Jake Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Seems like this deserves its own thread. The President and Speaker can work together on this, so I say we don't need to leave this discussion the D and R threads. I'm optimistic, currently. Both sides moving closer together. Boehner has agreed to some rate increases. Obama has agreed to several spending cuts. I'm afraid they may find their parties are not as unified as they think, though. I do find the SS cuts to be particularly irritating, since it is self sufficient and running at surplus. Thoughts? Some say this is overplayed but I see negative consequences in wasting time on this. Also, some cooperation sets a nice precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 The current rumors are a terrible deal and Obama can get something much better if we go into January. I'll be pissed if there's any unnecessary cuts to social security or medicare, either through age hikes or chained cpi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I'm not a politics savant but I don't get these whole negotiations, technically, against ourselves. Feels like a non violent civil war. Read of huffington that Obama may cave and raise taxes on middle class. That would be a huge sellout move. You're the F'n president. May as well go over the cliff if thats the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Adopting the Chained CPI across the board would effectively be a middle-class tax increase on top of cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Write your Senators and Representatives. You're right in that this was a completely fabricated 'issue' of our own doing in the first place. And like you said, why not just go over the damn cliff if you're getting less tax increases above $250k than you wanted, having to unnecessarily cut entitlement programs and getting little or nothing in return? Obama really does seem to be terrible at negotiating with Republicans, but I'll wait until an official deal is actually presented before completely melting down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 06:48 AM) Adopting the Chained CPI across the board would effectively be a middle-class tax increase on top of cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Write your Senators and Representatives. You're right in that this was a completely fabricated 'issue' of our own doing in the first place. And like you said, why not just go over the damn cliff if you're getting less tax increases above $250k than you wanted, having to unnecessarily cut entitlement programs and getting little or nothing in return? Obama really does seem to be terrible at negotiating with Republicans, but I'll wait until an official deal is actually presented before completely melting down. I have no problem with tax increases as long as there are spending cuts to go along with it. There is too much of a gap between how much they want to spend and the current revenue. They need to bring it closer togther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Not right now they don't. It would be counter-productive and could throw us back into a recession, making the deficit worse than it is now. This is exactly what's been happening in Britain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 08:08 AM) Not right now they don't. It would be counter-productive and could throw us back into a recession, making the deficit worse than it is now. This is exactly what's been happening in Britain. Then you can't go over the cliff! Across the board tax increases = recession Sequestration cuts = recession There are several programs that will be affected on January 1st, not to mention the likely huge market drop if we go over just to raise our leverage. I'd rather a status quo deal in which nothing changes than go over the cliff. They're playing with fire here and we will be the ones who get burned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 You can go over the cliff for negotiating purposes (eliminate Bush tax cuts) and then walk it back after-the-fact. There will be short-term market concerns there for sure, but they'll be pricing that in before Jan. 1 if they aren't already. The real issue is if we do nothing about it for the entire year. As far as I understand it, we really don't have to cut any spending in January if we don't want to. Year-long spending can be shifted forward as-if we never went off the cliff and then adjusted once a deal is made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 01:22 PM) You can go over the cliff for negotiating purposes (eliminate Bush tax cuts) and then walk it back after-the-fact. There will be short-term market concerns there for sure, but they'll be pricing that in before Jan. 1 if they aren't already. The real issue is if we do nothing about it for the entire year. As far as I understand it, we really don't have to cut any spending in January if we don't want to. Year-long spending can be shifted forward as-if we never went off the cliff and then adjusted once a deal is made. The other reason to go over the cliff would be if you actually believed the deficit was a problem. If you believe that...the fiscal cliff is incredible. It solves the deficit. Rapidly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Obama is such a p****! THIS is the number one issue I have with the guy. No damn backbone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettie4sox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 01:03 PM) Obama is such a p****! THIS is the number one issue I have with the guy. No damn backbone. Is he to wave his magical politcal wand to make all his dreams come true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (pettie4sox @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 02:55 PM) Is he to wave his magical politcal wand to make all his dreams come true? in this situation he has ALL the leverage in the world. there's pretty much no way for him to lose/look bad UNLESS he caves for no reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 09:26 PM) in this situation he has ALL the leverage in the world. there's pretty much no way for him to lose/look bad UNLESS he caves for no reason. Or he wants to put this away to focus on a new legislation (gun control/safety and immigration). There's really no reason to be worried about the deficit right now, unless you are in DC which for some reason is obsessed with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 02:26 PM) in this situation he has ALL the leverage in the world. there's pretty much no way for him to lose/look bad UNLESS he caves for no reason. What are you talking about? The Republicans have the house. They have a ton of leverage. For many of them, their reelection is not threatened by the way this negotiation goes. People THINK the President solves all these issues but it takes two to tango. I live amongst Republicans and they all still think Obama was at fault for the debt ceiling negotiations over a year ago. This negotiation is one guy vs a bunch of faceless representatives. The face of the debate is Obama so the pressure is more on him than anyone else. If things go wrong, he will be accountable. Not John Boehner. At this stage, he may have to wait Boehner out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Doing nothing means the entirety of the Bush taxcuts expire. The sequester also exempts the entitlement programs that Democrats should be fighting hardest to protect, like SS, Medicare and TANF (foodstamps). There's substantial defense cuts. Democrats have the Senate and the White House. Their majority in one gets stronger next year and they close the gap a little bit in the House. I don't know how you can say that their reelection isn't threatened by this negotiation. The country in general soured on Republicans after the debt ceiling fiasco and are much, much more likely to hold Republicans responsible for this one as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2012 -> 03:16 PM) Doing nothing means the entirety of the Bush taxcuts expire. The sequester also exempts the entitlement programs that Democrats should be fighting hardest to protect, like SS, Medicare and TANF (foodstamps). There's substantial defense cuts. Democrats have the Senate and the White House. Their majority in one gets stronger next year and they close the gap a little bit in the House. I don't know how you can say that their reelection isn't threatened by this negotiation. The country in general soured on Republicans after the debt ceiling fiasco and are much, much more likely to hold Republicans responsible for this one as well. The country perceives this stuff as the President. People vote for their reps based on pork, social stuff, and just general incumbency. The vast majority in the House do not come from competitive districts anyway. Edited December 19, 2012 by Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 19, 2012 Author Share Posted December 19, 2012 GOP likes Simpson-Bowles until BO submits a more conservative version of it. http://goo.gl/mag/V3rsnUM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Good, that plan is terrible. I don't care who undermines it. Like most of these "centrist" or "panel" "deficit" plans, it's mostly about cutting taxes for the wealthy overall and gutting entitlements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I got a response from Durbin hank you for your message about Social Security cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) and the federal deficit reduction negotiations. I appreciate hearing from you. Social Security benefits are adjusted annually to reflect inflation. The annual Social Security COLA is based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which measures price increases for market-based goods and services. The COLA is designed to help seniors keep up with the increase in costs we all face from year to year. The Social Security COLA is computed from the third quarter of one year to the third quarter of the next. Beginning in January 2013, Social Security benefits will increase by 1.7 percent. Social Security does not add a penny to the federal deficit, and the system is currently generating a surplus in tax revenues. Its board of trustees has said it will make every promised payment for the next 21 years. Any conversation about changes to the Social Security COLA should be had outside the confines of deficit reduction and the fiscal cliff. Many Americans have a tough time getting by with little or no yearly increases to Social Security. I will keep your concerns in mind as Congress considers Social Security COLAs in the future. Thank you again for sharing your views with me. Please feel free to keep in touch. Sincerely, Richard J. Durbin United States Senator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 Whle the term is designed to scare people, the sunny side is deficit reductions by stuff that both sides protect. It is a way for both sides to makethe sacrifices that need to be done and have political cover to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 QUOTE (Tex @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) Whle the term is designed to scare people, the sunny side is deficit reductions by stuff that both sides protect. It is a way for both sides to makethe sacrifices that need to be done and have political cover to do it. Finally, an honest porson who is willing to dump the country back into recession to shrink the deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 20, 2012 Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) We'll get the 'sacrifice' from millionaires of some change they found in the couch cushions in their 3rd home though! btw here's what other people will be sacrificing if they make some sort of chained CPI deal: Fifty-four million depend on Social Security – 1 out of every 6 people. About 2 out of 3 seniors depend on Social Security for most of their income, and one-third of seniors rely on it for at least 90% of their income. The average benefit is about $13,000 a year—less than full-time, minimum-wage work But, hey, shared sacrifice! Edited December 20, 2012 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Speaker Boehner tried to offer his own version of a "fiscal cliff" solution in the house, preserving the upper income tax cuts, defense spending, and including a bunch of budget cuts. Despite the large Republican majority in the House, the speaker pulled his own bill because he did not have enough votes for any plan. The House Republicans are totally unable to pass any plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 20, 2012 -> 01:36 PM) We'll get the 'sacrifice' from millionaires of some change they found in the couch cushions in their 3rd home though! btw here's what other people will be sacrificing if they make some sort of chained CPI deal: But, hey, shared sacrifice! Do they pay the same percentage in taxes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 John Boehner... (Boner) (BONER) needs to borrow just one of Nancy Pelosi's pair of balls. Then he might be 1/16 of an ounce effective. p**** whipped mother f***er. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts