The problem with the stimulus was it was full of bridge to nowhere type of wasteful spending. Just bc the bulk of the deal was terrible doesn't mean every portion was terrible. That's a logical fallacy

[Matthanuf06]

I'm pretty sure that it was deemed to be a temporary measure at its inception and was extended through the Administration's advocacy, over GOP objections. But, feel free to continue with the democrats-are-to-blame-for-everything rhetoric.

Obama said he wasn't going to raise taxes on the middle class. Taxes are now higher on the middle class. Certainly the GOP should have fought for it as well, they have some blame. Romney isn't in office though, Obama is. He's raping the pocket books of the middle class while burdening our kids with an impossible debt load. Terrible combination.

Given we are printing at an insane pace, wouldn't it be wise for the citizens to actually get it to combat the guaranteed inflation?

[wgbgator]

Obama said he wasn't going to raise taxes on the middle class. Taxes are now higher on the middle class. Certainly the GOP should have fought for it as well, they have some blame. Romney isn't in office though, Obama is. He's raping the pocket books of the middle class while burdening our kids with an impossible debt load. Terrible combination.

Given we are printing at an insane pace, wouldn't it be wise for the citizens to actually get it to combat the guaranteed inflation?

If this is going to be the standard, does it even matter then? I mean even when the payroll tax holiday was in effect, his opponents were claiming that he had raised taxes, whether it was Obamacare, or however the opposition wanted to define "raising taxes." Moreover, partly because of Making Work Pay, the Democrats were using rhetoric about presiding over massive tax cuts for the middle class (so, conversely does he get credit for that?). How closely are you going to parse rhetoric for political point scoring?

[Matthanuf06]

If this is going to be the standard, does it even matter then? I mean even when the payroll tax holiday was in effect, his opponents were claiming that he had raised taxes, whether it was Obamacare, or however the opposition wanted to define "raising taxes." Moreover, partly because of Making Work Pay, the Democrats were using rhetoric about presiding over massive tax cuts for the middle class (so, conversely does he get credit for that?). How closely are you going to parse rhetoric for political point scoring?

He should get credit for when he cuts taxes and credit for when he raises them. If Obama does a good job then ill have no problem praising him.

[wgbgator]

He should get credit for when he cuts taxes and credit for when he raises them. If Obama does a good job then ill have no problem praising him.

But in this case, the same measure both lowered and raised taxes at different times, according to the way we seem to be defining it. Basically, it's like saying Bush raised taxes on the wealthy, because the Bush Tax Cuts sunsetted. Not only that, you'd have to credit Obama for cutting taxes on incomes under $400,000 with the Cliff deal, because they were going up, because they were written to sunset. It's just stupid.

[tegator80]

Pick your best assessment of what is going down.

1) It is all a ruse, that there are no differences between the aisles in congress and the "opposition" fought a heroic battle but lost. Need to keep them in place for future battles. The next "crisis" is the debt limit in February. STAY TUNED!

2) The Pub is the minority party and does not have power anymore. The House Dems had the votes to stop anything tangible to reduce spending and then Obama/Senate put them in a position to be the "bad guys" in the end. Chose to retreat rather than make a stand.

Personally, I want to believe 2) based on the limited capabilities of the American public to think for themselves but I vote for 1). Things play out so tidily for our sound bite society. The march towards cattle in corrals and overseers continues. Just need to shuffle the money and power structures a little bit more before the Master Plan gets implemented in full force.

Well, the GOP didn't get very far in their fight for truth, justice and the American Way. So again I ask, is it a big ruse or is the GOP a permanent minority party?


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HOUSE_GOP_ANALYSIS?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT